Campaigns & Television
WP: Candidates, Cash, California
WSJ: No Such Thing as a Free Ad
Television Regulation
FCC: New Regulatory Thinking
FCC: The Public Interest Standard:
A New Regulator's Search for Enlightenment
Internet
WP: No Right to Filter Libraries
TelecomAM: Virginia Judge Rejects Dismissal Of ACLU
Challenge to Filtering
NYT: Bill Would Put Net Filters in California Libraries
NYT: Different Rulings on Child Porn Law Set Up
Potential Supreme Court Case
NYT: Technology Extends Reach of Aid for the Troubled
WP: Domain Name Tax Illegal, Judge Rules
NYT: Judge Calls Internet Registration Fee Illegal
WSJ: Hitting Up the Internet
TelecomAM: Another Congressman Opposes Universal Service
Charges On Internet
TelecomAM: Administration Opposes Internet Telephony Changes
Access to Government Info
NYT: Federal Government Clings to Paper Records
Microsoft
WP: Microsoft Again Makes Concession on Browsers
WSJ: Microsoft Corp. To Buy Pioneer Of 'Agent' Software
NYT: Microsoft Steps Into Debate Over On-Line Privacy
by Buying Firefly
NYT: U.S. and Microsoft to Talk Before Possible Showdown
Lifestyles!
NYT: Robot Headed for Rendezvous With Chernobyl
NYT: A Sly Lens on Corporate America
** Campaigns & Television **
Title: Candidates, Cash, California
Source: Washington Post (4/9, A3)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-04/09/115l-040998-idx.html
Author: William Booth
Issue: Media&Politics
Description: California voters are now on the receiving end of what has been
dubbed the "Couch Potato Election." This is because, with two millionaires
running for governor and another two in statewide elections, unprecedented
amounts of cash are pouring forth to purchase TV time for spots designed to
introduce viewer-voters to unknown, but rich candidates. Two Democratic
candidates for governor have spent almost $20 million on ad time. This
governor's race
has demonstrated that almost any amount can be spent, despite attempts in
Calif. and Washington to limit campaign spending. The amounts being spent could
push the spending spree beyond the level reached by Republican
multimillionaire Michael Huffington, who spent $30 million in an
unsuccessful bid to unseat Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). The specter of
so much money buying so much TV time has led some politicians and
strategists to worry that candidates in minor races might not be able to
find primetime airspace.
Title: No Such Thing as a Free Ad
Source: Wall Street Journal (Op-eds, A10)
http://wsj.com/
Author: FCC Commissioner Harold Furchgott-Roth
Issue: Free Air Time for Candidates/Campaign Finance Reform
Description: "Pres. Clinton has called on the FCC to mandate that
broadcasters offer free air time for political candidates. But does the FCC
have the legal authority to enact campaign finance reform? No law governing
the FCC gives it the power to command that broadcasters charge politicians
nothing for advertising spots. In fact, federal statutes define
broadcasters' obligations to political candidates, and they stop far short
of guaranteeing free air time. Given all this, my fellow commissioners and I
might do better to focus on what we are required by law to do rather than
searching for extracurricular activities. The FCC is not strictly limited to
those areas listed in our governing statutes. Under the Communications Act,
the FCC has discretionary authority to regulate broadcasting in the 'public
interest'. But the authority has its limits... the relevant legal issue is
whether the free air time proposal bears a real connection to the efficient
management of broadcast licensing."
** Television Regulation **
Title: New Regulatory Thinking
Source: FCC
http://www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Powell/spmkp807.html
Author: Commissioner Powell
Issue: Digital TV
Description: "There are a few truths about regulating in the era of digital
convergence that we must take to heart: First, it is futile to attempt to
preserve the balkanized regulatory framework that presently
exists....Second, we have to accept that the changes ushered in by the
digital revolution are inevitable....Third, we must acknowledge that we
cannot accurately predict what technologies and services will ultimately
prevail in the marketplace....In large measure because of these truths,
regulatory policy in the next century must be marked by (1) regulators
yielding to competitive markets as the means for allocating communications
resources; (2) a greater focus on policies that promote innovation; (3)
deconstruction of the categorical regulatory scheme in which what law you
are subject to is dependent upon how you send your message; and (4)
regulatory efficiency."
Title: The Public Interest Standard: A New Regulator's Search for Enlightenment
Source: FCC
http://www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Powell/spmkp806.html
Author: Commissioner Powell
Issue: Television Regulation
Description: "When a question is raised about the need for broadcast
regulation in the public interest, I ask myself five questions: (1) Does the
Commission have the authority to do what is asked; (2) Even if it does, is
it nonetheless better to leave the matter to Congress or await more specific
instruction; (3) Is the issue best addressed by a State agency or another
Federal agency; (4) Should we address the matter at all; and (5) Would any
action we take violate the Constitution."
** Internet **
Title: No Right to Filter Libraries
Source: Washington Post (Op-eds, A22)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-04/10/001l-041098-idx.html
Issue: Filtering/Libraries
Description: In Alexandria, VA, Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled that a suit
could go forward that had been brought in Loudon County by a group of
library patrons against a policy that made blocking software mandatory on
all machines. The order draws heavily on the reasoning laid out when the
Supreme Court overturned the Communications Decency Act. As in that case,
the judge wrote, the Loudon policy "unconstitutionally chills plaintiffs'
receipt of constitutionally protected materials" since, unlike in libraries
that have filters on only some machines, adults are forced to the level of
what's acceptable for children. Since access to the Internet is a single
package, the practical rationale for choosing books doesn't apply; rather,
content restriction is the sole motive, and blocking requires more effort
than not doing so.
Title: Virginia Judge Rejects Dismissal Of ACLU Challenge to Filtering
Source: Telecom AM
http://www.telecommunications.com/am/
Issue: Filtering
Description: A challenge led by the ACLU to the use of Internet filtering
software on public library computers in Loudon County, VA, got a boost April
7 when the U.S. District Court rejected a gov't. motion to dismiss the case.
Judge Leonie Brinkema cited 3 factual issues: 1) Whether there's a
compelling need for some sort of blocking, 2) how effective the blocking
software is at distinguishing acceptable sites from pornographic sites, and
3) how much control the library has over the standards used by the software.
The ACLU said the library board can't impose coherent criteria for what
material to block when it doesn't know how the software is programmed.
Title: Bill Would Put Net Filters in California Libraries
Source: New York Times (CyberTimes)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/cyber/articles/10california.html
Author: Rebecca Fairley Raney
Issue: Internet Regulation
Description: Assemblyman Peter Frusetta (R-CA) has introduced a bill that
would require all public libraries in Calif. to install filtering software
on any public computers providing Internet access. Frusetta said that the
interests of protecting children from pornography and obscene material
outweigh the First Amendment. "I don't think First Amendment issues apply to
children of these tender years," said Frusetta. He said that using filtering
software would be like providing a "wrapper" that hides adult magazines from
children's view in stores. The California Library Assoc. and the American
Civil Liberties Union are "lining up" free speech arguments against the
bill. "Filters block out information people need," said Linda Crowe,
chairwoman of the California Library Assoc. legislative committee, referring
to issues that are filtered out like breast cancer and sexuality. "Libraries
are there to give information to folks, and if the information is filtered,
we can't do our job."
Title: Different Rulings on Child Porn Law Set Up Potential Supreme Court Case
Source: New York Times (CyberTimes)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/cyber/cyberlaw/10law.html
Author: Carl S. Kaplan
Issue: Internet Regulation
Description: Federal Judge Gene Carter, of the Federal District Court in
Portland, ME, declared on March 30 that key sections of the Child
Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 are unconstitutional because they contain
vague and overly broad language. Judge Carter's ruling "struck the first
judicial blow" against the "controversial" federal law designed to help
fight child pornography in the age of the Internet. Judge Carter found in
examining the law that the key term "appears to be" minor, which is too
vague because a viewers determination of age of the image depicted would be
highly subjective. He also said that the law's definition of child
pornography "creates substantial uncertainty" for viewers presented with
sexual content depicting adults. The court suggested that adult actors may
appear over 18 to some but under 18 to others. Some civil libertarians fear
"that this legal slight-of-hand on the part of the judge, if approved by
other courts, could result in all-too-easy regulation of the content of
speech on the Internet." Judge Carter's decision will almost certainly be
appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit of Boston.
Title: Technology Extends Reach of Aid for the Troubled
Source: New York Times (4/9/98-Circuits)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/circuits/articles/09psych.html
Author: Sandeep Junnarkar
Issue: Health
Description: More hospitals across the nation are starting telepsychiatry
programs to help serve people in rural areas who seek psychiatric help but
don't have access to a psychologist or social worker. In this type of
therapy, the patient and therapist uses computers, medical equipment and
closed-circuit and video tele-conferences to hold treatment sessions at a
distance. There are currently about 70 telepsychiatry programs around the United
States, up from about 46 in 1996, said Dr. Ellen Rothchild, a clinical
professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve Univ. in Cleveland and
chairwoman of telemedicine services for the American Psychiatric
Association. Experts caution against using telepsychiatry as a replacement
for face-to-face treatment. "It really doesn't provide the kind of hands-on
care one may want," said John O'Laughlen, administrator of the consolidated
department of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. "It really augments care
and provides the opportunity to care for a wider variety of people who may
not have gotten help otherwise."
Title: Domain Name Tax Illegal, Judge Rules
Source: Washington Post (F4)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-04/10/065l-041098-idx.html
Author: Mike Mills
Issue: Internet Domains
Description: U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan held that a $30 fee
assessed on Internet address holders was an illegal tax because it was
devised by the Nat'l Science Foundation and Network Solutions instead of by
Congress. Judge Hogan wrote that "unless Congress acts to ratify the
collection of
the [fee], plaintiffs may be entitled to a refund of the taxes that they
have paid." The $30 has gone into a gov't. "Intellectual Infrastructure
Fund" for the Internet and is part of a $100 fee charged by Network
Solutions to those who want to register Internet domain names. Judge Hogan ruled
that Network Solutions didn't violate the law in charging the other part of
the fee, saying the company is merely being compensated for the service of
providing domain names to customers.
Title: Judge Calls Internet Registration Fee Illegal
Source: New York Times (CyberTimes)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/cyber/articles/10domain.html
Author: Jeri Clausing
Issue: Internet Domains
Description: Federal Judge Thomas F. Hogan, of Federal District Court in
Washington, ruled yesterday that a $30 fee collected on millions of Internet
domain registrations is an illegal tax. This decision puts in limbo a $50
million federal fund that was designated in part to help fund research on
the Next Generation Internet. William Bode, the lawyer who brought the suit,
said he hoped this ruling would translate into millions of refunded dollars
for people who registered domains over the past two years. Beth Gaston, a
spokeswoman for the National Science Foundation, said it was unclear what
would happen to the fund. "Obviously we are disappointed with the district
court decision," she said. "Right now we are reviewing it to see what our
options are." Judge Hogan said the tax was illegal because it had never been
specifically authorized by Congress. "Congress may have intended to grant the
NSF the authority to collect the assessment, but it has not done so yet,"
Hogan wrote. "It still retains the power to ratify the collection even at
this late date," he added. "However, if it wishes to effect such a
ratification and permit NSF to use the Intellectual Infrastructure Fund,
Congress must pass legislation that more explicitly conveys its intentions."
Title: Hitting Up the Internet
Source: Wall Street Journal (Op-eds, A10)
http://wsj.com/
Issue: Internet/Universal Service
Description: Now, as it has in other ways, the Internet is changing things.
In lieu of MCI, people could place a call using an Internet long distance
service. The call is routed through his local phone service to a computer,
which puts the call on the Internet. Once there, the call travels to the
desired destination, where it is transferred to the receiver's local phone
service. The main difference between the two methods is cost. By using the
Internet, a caller spends half of what they would using the traditional
method. In part, this is because ISPs don't pay access fees to local phone
companies. In addition, all phone companies pay subsidies to the
government's "universal service fund," which has existed since the 1930s,
and which helps underwrite phone use for low income inner-city residents,
and rural areas, where service is more expensive to provide. At the urging
of Sen. Ted Stevens (R.-Alaska), the FCC will send a report to Congress
asking for permission to burden Internet phone companies with universal
service fees. Leveling stiff fees on Internet telephony providers will
result in costlier Internet service for consumers. Worse, the technological
development of a new medium will suffer due to regulatory efforts to
preserve a clearly outdated business model.
Title: Another Congressman Opposes Universal Service Charges On Internet
Source: Telecom AM
http://www.telecommunications.com/am/
Issue: Universal Service
Description: Rep. Rick White (R-WA) told the FCC he opposes regulating
Internet telephony -- including removing its exemption from universal
service charges. In a letter to Chairman Kennard, White said the Telecom Act
defines IT as an information service, not a telecom service.
Title: Administration Opposes Internet Telephony Changes
Source: Telecom AM
http://www.telecommunications.com/am/
Issue: Universal Service/Internet Telephony
Description: The Administration's top telecom official urged the FCC not to
regulate Internet telephony as a "telecommunication service," warning that
to do so would "raise contentious issues" with international as well as
domestic implications. In a letter to Chairman Kennard, Nat'l
Telecommunications and Information Administrator (NTIA) Larry Irving also
told the Commission not to "be wedded" to its proposed mechanism for funding
high-cost universal service, under which states would fund 75%. [See
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fccfilings/96_45reportltr.htm]
** Access to Government Info **
Title: Federal Government Clings to Paper Records
Source: New York Times (4/9/98)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/circuits/articles/09archives.html
Author: Michael Cooper
Issue: Access to Government Info
Description: The Nat'l Archives and Records Administration is advising
Gov't. agencies that they could delete and destroy their e-mail and other
electronic records as long as they printed out copies and saved the reams of
paper. Researchers, librarians, historians and journalists are crying foul
and struggling to save the electronic records. They sued the archives
administration in Dec. 1996, charging that vital data could be lost in the
metamorphosis from byte to backup and arguing that the Gov't. was missing an
opportunity to make its records more accessible and searchable. A Federal
District Court judge agreed with them in October, declaring the paper policy
"null and void." The Gov't. has no system capable of storing
the voluminous electronic output of a bureaucracy in the computer age.
Michael Tankersley, a lawyer with Public Citizen, said paper copies are just
not the same as the electronic originals and are far less valuable to
researchers and the public. "You can search and sort and do research with
the electronic version in ways that you can't with voluminous paper
records," he said.
** Microsoft **
Title: Microsoft Again Makes Concession on Browsers
Source: Washington Post (F1)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-04/10/066l-041098-idx.html
Author: Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Issue: Antitrust
Description: Microsoft said it would allow news and entertainment companies
that advertise their Internet sites on the "desktop" of Microsoft's Windows
software to promote Internet-browsing software made by other firms,
specifically rival Netscape. The companies' Internet sites are listed in a
"Channel Bar" that is added to a user's desktop when they install version
4.0 of Microsoft's IE Browser. Under contracts Microsoft has with the
"content provider" companies, they have had to tout Microsoft's browser
exclusively on the Internet sites. The software giant's competitors have
criticized the agreements, saying that Microsoft was using its dominance
with Windows to improperly get a leg up in the browser market. A Microsoft
exec said that the company believes that the contracts are legal but that
the controversy over them was becoming a "distraction."
Title: Microsoft Corp. To Buy Pioneer Of 'Agent' Software
Source: Wall Street Journal (B6)
http://wsj.com/
Author: Nick Wingfield
Issue: Online Services
Description: Microsoft will pay about $40 million for the Firefly Network,
including stock, cash, and assumed debt, according to people familiar with
the transaction. Firefly is a pioneer of the so-called "agent" software that
searches the World Wide Web for goods and services based on computer users'
interests, making the results more personalized. The technology can be used
to tailor information, shopping and other Internet services based on a
digital profile that includes a user's preferences and biographical data.
Supporters say this personalization capability makes life easier for
Internet users. Bob Herbold, Microsoft's COO, said the deal will help it
develop software and services that meet the P3P standards. But Firefly's
technology remains unpopular among some privacy advocates, who fear personal
data may still be exploited by unscrupulous direct marketers.
Title: Microsoft Steps Into Debate Over On-Line Privacy by Buying Firefly
Source: New York Times (C1,C4)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/10microsoft.html
Author: John Markoff
Issue: Privacy
Description: Microsoft's announced yesterday its purchase of a small
software developer, Firefly Network Inc., based in Cambridge. While
Microsoft's purchase did not cause much of a stir on Wall Street, it
highlights an ongoing debate over the issue of privacy and the Internet.
Firefly's technology allows computer users to better control their personal
information on the Internet. Some are concerned that Microsoft will begin to
integrate this technology into its Web browser, thus making the gathering of
personal information about individuals an integral part of the Internet. At
the very least it would make it much easier for companies to gather personal
and behavioral information about people for marketing purposes. However,
Firefly also "embraces and champions a new set of Internet standards," which
helps a person choose how much personal information is transmitted when they
visit a Web site. The privacy advocates' debate stems from the fact that
"Firefly's standard represent a compromise between those who want to unleash
the power of the Internet to aim individualized advertising in a way never
before possible and those who want to curb potential abuses by corporations
and government agencies."
Title: U.S. and Microsoft to Talk Before Possible Showdown
Source: New York Times (C4)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/biztech/articles/10microsoft-side
.html
Author: Steve Lohr
Issue: Antitrust
Description: The Justice Department's top antitrust official is scheduled to
meet with Microsoft Corp's general council this Thursday in Washington in an
effort to find common ground instead of returning to court. The government
is expected to voice some of its concerns about "Microsoft's contracts with
personal computer makers and others." And Microsoft is expected to "try to
explain that practices the government finds questionable are, in fact,
entirely legal if fully understood."
** Lifestyles! **
Title: Robot Headed for Rendezvous With Chernobyl
Source: New York Times (CyberTimes)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/98/04/cyber/articles/10robot.html
Author: Matt Richtel
Issue: Technology
Description: The same space agencies and scientists that helped Pathfinder
explore Mars are using similar "cutting-edge" technology to explore the
contaminated site of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor this November. The robot,
called Pioneer, is a miniature bulldozer that will not only scout the
location but will also shoot video and help create a virtual model of the
inside of the 198-foot concrete tomb that encases the reactor. Scientists
hope that Pioneer's findings will help the consortium of G-7 governments
cooperating on the Chernobyl cleanup, decide how they should mend the tomb
that is decaying so severely that nuclear waste may begin to seep into the
outside water and air. "The high exposure to radiation kills the on board
computer and freezes the joints," dais Daryl Rasmussen, Telepresence
Researcher for the Intelligent Mechanisms Group at the NASA Ames Research
Center. "So far, nobody has built a robot that can survive in there - let
alone accomplish the work."
Title: A Sly Lens on Corporate America
Source: New York Times (B1,B27)
http://www.nytimes.com/library/film/041098bigone-film-review.html
Author: Janet Maslin
Issue: Arts
Description: Michael Moore is back again with a new movie titled, "The Big
One," depicting a promotional book tour. Moving onward from Flint, Mich. and
the rabbit lady, Moore's latest movie is the "rare mainstream American film
about real issues, and the too-rare documentary with a reasonable commercial
future." The film gets its name from a radio interview "in which Moore
suggested changing the name of the United States of America into something
more dynamic ('The Big One'), honoring bald men because they are more common
than bald eagles, and turning "We Will Rock You" into the national anthem."
Moore, known for his passion on the issue of downsizing, often uses
"guerilla tactics" when approaching top-level corporate employees about
their more questionable activities. ("The deal is, you never turn the camera
off," he instructs his cinematopgrapher.") But what do these methods bring
to the problems of displaced American workers? "Provocation and attention,
certainly. But far more lingering than Moore's surprise showdowns with
various plant managers seen here is the glimmer of hope that his
high-profile crusading can prompt thought or even get some jobs back." The
kinds of labor issues he discusses are those that often don't make it to the
multiplex -- at least it's a start.
*********
...and we are outta here. Have a great weekend. We'll be back Monday.