April 2014

A California appeals court recently ruled that emails and other forms of electronic communication about public business are not subject to the state’s Public Records Act if they’re conducted on a private computer or device.

But the decision’s impact on government transparency policies may cause aftershocks well beyond the Golden State’s borders. The 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose’s March 27 opinion gives elected officials and government employees a free pass to conduct public business in secret on their own devices. And with other states grappling with data retention and transparency issues, the decision could serve as a model to pull back on open government efforts over the last several years.

The 6th District Court of Appeal’s ruling overturned a lower court decision that would have enabled a citizen to obtain messages sent on private devices through private accounts of the San Jose mayor and city council members. The California Supreme Court may take up the case, but if it doesn’t, the 6th District’s decision would stand, creating a precedent for similar situations in the future.

The tax agency needs to better audit its own accounts, according to the Government Accountability Office.

GAO officials discovered that Internal Revenue Service was not sufficiently monitoring databases for abnormal activity that could indicate a breach. They also found poor encryption on key agency systems. In addition, this is the seventh consecutive year the IRS has failed to patch security vulnerabilities that could compromise financial data, a review of GAO reports dating back to 2007 reveals.

"Serious weaknesses remain that could affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of financial and sensitive taxpayer data," Nancy Kingsbury, GAO managing director for applied research and methods, and Gregory Wilshusen, GAO director for information security issues, wrote in a new report.

The IRS did not apply critical patches in a timely fashion to multiple systems, including programs for procurement and email, the auditors said. In addition, the agency was running unsupported software on workstations and databases that developers are not even issuing security fixes for anymore. GAO officials also noticed that systems handling transfers of financial data were not configured to encrypt login information.

[Commentary] Comcast wants to own the Internet -- or, at least, the cables that carry it to most Americans’ homes. There is absolutely no way that Comcast can argue it would have meaningful competition in wired broadband or cable after the merger.

A merger would turn Comcast’s already long lead into overwhelming dominance. And Comcast knows this. So how can it convince the FCC that this isn’t a problem? By comparing itself to pretty much any company that offers Internet or video service in any form. Leaving aside its link to NBCUniversal, Comcast has three major offerings: wired broadband, cable TV, and video on demand. If a company has moved into any of those spaces, Comcast says it’s a competitor.

Taken individually, each of these companies do compete in some sense with parts of Comcast, but the comparison falls apart when you look at how many of these services run on its broadband network. Comcast offers carefully constructed revenue and market cap charts that place it and TWC at the very bottom of the scale -- except that it’s comparing itself to the entirety of multinational giants like Apple, AT&T, and Microsoft, as well as bizarre additions like Facebook.

Comcast can only claim new services compete with existing wired broadband if it vastly oversells their potential. Google announced tentative plans to bring Fiber to more cities in February, and Comcast has spun this into a pending flurry of expansions, ignoring the fact that Google has until the end of 2014 to announce its decision and currently operates in only two small markets. There’s no doubt it can spur competition, but certainly not on the scale that Comcast implies.

Back9Network, a golf lifestyle cable channel, fears that the merger between Comcast and Time Warner could spell the end of its business.

The remarks by the CEO of the independent programming firm were made during a Senate Judiciary hearing on the proposed $45 billion cable and Internet mega merger.

James Bosworth, chief executive of the Hartford-based network, told lawmakers that for an independent programmer to succeed, it needs its channel to be carried by one of the big four paid television providers: Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Dish or Direct TV.