A headline "Tech group representing AT&T, Palantir backs CISPA" isn't good copy. But that could have been the headline. The "Executive Council" (which seems to be the part of the organization that draws the focus on Google and Yahoo) also contains people from Oracle, Microsoft, and VeriSign. And one thing that council doesn't do is sign off on every letter the group sends out (or, probably, every point in the policy platform it espouses).
I doubt without knowing exactly that Google's official position is anti-CISPA and that this group doesn't speak for them because they don't actually control what it says. But I've been surprised in the past.
Perhaps, though, people should read this and think "hey, Google ought to put some pressure on the lobbying groups they participate in not to be stupid/evil/whatever." And perhaps if a few Google executives express that they're upset that their names were used in conjunction with something they don't support, they can rein in groups that want to claim the mantle of "the tech industry".
The difference is, we expect this sort of Evil behavior from AT&T, Palantir, Oracle, VeriSign and definitely Microsoft. But when a company with the supposed motto of "Don't be evil" backs it, it's news. Yahoo, though, I'm only a little surprised. I'm also not surprised Apple is a member, nor that you (and the headline) didn't mention them.
Sure, sure, you can't keep track of the political positions of every group you're a member of. But if a group holds opinions that are evil, that might just be a good reason to not maintain membership. I could easily Godwin this thread by mentioning certain groups I am not a member of for exactly that reason. The company you keep and all that.
Trade associations tend to remain silent when a good portion of their members oppose legislation. But Google/Facebook/Microsoft aren't opposing CISPA, last I checked. It's more like they're just remaining neutral.
http://www.technet.org/leaders/member-companies/
A headline "Tech group representing AT&T, Palantir backs CISPA" isn't good copy. But that could have been the headline. The "Executive Council" (which seems to be the part of the organization that draws the focus on Google and Yahoo) also contains people from Oracle, Microsoft, and VeriSign. And one thing that council doesn't do is sign off on every letter the group sends out (or, probably, every point in the policy platform it espouses).
I doubt without knowing exactly that Google's official position is anti-CISPA and that this group doesn't speak for them because they don't actually control what it says. But I've been surprised in the past.
Perhaps, though, people should read this and think "hey, Google ought to put some pressure on the lobbying groups they participate in not to be stupid/evil/whatever." And perhaps if a few Google executives express that they're upset that their names were used in conjunction with something they don't support, they can rein in groups that want to claim the mantle of "the tech industry".