THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, February 24, 1995 TAG: 9502240564
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY JAMES SCHULTZ, STAFF WRITER
LENGTH: Medium: 68 lines
Save your shrink wrap. Read the fine print in the manual. And whatever you do, don't forget to send in the registration card.
That should guarantee that no software ``bombs'' will explode on your personal computer anytime soon.
Normal precautions aren't enough for Del. Alan A. Diamonstein, D-Newport News, however.
For the second year in a row, Diamonstein introduced legislation in the General Assembly that would require software companies to warn individuals and businesses of disabling commands embedded within computer programs or risk criminal or civil penalties.
And for the second year in a row, the legislation - opposed by software companies in the state and nationwide - couldn't make it to the statute books. This year, the bill couldn't pass muster with a key Senate committee and so didn't come to the floor for a vote.
On Thursday, Diamonstein conceded defeat and said he or another legislator would reintroduce the measure in next year's General Assembly.
``Sure, I'm disappointed,'' Diamonstein said. ``People were afraid to tell the public the truth. So they fought the issue.''
Leading the fight was the software industry, representatives of which point to the bill's notification provisions as unnecessary and unenforceable. New laws aren't required, the industry asserts, because existing laws, particularly those pertaining to contracts, are sufficient to handle any dispute.
``(The bill) is an ill-thought, ill-conceived idea,'' said Ray Pelletier, executive director of the Northern Virginia Technology Council. ``Where's the beef? Show me where businesses are being shut down by software companies. Software companies are looking for long-term relationships.''
It would be impossible, contend software interests, to notify each and every computer program user of penalties once licensing deadlines are passed or if software is improperly installed on one computer too many. Yet failure to notify could expose companies to a rash of nuisance lawsuits.
That's not to mention international trade issues. Increasingly, software is being designed for transmission and installation over global computer networks. Disabling commands, the advocates contend, are the sole means by which software firms can protect themselves against theft or fraud.
Finally, opponents argue that the legislation would cripple an otherwise flourishing industry.
``Virginia is one of the key technology states in the country,'' said Charles J. Davis, a lobbyist opposing the Diamonstein legislation. ``The reason for that is (software in) Northern Virginia. Here's an industry in which penalizing legislation is passed. Do you stay? If you're thinking about coming to Virginia, do you come?''
The bill springs from a dispute between Newport News Shipbuilding and a key software supplier, Computer Associates International of New York. The company accused the shipyard of improperly installing software on more than the agreed-to number of computers. The conflict was settled out of court, and Computer Associates continues to supply software to Newport News.
``We're disappointed. We were strongly behind the legislation,'' said Newport News Shipbuilding spokesman Mike Hatfield.
Joining the shipyard in support of the bill were other large concerns, including members of the Virginia Hospital Association. ILLUSTRATION: Del. Alan A. Diamonstein concedes defeat for this session.
KEYWORDS: GENERAL ASSEMBLY by CNB