Yesterday the Senate amended S88,
the Developing Innovation and Growing the Internet of Things (DIGIT) Act,
and passed
the bill under the unanimous consent process. There was no debate and only
the one amendment (S
769, pgs S4889-90), substitute language offered by Sen. Wicker (R,MS). That
amendment was also adopted under the unanimous consent process.
Changes in the Bill
The substitute language made three changes to the bill:
• In §3, removed the definition of ‘appropriate committees
of Congress’ as the term was not used in the bill;
• In §4(c), added the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
to the list of federal agencies to be represented on the Federal Working Group;
and
• In §4(f)(2),
added a specific list of congressional committees to which the final report by
the working group would be submitted.
Moving Forward
The bill now moves to the House for consideration. There is
a companion bill in the House, HR
686. No action has been taken on that bill beyond referral to the House
Energy and Commerce Committee for consideration. Unless someone with more
influence in that Committee than Rep. Welch (D,VT) becomes a sponsor of the
bill, it is very likely that both bills will languish in Committee in the House.
Commentary
There is another problem with this bill that I had not
mentioned in my post about the introduction of the bill or in the post on HR
686. There is no definition of ‘Internet of Things’ in the bill. The problem
here is that a working definition is going to have a major impact on the scope
of the report required in this bill.
On one hand if we use the IoT definition found in HR
3010 [“the set of physical objects embedded with sensors or actuators and
connected to a network” {§2(h)(1)}], we would almost certainly have to include
most of the realm of industrial control system components in the Working Group’s
study.
A more limited definition; “the interconnection via the
Internet of computing devices embedded in everyday objects, enabling them to
send and receive data”; would still have a rather broad impact, but would rule
out control system components and medical devices, for instance. That would
make this a much more manageable study.
No comments:
Post a Comment