4 ms·

ig1, while there are established forums for narrow technology policy hot points---IP, net neutrality, piracy---there is no contingent representing the tech. ent

ig1, while there are established forums for narrow technology policy hot points---IP, net neutrality, piracy---there is no contingent representing the tech. enterprise sector. Most current groups are motivated more by libertarian philosophical values than by the need to represent the business interests of the sector. I believe there is space---and need---for a business lobby that represents our interests.

ig1 14y ago
I'm not sure there's strong enough alignment among tech enterprise for a generic group to make sense. For example when it comes to funding incumbent players may want the exact opposite from startups.
- ekpyrotic 14y ago
  ig1, I think that's a reasonable concern. While the organisation would lobby on general tech. policy issues, it's focus would be on start-up tech. entrepreneurs. Other, larger, companies have a voice through the general business lobby, i.e., the CBI in the UK. Unfortunately, this has meant that start-ups---through a combination of lack of time and lack of funds---are not properly represented in the political discourse. At the moment the voice of tech. comes from the likes of Apple and Google, but this is---like you hinted---economically disadvantageous to the start-up crowd. The big companies have an incentive to clampdown on small-time tech. funding and implement regressive licensing policies. Here's my main worry: While the tech. start-up community is essential to ongoing economic growth, esp. as international competition intensifies, time and funding commitments mean that they are sidelined in national and transnational policy/funding settlements. I believe that the community needs to coalesce around an experienced and informed mission group in order to secure our interests. NOTE: Thanks for engaging ig1. The original post made my ambitions in this direction sound too broad. Our discussion has helped me narrow-in on the type of organisation I believe the sector needs.

ig1 14y ago

I'm not sure there's strong enough alignment among tech enterprise for a generic group to make sense. For example when it comes to funding incumbent players may want the exact opposite from startups.

ekpyrotic 14y ago
ig1, I think that's a reasonable concern. While the organisation would lobby on general tech. policy issues, it's focus would be on start-up tech. entrepreneurs. Other, larger, companies have a voice through the general business lobby, i.e., the CBI in the UK. Unfortunately, this has meant that start-ups---through a combination of lack of time and lack of funds---are not properly represented in the political discourse. At the moment the voice of tech. comes from the likes of Apple and Google, but this is---like you hinted---economically disadvantageous to the start-up crowd. The big companies have an incentive to clampdown on small-time tech. funding and implement regressive licensing policies. Here's my main worry: While the tech. start-up community is essential to ongoing economic growth, esp. as international competition intensifies, time and funding commitments mean that they are sidelined in national and transnational policy/funding settlements. I believe that the community needs to coalesce around an experienced and informed mission group in order to secure our interests. NOTE: Thanks for engaging ig1. The original post made my ambitions in this direction sound too broad. Our discussion has helped me narrow-in on the type of organisation I believe the sector needs.