NETWORKS and COMMUNITIES - December 26, 1993 Issue 4 Compiler Sam Sternberg samsam@vm1.yorku.ca This special issue is devoted to an analysis of the U.S. Whitehouse's network policy. It includes information on how to monitor and respond to it. Information on the technological and economic assumptions this initiative is based on is also included. First, key aspects are pointed out; Next, underlying assumptions are explored. Then I provide some suggestions for participation in the ongoing process of policy formulation. A listing of major organizations which can provide you with a "voice" are listed at the end. WHITEHOUSE LEGISLATIVE GOALS A background session held prior to U.S. VP Gore's speech focused on the key issues as seen from the Whitehouse . " the Telecommunications Act of '34 dealt with a much different world. We have now had the challenge of coming up with models that define competition in the modern world where you don't have competition that's based just on how many wire go into your house, but what your access is to wireless technology. The fact that we're going to be talking to our televisions and watching our telephones means that we have to redefine what competition means because we're going to be getting information from every source imaginable. And as one person put it, everything we do now through wires in the ground we're going to do in the air; and everything we do now in the air we're going to do through wires in the ground. So we have to rethink the models at the same time that we're rethinking the technology." VP Gore has done his homework and he is attempting to harmonize the various interests within the administration and on the hill. "first off, the Vice President has spoken with the spoken with the sponsors of all of the bills that are on the Hill in the last month or two and has met with many of them personally, and has had an interagency group that has been reviewing all of that. Tomorrow in his talk he will address where he would like to go with some of those , although the administration proposal and which of the bills we will incorporate and which provisions will be announced in the January speech in Los Angeles". Laudably the focus on social issues is clear. " This isn't so much about technology, although that's what we read about every day, as it is about technology's effects on the way we communicate and the way we're going to communicate, and who will have information and who will not. And the provision of information to the public, to schools, hospitals, libraries, as well as to the economically well-off sectors of society is a crucial point that we want to make sure is included in any reforms that happen". The nature of the administration's position on Universal Access is not so clear. " The extent of how we define universal service is actively under discussion. And the question of subsidies or rate subsidies is also a very difficult one. As you know, the definition of universal service has gone to having a party line phone to having an individual line. Is call-waiting part of universal service? Is a modem hook-up part of universal service? Those are some of the questions that we have to answer. We don't expect to have all of the answers, because the market will surprise us down the road in terms of what's available". The above quotes come from the report of the background session. In the speech itself Gore said " We cannot relax restrictions from legislation and judicial decisions without strong commitments and safeguards that there will be a "public right of way" on the information highway. We must protect the interests of the public sector. That's essential in building the information highway. That's essential in providing affordable services for public education, public health and government. The less fortunate sectors of the population must have access to a minimum level of information services through subsidies or other forms of a public interest tithe." [....................... matter deleted] Referring to the many technologies being used by reporters hearing the speech he said " All of these forms of communication bring us together --they allow us to participate in a virtually instantaneous dialogue. They will allow us to debate, and then to build a consensus, on the nature of the information infrastructure, on the details of legislation, on the nature of regulation. But, even more, as I said at the outset, these methods of communication allow us to build a society that is healthier, more prosperous, and better educated. They will allow us to strengthen the bonds of community and to build new "information communities." A FLAW IN THE WHITEHOUSE VISION In Vice President Gore's explanation of the administration's policy on the Information Highway there are a number of features of particular importance to advocates and operators of community networks. Before going into details, its important to point out one major apparent gap in the Vice President's understanding of the Internet. He apparently does not understand that the Cyberspace is not just a communications medium and tool for the distribution of information. It is most importantly a new opportunity to create compilations of information that meet specific needs. The most remarkable resources on the internet are its specialized compilations. Examples of excellent new resources include Fednet for government information, The History gopher for historians, Riceinfo for students and others with broad general interests; and the National Capital Free-net for residents of Ottawa Canada and the world wide Internet community. And among these compilations the most valuable are those that feature interactive services. It is specificly interactivity that is the most revolutionary aspect of the information highway. Free-nets and other civic network services are the most significant examples of such interactive compilations. They have the greatest potential for providing significant improvements in social service delivery, in life long learning opportunities, and in local access to information for both individuals and smaller businesses. Precisely because they provide local compilations tailored to local needs, they encourage broad general use and the development of sophisticated interactive resources. Only a civic net can develop the panoply of attractive resources that generate this synergistic effect. Where else can battered women hope to learn immediately about available shelter resources for themselves and at the same time obtain initial medical advice. Where else can a student study foreign language with both foriegn nationals and locals who are native speakers of that language. Educating the legislators who will shape this next body of communication law is our most important current task. COMMENTARY ON THE VICE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE A: Free-nets and community networks were not specificly mentioned in either the background briefing or the speech itself. B: Commercial competition was described as the primary mechanism of guaranteeing access. The need for special access provisions for students, educational institutions, and other special populations was recognized. C: The issue of privacy and encryption was also not mentioned. D: Implied by the announcement was a commitment to encourage involvement by states and municipalities in the process of "guided deregulation". E: Access -by all potential service providers - to all "bit" marketing media was emphasised F: The Internet itself was described as a precursor to the information highway. G: There was little recognition that the Internet is a global entity. BACKGROUND on what was and wasn't said. [supplied by the compiler] WHY THE INTERNET IS ONLY A PRECURSOR TO THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY. 1 - It is already possible to send digitized data along any communication network. And all networks can already be interconnected. This means cable, radio, TV, and the phone system are all unifiable and will soon be treated as a single network. 2 - 98% of all North American households have telephones and their ordinary twisted pair phone lines can carry 100 megabits of data,when they have the proper equipment at the endpoints. Less than 1 percent of Chinese household have phones or are ever likely to get copper wire to the home. Advances in cellular technology have made interactive cellular TV a current reality so the rest of the world does not need wire to be connected. Most of the Third World will simply jump directly to wireless communication technologies. In essence the technology is already hear, so cost must decline and services be provided before global access becomes a reality. 3 - Broadcast holography - the highest bit demanding technology currently being developed - can be transmitted within the limits of phone wire's 100 megabits of data. At least 4 real time, full color interactive TV channels can also be carried simultaneously over your phone line. 4 - The next generation of TV - High Definition TV (HDTV) - will consist of computers pretending to be televisions. They will have full interactive capability and will be fundamentally digital, not analog units. If the history of color TV repeats itself, even households without phones will have such TV's within a decade or two of their appearance WHY ALL PROVIDERS NEED ACCESS TO ALL COMMUNICATION NETS. 1 - Everyone and anyone is potentially an information provider, but not everyone has access to specific communications channels now. Without internetworking access, pockets of information exclusion will persist. Isolated communities in for example - Alaska, Canada, and Mongolia need access - even China, currently attempting to isolate itself from satellite broadcasts will eventually realize its error. Universal access is critical. It should not matter if it requires cable, radio or satellite services. Legislatively mandated access is needed to provide guarantees. Such legislation, hopefully, will be introduced in every country and be supplemented by international telecom law. 2 - Current consumers of some communications services have not benefited from technologically based cost savings. Telephone service delivery costs have declined 98% in the past decade but North American consumers have not seen these savings passed on to them. In Hong Kong cellular service is provided for a low monthly fee. In North America every incoming and outgoing call is billed on a per minute of use basis. In Britain cable companies already offer phone service at lower rates than the state owned telco. Competition between alternative communication channels and on each channel really is need to allow communication costs to decline as rapidly as we seen computer equipment cost decline. WHY STATE AND MUNICIPALITIES MUST BE INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS. 1 - Emerging legislation may mandate shared costs for the services to special populations. It will certainly mandate shared responsibility over the allocation of fiscal resources - block grants - for these communities. Municipalities in particular have a strong interest in requiring and providing universal access, as a means of lowering the costs associated with service delivery and regulatory enforcement. Advocates and operators of civic nets need to educate municipal and state officials now. The pace of legislative action at the federal level is breathtaking, and without informed participation by state and local officials, the principal allies the civic networking movement will be left out of the process. 2 - Much of the federal legislation will require state legislatures to enact or modify laws to complete the process. Errors and omission at the Federal level can be corrected in State and municipal legislation. WHY PRIVACY ISSUES HAVE TO BE CLOSELY MONITORED IN UPCOMING LEGISLATION. 1 - This administration remains committed to supporting the elements of law enforcement and intelligence communities that fear real privacy of communication. An attempt will almost certainly be made to use this round of legislative action to reintroduce regressive legislation on this subject. The appointment this week of Mr. Inman - former head of NSA - as Secretary of Defense virtually assures this. 2 - The seductive force of access to the seat of power can already be seen in the misstep on the Clipper chip by EFF. [EFF - which has been enjoying unusually good access to the Whitehouse - advocated "voluntary" acceptance of the clipper chip]. CPSR caught this in time, but a concerted effort will be needed to prevent this kind of thing from affecting final versions of legislation, which are crafted in non-public joint mark-up sessions. 3 - The proponents of a government right to invade your privacy are not trustworthy repositories of private information. These are the same folks who received 100s of billions in funding to monitor the Soviet Union, yet failed to predict its demise or to believe it had occurred long after it was an accomplished fact. They are now quietly lobbying the Whitehouse for a new role - Defending America business through covert action and monitoring. They are actually only attempting to defended their blotted budgets. If they succeed it will only harm both individual privacy and the competitive capacity of the U.S. The public justifications for "monitoring" are ludicrous. Anyone wishing to avoid legislatively mandate government access to private communications will simply avoid the nets. The rest of us will be subject to the decisions of this group as to which businesses are "America" and which of those deserve covert "service." Such a stance can only lead to a profound disinclination on the part of Global firms to business in and with the U.S. Or to communicate over the U.S. portion of the global net. WHY ACCESS PROVISIONS FOR SPECIAL POPULATIONS ARE NEEDED. 1 - Almost no classrooms presently have phone access. 2 - The vast majority of recipients of Federal, State, and local social assistance are among the 45% of the North American population without a personal computer in their household. No significant improvements in social services and no significant declines in the cost of delivering those services is possible, unless universal access is provided. Civic networks are the best current model for moving towards universal access. WHY FREE-NETS AND CIVIC NETS HAVE YET TO BE MENTIONED IN WHITE HOUSE MATERIALS. 1 - The White House does not understand the benefits of civic networks. 2 - The Civic networking community is not politically sophisticated. 3 - The political infrastructure needed to impact upcoming legislative activity does not exist. MONITORING THE LEGISLATIVE ACTION The American Library Association's electronic newsletter can be expected to monitor this legislation closely, Subscribe by sending e-mail to : LISTSERV@UICMV.UIC.EDU In the body of the mail write - subscribe ala-wo (your name) PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS Clearly those of us who believe in local community nets with global access have got to get busy. The role and value of civic nets may be obvious to us. It is not obvious to the legislators who will be deciding on these matters. The physical net is a product of the business community. Its largest segment is based on software developed by a combination of government money and voluntarily contributed labour. Its content is largely contributed voluntarily for the benefit of all interested parties. In this is differs from any prior human cultural institution except our inherited cultures themselves. They too represent an inherited and shared body of knowledge and practices and beliefs which are not beneficial possessed [owned] by any particular person. We must work to guarantee this public spirited quality along with the governments goals of universal access. I suggest that we take as a model the successful effort led by Jim Warren in California to pass AB1624 [ it makes all California legislative information publicly available over the Internet ]. This legislation was virtually dead when Warren began garnering support for it within California's computer and political communities. Over a several month period the legislature received 1,000s of letters and faxes in support of the bill. It is now law. AB1624 will take effect Jan.1, 1994. It is a FIRST; this is the first time that comprehensive information about state legislation-in-process and state laws have been made available by a state via the nonproprietary public computer networks, especially without any fees charged by the state, all mandated by law. When Warren began his efforts the legislators refused to believe that anyone would voluntarily work to make government information public. They asked how the State could make money form this effort and how the Internet volunteers would make money. Slowly they were educated to the point where the law made sense to them and it passed. With the same spirit and determination that jim showed, both U.S. citizens and foreigners - like me - should participate in guaranteeing a role for civic networks. As VP Gore said in his speech " The challenge is not, in the end, the new technology. It is holding true to our basic principles." U.S. CITIZENS - U.S. citizens have a number of options open to them: The least effective action you can take is posting messages to the Internet. The Whitehouse monitors some of this traffic but most congresspersons don't. While the Whitehouse is proposing legislation, it is congress that will decide what happens. 1 - Join one of the organizations listed below. Numbers matter when it comes to having your voice heard in the legislative process. Your dollars will help them participate in the process and your membership will increase their impact. 2 - Send a fax -to the local office - of each of your municipal, state, and congressional reps. Let them know how important this legislation and the role of civic nets will be in its impact on the future social and financial health of the U.S. Tell them you will be following their actions locally. 3 - Encourage the state and local chapters of all organizations you belong to - to join these organizations and - to take a position on local legislative actions. 4 - E-mail the Whitehouse - tell them you appreciate their actions but you believe they have failed to recognize the importance of civic networks. Send messages to : vice.president@whitehouse.gov NON U.S. MEMBERS OF THE INTERNET COMMUNITY CAN GET INVOLVED - 1 - E-mail the Whitehouse and let them know that the Legislation implementing the NII will have a global impact. Tell them about your perspective on this legislation. 2 - Encourage your government to participate in this process by monitoring U.S. legislative actions, and preparing to enact legislation that reflects your distinct national needs. 3 - Participate in international Telecom activities 4 - Educate your government on the economic and social importance of maintaining technological parity. Emphasis the importance of civic networks in providing a low cost means of remaining on the leading edge of global social and technical developments. SOURCES OF ASSISTANCE 1 - THE CENTER FOR CIVIC NETWORKING CCN can be reached at 617-241-9205 or ccn@civicnet.org To be added to their policy mailing list, send a request to nii_agenda-request@civicnet.org. Although almost dormant to date, the center may yet prove a major actor in the work to shape future legislation. 2 - CPSR - Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility This organization is my preferrence as an advocate in the absence of any decision by NPTN to take part in this process. It has a large network of chapters which can work on the state and local level. Its 20,000 members provide an important base for information dissemination and advocacy. In each case, the addresses listed below are on the machine csli.stanford.edu, so that the Internet style addresses should be cpsr-board@csli.stanford.edu, for example. CPSR-CHAPTERS cpsr-acadiana cpsr-madison cpsr-philadelphia cpsr-austin cpsr-maine cpsr-pittsburgh cpsr-berkeley cpsr-milwaukee cpsr-portland cpsr-boston cpsr-minnesota cpsr-san-diego cpsr-chicago cpsr-new-haven cpsr-santa-cruz cpsr-denver-boulder cpsr-new-york cpsr-seattle cpsr-los-angeles cpsr-palo-alto cpsr-washington-dc Please contact and join your nearest chapter. for more information gopher to gopher.cpsr.org 3: EFF - the Electronic Frontier Foundation has played a significant role in advocating for strong civil liberties and high quality services on the Internet. for information gopher to gopher.eff.org These 3 groups and many others along with a plethora of additional information is available for access through the wonderful Rice University gopher. gopher to RICEINFO.RICE.EDU --> GOVERNMENT, POLITICAL SCIENCE, AND LAW. Happy New Year. Sam Sternberg samsam@vm1.yorku.ca Please feel free to use this newsletter as you see fit. .