[FYI] (Fwd) FC: News and events from Cato, EPIC, and Stanford Univ.

["Axel H Horns" <horns@ipjur.com>]

------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:09:52 -0500
To:             	politech@politechbot.com
From:           	Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject:        	FC: News and events from Cato, EPIC, and Stanford Univ. law school
Send reply to:  	declan@well.com


---

Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 11:46:20 -0500
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
From: Chris Hoofnagle <hoofnagle@epic.org>
Subject: EPIC P2P letter

Dear Declan,

Wanted to give you and perhaps Politechbot a heads up: EPIC is sending
an open letter to the college and university community today on P2P
monitoring.  We've advised colleges and universities not to take on
any obligation to monitor P2P usage, as such monitoring can chill free
speech, impinge upon academic freedom, and invade privacy.

The full text of the letter is pasted below, and is online at 
http://www.epic.org/privacy/student/p2pletter.html

Regards,
Chris

November 6, 2002

Dear College or University President,

We are writing in regard to a series of letters you recently received
on issues of copyright infringement and peer-to-peer (P2P) file
trading networks. [1]  The Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC) is a not-for-profit research center that focuses on the right
to privacy and emerging civil liberties issues. We believe these
issues require a circumspect analysis of the impact of network
monitoring on privacy and academic freedom. While network monitoring
is appropriate for certain purposes such as security and bandwidth
management, the surveillance of individuals' Internet communications
implicates important rights, and raises questions about the
appropriate role of higher education institutions in policing private
behavior.

We recommend that your institution carefully consider the issues
recently detailed in a report by the National Science Foundation
Logging and Monitoring Project (LAMP). [2]  The LAMP report examines
the intersection of network logging, privacy issues, and security
risks. It also recognizes the unique environment of higher education
institutions, and recommends caution when engaging in monitoring.

While the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has
legitimate interests in protecting against infringement, it is worth
noting that copyright law sets limits on the exclusive rights of
content owners, making some uses of protected material legal. [3]  The
copyright trade association approach has not always been sensitive to
these different types of uses, while raising significant privacy and
speech concerns. [4]  Now, the RIAA wishes to involve colleges and
universities in the process of policing the communicative activities
of students, staff, and faculty in a way that is significantly outside
institutional missions. For this reason, and the considerations listed
below, we urge caution in adopting network monitoring and other
similar methods to address concerns about infringement.

Network monitoring can have a chilling effect on the marketplace of
ideas. It is critical that higher education institutions set policies
that foster open-mindedness and critical inquiry. As Chief Justice
Earl Warren noted in Sweezy v. New Hampshire, "Teachers and students
must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate, to gain
new maturity and understanding; otherwise our civilization will
stagnate and die." [5]

Monitoring the content of communications is fundamentally incompatible
with the mission of educational institutions to foster critical
thinking and exploration. Monitoring chills behavior, and can squelch
creativity that must thrive in educational settings. Furthermore, in
order to monitor at the level desired by the copyright industry--to
detect file transfers "without authorization"institutions would have
to delve into the content and intended uses of almost every
communication. Such a level of monitoring is not only impracticable;
it is incompatible with intellectual freedom.

Monitoring individuals' network usage leads to data protection 
responsibilities. Monitoring of individuals' network usage habits
generates records subject to a system of protections under the Federal
Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). [6]  In addition to the
protections provided by FERPA, a 1997 report by CAUSE (Association for
Managing and Using Information Resources in Higher Education)
recommends a full system of Fair Information Practices (FIPs) for the
treatment of these student records. This framework includes
notification of policies; minimization of collection of data; limits
on secondary use; nondisclosure and consent; a need to know before
granting third parties access to data; data accuracy, inspection, and
review; information security, integrity, and accountability; and
education. [7]

Network monitoring appliances can be systems of general surveillance.
The RIAA has recommended widespread use of network monitoring to
manage P2P file sharing. These technical approaches can become systems
of surveillance. Once installed on an institution's network, they
could be used for copyright control today, and the control of ideas
tomorrow. Institutions should not build in a network infrastructure
that facilitates monitoring because "[w]hat may begin as logging
activity to protect the efficient and effective functioning of one
system can become targeted data collection and surveillance of a
specific individual." [8]

Free environments shun technological controls on behavior. Because
individuals at institutions of higher education must always remain
free to inquire, colleges and universities are not the place for
technological restrictions on communication. Institutions of higher
education should not practice content monitoring, an approach that the
controlled environments of corporate workplaces and kindergartens have
adopted.

Further, institutions that simply install a network monitoring
application circumvent deliberative academic policymaking. All
stakeholders of the university--including students--must be involved
in a process that recognizes the legitimate concerns of the copyright
industry without unduly hindering academic freedom, privacy, and fair
use rights. As Professor Virginia Rezmierski and Aline Soules have
noted:

For a policy to be effective in guiding community behaviors, it must
reflect the full range of the community's values, must be understood
and embraced by community members, and must reinforce the most
important values and the mission of the institution as a whole. An
effective policy requires campus-wide discussion and the involvement
of each of the major constituencies of the community. [9]

The purported privacy and security risks of P2P are largely red
herrings. The copyright industry alleges that P2P programs jeopardize
network security and privacy. While all network-enabled applications
raise security concerns, P2P systems are not uniquely vulnerable and
do not warrant special treatment on these grounds. Far more damage to
data integrity and privacy results from exploits of Microsoft Outlook
than from P2P applications. Academic institutions have not responded
to Outlook-based security threats with prohibition or surveillance;
instead, measures are put in place to limit entry of known threats and
educate network users about appropriate protection measures.

Network surveillance and enforcement is likely to lead to an
escalating network "arms race," potentially harming overall network
integrity and performance. While P2P traffic currently travels over
easily identifiable TCP ports, if these ports are blocked or
unreasonably throttled, it is likely that this traffic will move to
less easily filtered modes. Certain P2P clients already use port 80
(usually reserved for Web browsing) when they detect the presence of a
firewall blocking other ports. [10] Furthermore, file sharing
applications utilizing sophisticated encryption already exist, [11]
and are likely to become widely deployed in response to efforts to
limit these systems. Academic institutions should not adopt a
confrontational role with respect to these technologies. By permitting
reasonable use of these applications, they can ensure that the traffic
remains identifiable for purposes of efficient bandwidth allocation
without the use of needlessly privacy-invasive techniques.

Under current law, educational institutions are required to take down
infringing content hosted on a university Web server. These provisions
provide an adequate remedy to address online infringement. But this
new proposal would shift the burden to colleges and universities to
devote scarce resources to monitoring online communications and to
identifying and "prosecuting" individuals suspected of using P2P
networks to commit copyright violations. This is neither a reasonable
nor an appropriate burden to place on institutions of higher
education. Refusing to accept this burden will not leave the copyright
trade associations without recourse in cases of infringement via P2P
networks; instead, the power to authorize policing and adjudicate
guilt or innocence will remain where it belongs, in the courts. If a
copyright owner suspects such infringement, it can initiate a lawsuit
against the suspected wrongdoer.

We recommend that institutions take a careful approach to addressing
the legitimate concerns of the copyright industry. We also recommend
that institutions not adopt privacy-invasive technologies or policies
that impinge upon academic freedom and privacy in order to address
those concerns. Network monitoring for bandwidth management is
appropriate, but monitoring of individuals' activities does not
comport with higher education values.

Sincerely,

Marc Rotenberg
Executive Director

Chris Hoofnagle
Legislative Counsel

Adam Kessel
IPIOP Fellow

Ruchika Agrawal
IPIOP Fellow

Cc:

Mary A. Burgan, American Association of University Professors
Judith Boettcher, Corporation for Research and Educational Networking
Alan Charles Kors, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
Robert Paterson, SIGUCCS, Americans for Computing Machinery Julie
Beatty, United States Student Association Jackie Tyson, National
Association of Graduate-Professional Students




[1] Letter from Hillary Rosen, Chairman and CEO, Recording Industry
Association of America, to College and University Presidents (Oct. 3,
2002), at http://www.riaa.com/pdf/Universityletter.pdf; Letter from
David Ward, President, American Council on Education, to College and
University Presidents (Oct. 9, 2002), at
http://www.riaa.com/pdf/Copyrightletter.pdf.

[2] Virginia E. Rezmierski & Nathaniel St. Clair, II, Identifying
Where Technology Logging and Monitoring for Increased Security Ends
and Violations of Personal Privacy and Student Records Begin, Final
Report of the National Science Foundation Logging and Monitoring
Project (2001), at
http://www.aacrao.org/publications/catalog/NSF-LAMP.pdf.

[3] See 17 U.S.C. §§ 107-122, 1008.

[4] Jessica Litman, War Stories, 20 Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law
Journal 337 (2002) (forthcoming), at
http://www.law.wayne.edu/litman/papers/warstories.pdf; John Markoff,
Scientists Drop Plan to Present Music-Copying Study That Record
Industry Opposed, New York Times, Apr. 27, 2001; Legal Concerns Delay
Publication of Research on 'Digital Watermarks,' Chronicle of Higher
Education, Feb, 9, 2001.

[5] 354 U.S. 234 (1957).

[6] 20 U.S.C. § 1232g.

[7] Privacy and the Handling of Student Information in the Electronic
Networked Environments of Colleges and Universities, CAUSE, April
1997, at http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub3102.pdf.

[8] Rezmierski & St. Clair at 1.2. Further, "College and university
communities are vulnerable to unwitting as well as purposeful abuses
of network and information systems." Id. at 1.1.

[9] Virginia E. Rezmierski & Aline Soules, Security vs. Anonymity: The
Debate over User Authentication and Information Access, EDUCAUSE
Review (March/April 2000), at
http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM0022.pdf

[10] http://www.groove.net/.

[11] http://www.freenetproject.org/.


---

Subject: FW: Cato event: "Broadband Policy After the Market Meltdown"
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:19:23 -0400 From: "Adam Thierer"
<athierer@cato.org> To: <declan@well.com>


-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Thierer
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 9:53 AM
To: Adam Thierer
Subject:

Dear TechKnowledge reader:
     Hope you will be able to join us for Cato's 6th Annual Technology
     & 
Society conference on Thursday, November 14th. This year's topic:
"Telecom and Broadband Policy After the Market Meltdown." The event is
free of charge and open to the public. Conference details and
registration information follow.
_______________________________________________


http://www.cato.org/events/techconf02/index.html





Telecom and Broadband Policy
After the Market Meltdown
The Cato Institute's Sixth Annual
Technology & Society Conference

Thursday, November 14, 2002
8:00 a.m.-2:30 p.m.

Cato Institute
F.A. Hayek Auditorium
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001

The American telecommunications sector went into a freefall in 2002.
Telecom stocks tanked as once proud industry giants and smaller
carriers alike were financially decimated. Numerous providers were
forced to declare bankruptcy. And the reverberations were felt well
beyond the boundaries of the telecom sector as upstream and downstream
industries took a hit as well.

What were the causes of this market meltdown? Was it driven purely by
misguided corporate decisionmaking and bad business models, or is
public policy more to blame? The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was
supposed to rejuvenate this sector by encouraging increased
competition, innovation and investment, but most industry watchers
have been dissatisfied with the sluggish pace of change.

This conference will explore recent developments in the
telecommunications sector and feature a set of balanced debates over
the future of both wireline and wireless public policy.

This conference is free of charge. For more information, call (202)
218-4633 or e-mail techandsociety@cato.org. Registrations must be
received by Tuesday, November 12, 2002.

Conference Agenda:
8:00-8:30 a.m. Registration-F.A. Hayek Auditorium Foyer

8:30-8:40 a.m. Welcoming Remarks
Adam D. Thierer
Director of Telecommunications Studies, Cato Institute

8:40-9:30 a.m. Morning Keynote Address

Hon. William J. "Billy" Tauzin*
Chairman, House Commerce Committee

Introduction: Adam D. Thierer, Cato Institute

   Part One: Wireline
9:30-10:30 a.m. Panel 1
The Telecom Market Meltdown:
Causes and Consequences

Moderator: Adam D. Thierer
Cato Institute

Larry Darby
Founder and President, Darby Associates

Robert Gensler
Vice President, Portfolio Manager and Investment Analyst, T. Rowe
Price

Anton Wahlman
Research Analyst in Broadband Access Technology, Needham & Co.

John Wohlstetter
Senior Fellow in Technology Deregulation, Discovery Institute

10:30-10:45 a.m. Break

10:45 a.m.-12:00 p.m. Panel 2
What Vision Will Govern Broadband? Deregulation, Open Access, or
Structural Separation?

Moderator: Clyde Wayne Crews Jr.
Cato Institute

Peter Jew
Vice President of Marketing, Optical Solutions

James K. Glassman
Host, Tech Central Station, and Resident Fellow, American Enterprise
Institute

John Ryan
Principal, Chief Analyst, and Cofounder, RHK Telecommunications
Industry Analysis

Robert W. Crandall
Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, Brookings Institution

Fred L. Smith Jr.
Founder and President, Competitive Enterprise Institute

12:00-12:45 p.m. Lunch-Wintergarden

   Part Two: Wireless
12:45-1:15 p.m. Luncheon Keynote Address

Hon. Kathleen Abernathy
Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission

Introduction: Clyde Wayne Crews Jr., Cato Institute

1:15-2:30 p.m. Panel 3
The Future of Spectrum Governance: Property Rights or a Spectrum
Commons?

Moderator: Adam D. Thierer
Cato Institute

Yochai Benkler
Professor of Law, New York University School of Law

David Reed
Systems Designer and Researcher

Thomas W. Hazlett
Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute

Gerald Faulhaber
Professor of Public Policy and Management, University of Pennsylvania

Rudy Baca
Vice President and Global Strategist, Precursor Group

*invited

http://www.cato.org/events/techconf02/index.html


----

Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 09:49:45 -0800
To: declan@well.com
From: Lauren Gelman <gelman@stanford.edu>
Subject: Martin Garbus to Speak at Stanford




Stanford University Law School
Center for Internet and Society
Lunchtime Speaker Series Presents:

Martin Garbus

Monday, November 11, 2002
12:15 - 2:00 pm
Moot Court Room
Stanford University Law School:
Directions: http://www.law.stanford.edu/directions.shtml
Lunch provided

Martin Garbus will discuss his new book: Courting Disaster: The
Rehnquist Court and the Unmaking of American Law. He will also recount
his experiences representing the Gone With the Wind heirs in the Wind
Done Gone litigation and representing the defendants in District Court
in the Universal v. Reimerdes (a.k.a. the NY DVD case) challenging the
constitutionality of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Questions:

Post questions for Mr. Garbus online at: 
http://cyberlaw/events/archives/martin_garbus.shtml

About the Speaker:

Martin Garbus is a founding partner of Frankfurt Garbus Kurnit Klein &
Selz, PC. One of the country's leading trial lawyers, Mr. Garbus has
tried complex commercial, intellectual property, estate, and criminal
cases, as well as media cases in nearly every state in the country. He
has appeared before the United States Supreme Court as well as the
highest state and federal courts in numerous states on many occasions.
His courtroom work has ranged from long jury trials in complex estate
cases and securities cases to arbitrations and short bench trials.

He has represented most of the major book publishers, movies companies
and media conglomerates in the United States and abroad in commercial
and media actions. He has also represented major entities in new
media, Internet companies, networks and cable television and radio
industries, including Channel 4, PBS, Pearson and Penguin-Putnam Books
in the United States and Australia, Fox and Warner Bros., and Michael
Bloomberg and his business entities, in business transactions as well
as litigations. As part of his communications and intellectual
property practice, he has represented the publishers of Salman Rushdie
and Henry Miller and has personally represented actors such as Spike
Lee, Al Pacino, Richard Gere, and Robert Redford, and authors such as
David Halberstam, as well as such well-known political dissidents such
as Vaclav Havel, Nelson Mandela and Anatoly Sakharov. He has also
served as a consultant on the media and communications in Canada,
England, Australia, the former Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, Poland
and Hungary.

Martin Garbus is the author of three books about his commercial and
criminal trials: Ready for the Defense and Traitors and Heroes, and
Tough Talk: How I Fought For Writers, Comics, Bigots, and the American
Way (published in August 1998 by Random House-Times Books) which deals
with media problems on the Internet including copyright, trademark and
libel. Mr. Garbus has taught law at Columbia and Yale universities. He
is a frequent contributor to major newspapers and national magazines,
including the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times,
and has been a commentator on current legal issues for NBC, ABC, CBS,
Time and Newsweek. He is a graduate of Hunter College (BA, 1955), New
York University (JD, 1959) and studied economics at Columbia
University and studied tax law at New York University School of Law.



-- 
Lauren Gelman, Esq.
gelman@stanford.edu

Assistant Director
Program for  Law, Science and Technology
Assistant Director
Center for Internet and Society

Stanford Law School
Crown Quadrangle
559 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305-8610

(ph) 650-724-3358
(fax) 650-723-4426




----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing
list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this
notice. To subscribe to Politech:
http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is
archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Declan McCullagh's photographs
are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Like Politech? Make a donation here:
http://www.politechbot.com/donate/ Recent CNET News.com articles:
http://news.search.com/search?qÞclan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---

------- End of forwarded message -------


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@lists.fitug.de