Balancing the Commercial and Public-Interest Visions of the NII

Internet is egalitarian for those who are on it; it is elitist for those who cannot use it or do not have access to it. Who will guide the broadening of access to Internet, while preserving its special character? Who is going to protect the public values in the information infrastructure? Who will protect the culture built in the Internet by the users who created it? How should the federal agencies advance the NII, and what provisions of policy should be incorporated?

Balancing the Commercial and Public-Interest Visions of the NII

t seems likely that the enormous consumer markets for electronic entertainment and for voice communications will dominate the modest resources invested in the many networks that make up the Internet and the bulletin board and other innovative information services accessible through the Internet. Thus the first responsibility of the Information Infrastructure Task Force is to assign responsibilities and formulate legislation to set policies, regulations and standards that ensure that the vision of a wired, information-rich nation is not obscured by the much larger emerging electronic entertainment markets.

Balancing the Commercial and Public-Interest Visions of the NII

These new capabilities can evolve in either of two directions. They can provide the broadband access to the “last mile” – the connection to the home – thus extending the Internet vision to broadband access to anyone with a TV set. Or they can see the vision of a better informed, more efficient and democratic society overtaken by saturation of viewer attention by access to home shopping and a choice among 10,000 movies.

Balancing the Commercial and Public-Interest Visions of the NII

Two challenges face the administration. The first is to bring three diverse service environments together into an information infrastructure that integrates three different worlds: Knowledge Infrastructure … Integration Infrastructure … Telecommunications Infrastructure … The second policy challenge is to prove the incentives that will stimulate the creation of the services, public and private, that are so promising for the nation’s future.

Digital Communication Must Not Weaken Law Enforcement

While the societal and economic benefits that would come from the proposed digital telephony legislation are difficult to quantify, the economic benefits of maintaining effective law enforcement through its capability of conducting authorized intercepts are estimated to be in the billions and many lives would likely be saved. These benefits are likely to increase with the growth in telecommunications.

Digital Communication Must Not Weaken Law Enforcement

Technology has been drifting in a direction that could shift the balance away from effective law enforcement and intelligence-gathering toward absolute individual privacy and corporate security. Since the consequences of doing so would pose a serious threat to society, I am not content to let this happen without serious consideration and public discussion … The consequence of this choice will affect our personal safety, our right to live in a society where lawlessness is not tolerated, and the ability of law enforcement to prevent serious and often violent criminal activity.

Digital Communication Must Not Weaken Law Enforcement

It is not only conceivable but likely that other countries will be interested in products that allow their governments to decrypt communications when authorized by law. Foreign governments, by example, would be loathe to see terrorists operate and communicate in their country with impunity behind the shield of absolutely secure cryptographic devices. U.S. companies could take the lead in developing products that meet the security needs of customers and the legitimate needs of law enforcement and governments abroad.

Digital Communication Must Not Weaken Law Enforcement

Cryptography offers the possibility for absolute communications protection or privacy that is not available to us in any other area of our lives. Our physical beings are constantly at risk, and our premises, cars, safes, and lockers can be illegally broken into or lawfully searched. We live with this risk and indeed benefit from it whenever we lock ourselves out of our homes, cars, and so forth. It is unclear that we need an absolute level of protection or privacy for our communications surpassing the levels in other areas of our lives. Indeed, our speech in many regards and area is already subject to balanced regulation (e.g., slander, libel, obscenity, falsely yelling “fire” in a theater) … If companies themselves do not regulate cryptography, their employees would have a means of transmitting company secrets outside the company with impunity and without detection.

Digital Communication Must Not Weaken Law Enforcement

The societal and economic benefits of authorized electronic surveillance will increase as telecommunications services and facilities continue to expand and electronic and commerce comes into widespread use, bringing with it more possibilities for fraud and other types of crimes.