August 2001 Public Policy Computer Graphics Column

Introduction

Bob Ellis
Laurie Reinhart

We begin with a welcome, by our chairman Bob Ellis, to new readers and to SIGGRAPH 2001 attendees. In doing this, we provide an overview of the activities of the Public Policy Program (section 1) and of our community outreach on digital technology policy (section 2). This section includes a brief description of our first tutorial and panel, presented at this year's conference. This is followed by the appendices used in the panel, with many useful references and URL's.

Follow-up on previous columns referring to UCITA, including a conversation with a reader, are next (sections 3 and 4).

Myles Losch has contributed a section on "Imploding DSL Carriers?" (section 5), and also his eyewitness account of digital TV in court (section 6).

1. Welcome SIGGRAPH 2001 Attendees

Bob Ellis
Laurie Reinhart

The SIGGRAPH Public Policy Program

We extend a special welcome to those SIGGRAPH 2001 attendees who may be hearing about our activities for the first time.

The mission of the SIGGRAPH Public Policy Program is to provide visibility of relevant public policy information, such as proposed legislation, to SIGGRAPH members and others in the computer graphics technical community and to provide information on the implications of technology to the non-technical community, including policy makers and funding agencies. We do so by this column, our web site (http://www.siggraph.org/pub-policy), serving as a catalyst for studies on computer graphics research topics, participation in conferences addressing policy issues, conducting issues surveys, writing white papers and working with ACM public policy groups, such as USACM. Our activities are performed by an all volunteer group; we have no professional staff support for public policy.

I have some excellent assistance. Myles Losch provides us with expertise in the areas of telecommunications policy and digital aspects of intellectual property issues. David Nelson is our webmaster. Laurie Reinhart provides editorial support and assists David with the website. In addition, Laurie has started taking a major role in putting this column together and providing visibility for policy activities at our annual conference.

We have developed special emphasis on several issues. In our most far-reaching project, we have been working with the computer graphics research community on defining a study of computer graphics research topics. Mike McGrath has played a major role in this activity.

We have placed special emphasis on the interaction of computer graphics and the Internet. Our first (and only to date) white paper was on computer graphics and the Internet; copies may be found on our web site. Believing that broadband Internet access is a necessity for successful computer graphics on the Internet, we have commented extensively on the technology and issues associated with services such as Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) and cable modems (http://www.siggraph.org/pub-policy/CGColumn-0599.html). Long before the popular press commented on the security and privacy aspects of these services, we were alerting SIGGRAPH members (http://www.siggraph.org/pub-policy/CGColumn-1199.html).

Computer graphics and intellectual property (IP) issues have also been important. In particular, digital copy protection schemes in use with DVD technology and proposed for digital TV, strengthen the rights of owners of IP and may limit the rights of consumers under fair use concepts and home recording rights.

At SIGGRAPH 2001 we organized both a tutorial and a panel. The course is a survey of policy issues that affect computing with emphasis on those issues of particular relevance to computer graphics. The panel is on the new world of intellectual property and features people who can take an objective view of the situation and propose solutions that may satisfy both users and creators of IP. Myles Losch has made a significant contribution to the course material and David Nelson is serving as co-organizer for the panel.

2. Community Outreach on Digital Technology Policy

Bob Ellis

One activity for a computer graphics professional is outreach to the general public. The appendices contain some material I've used in this activity. My experience is that this is most effective when you can get yourself on the program of an existing organization that has regular meetings. Like everyone, most members of the public are busy people and the subject of your concern may be pretty far down on their list of things to worry about! Just talking with your friends, neighbors and relatives can be very effective. Remember to make your comments relevant to their interests and be sure to listen to their comments.

3. UCITA Diary #2

Bob Ellis

In the May 2001 issue of this column, I started commenting on my activities in my home state regarding the introduction of a bill that would make the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act into a state law. This is the second and final (for this legislative session) entry.

As opponents of UCITA made known the problems with UCITA, the legislator who introduced the bill wisely decided not to even hold formal hearings but to pass back the concerns to the group that developed the model legislation. It also became obvious that there was nothing uniform about UCITA because Virginia and Maryland have both passed different versions. If there was any chance of the bill being passed here, changes would have had to be made which would have been responsible for yet another non- uniform UCITA.

I'm sure UCITA will be back so keep tuned for more information.

4. Further Dialog, from February and May 2001 columns: electronic signatures, UCITA, DMCA

Bob Ellis
Myles Losch

In the May 2001 column we presented a dialog with reader Dan Burk (a member of the SIGGRAPH 2001 panel) which was started in the issue before that. As a final comment on this, Myles Losch wrote:

"In the last part of the column, Prof. Dan Burk may have erred in naming UCITA as the law alluded to by an earlier reader, who spoke of a statute that could "criminalize" certain conduct. So far as I know, UCITA is purely a civil measure about licenses (i.e. contracts), which if breached could lead to civil lawsuits but not criminal prosecutions."

"In that respect UCITA is like patent law but unlike copyright law (e.g. DMCA), which contains both civil and criminal penalties for infringement. Of course not all writers keep that distinction clear; one reads of "speech-crime laws," for example, where that term is meant to cover everything from felonies like perjury, to civil torts like slander."

To which Dan Burk replied:

"Strictly speaking this is correct -- breach of contract typically is the subject of a private suit rather than governmental prosecution. It would be the DMCA breach accompanying avoidance of a UCITA contract that would be potentially criminal."

"However, UCITA isn't really properly compared to either copyright or patent, since both confer property rights with some remedy -- UCITA isn't supposed to confer property rights (although that is debatable), only to define how existing property rights can be allocated."

5. `Imploding DSL Carriers` (Recent DSL Business Turmoil and Its Consequences)

Myles Losch

As regular readers know, this column has covered the spread of broadband network connections, which we see as necessary to bring homes and small businesses easier access to synthetic digital imagery. The two most popular alternatives for achieving this are:

1) Cable television wiring plus fast new modems, and ...

2) Telephone wires upgraded with Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) technology.

But over the past year, the U.S. DSL business encountered setbacks that weakened competition, boosted prices for consumers, and led diverse groups to urge government intervention. Some industry analysts trace the problems back five years, to flaws in the 1996 Telecommunications Act that ordered local phone companies (mainly the 'Baby Bells') to rent their wires to rivals.

But the Bells sued to block parts of the Act and, said critics, delayed or mishandled orders from competitors. Together with other difficulties, this reportedly sped the recent demise of a number of small, aggressive independent DSL providers (such as NorthPoint, which abruptly collapsed, leaving over 100,000 customers without service).

Facing fewer serious rivals, the Bells (which dominate the U.S. DSL market) raised DSL prices for home Internet access by up to a quarter, thus encouraging cable television companies to follow suit. Such moves increased the public pressure on government to act. Among the consequences have been:

1) Calls by the Bush administration's new FCC chair Michael Powell for an eightfold rise in penalties against phone companies that improperly thwart rivals, plus relaxed time limits for pursuing such misconduct, and other tough new rules.

2) Moves by some state regulators to force the Bells to restructure (but not [yet] to divest) their "last mile" wiring business, so as to make discrimination against competing service providers more difficult.

But the Bells have not been complacent in the face of regulatory countermoves: they have fought for new legislative authority to carry interstate traffic without first meeting the market-opening requirements of the 1996 Telecom Act.

All of this has taken place against a background of rapid growth in DSL (and its alternatives). But some analysts fear that price rises will dampen demand, and even speculate that this is among the Bells' goals. In this view, the Bells want:

1) Much more time to refine their DSL implementation techniques and the supporting business processes, both of which remain seriously immature by the standards of voice telephony.

2) Lower annual capital investment needs for upgrading their wired infrastructure to support DSL. This is said to result from the Bells' heritage as heavily regulated public utilities, which traditionally face strong pressure (from investors in their stock) to maintain high dividend payouts.

Were the Bells obliged to seriously compete for market share against many fast-moving DSL rivals offering low prices (holds this hypothesis), their resulting need for investment capital would conflict with shareholder expectations; hence the alleged preference for more gradual growth of DSL service.

Several of the developments noted above will clearly require significant time to unfold, and we hope to follow them in future columns.

6. Digital TV Before the Court: Clashing Principles

Myles Losch

This past May in New York, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit heard oral argument in a case that could significantly affect an issue (copyright "rules of the road" for digital works), that we and others have long seen as delaying the replacement of analog television by a computer-friendly, digital successor. [Following is one observer's (Mr. Losch's) response to the court session, with no attempt at a full account or analysis.] Formally, the question that day was whether to partly or wholly lift a lower court's order last year (sought by the movie industry) that 2600 Magazine cease publishing on its website the DVD decryption utility DeCSS, and also remove hyperlinks to other sites where that program can be found.

Among the copyright issues presented, were the degree of control that copyright holders may exercise over uses of their digital works that, by long-standing public policy, need no licenses; and the extent to which technology may be used to create "perpetual" copyrights in such works. But as the parties (and other groups* who earlier filed briefs in the appeal) made clear, this is more than just a copyright case, for also implicated [as in other, non-copyright U.S. cases during recent years] was the scope of legal protection for computer software as free expression (scientific, artistic, and/or political).

And from a broader policy perspective, Prof. Jessica Litman, alluding in a recent book (www.digital-copyright.com) to the statute under which the case arose (the Digital Millennium Copyright Act [DMCA] of 1998), asserted that "... If current trends continue unabated ... we are likely to experience a violent collision between our expectations of freedom of expression and the enhanced copyright law..."

In addition to the two parties in the original case, the appeal included oral argument by the U.S. government, which intervened to defend the DMCA's constitutionality. The government's position featured broad claims of authority to act against not only the use, but also the writing and/or publication of any software with harmful potential. On such a view, prior government licensing (akin to that imposed on medications) could presumably be required of anyone who creates or publishes a computer program.

And as for the lower court's injunction in the case at hand, the government lawyer would have toughened it. Yet curiously, neither he nor his movie industry colleague directly addressed the defendant magazine's response to the order, namely, converting the banned hyperlinks into ASCII text URLs (which for many Web surfers are nearly as useful). One suspects, though, that if the injunction's ban on linking survives judicial scrutiny, the URLs may be targeted next.

By a wide margin, the most memorable advocacy that day was presented on behalf of the defendant magazine by Kathleen Sullivan, the dean of Stanford Law School and a noted constitutional scholar. But no inference should be drawn from this, since Dean Sullivan also bore the greatest burden (arguing as she did for reversal of the lower court's decision), whereas her opponents merely sought to protect the status quo. Adding to Dean Sullivan's burden was the 17-year-old magazine's reputation, especially in law enforcement circles, for complacency (or worse) toward computer crime.

For software developers, perhaps the most noteworthy argument was not made in court, but in a computer scientists' brief filed earlier. These researchers took the view that software (which for copyright purposes is a type of literary work), when considered apart from computers (e.g. on the printed page, or other nonvolatile medium) is as innocuous as a cake recipe (without ingredients or baker), or sheet music (without musicians or instruments). Presumably, from this perspective, U.S. courts would treat original computer programs as non-functional, pure speech, and no more regulable than (say) a poem or essay.

The judges requested post-argument briefs from all parties and, in a later clarification, identified a number of specific questions (most bearing on free expression) to be addressed. But again, no reliable conclusions flow from this (other than the court's apparent wish to seriously consider the constitutional questions associated with the case).

What might be the practical impact of this case? Events of recent years suggest caution in one's assessment. Few analysts suppose that DeCSS can in fact be suppressed by courts. One of the judges suggested that the true target was future DeCSS-like programs, but the actions of copyright-based industries cast doubt on this, or at least call into question whether any different outcome could realistically be expected.

These industries accordingly seek to alter the hardware architectures of personal computers (and the Internet's design) to support restrictions (that cannot be sidestepped by software) on the use of copyrighted digital works. But this strategy too appears questionable, and so parallel efforts are well underway to create artificial technological incompatibilities between PCs and emerging entertainment media formats.

The shortcomings of that idea are apparent as well, and needn't be restated here.

From a legal standpoint, the 2nd Circuit, although influential, covers only a few of the 50 U.S. states; there are a dozen other such circuit courts, some of which may take a different view on key issues. (The 6th and 9th Circuits, in cases unrelated to that described here, have been relatively supportive of software authors' rights to create and publish as they see fit.) Divergence among circuit courts increases the likelihood of Supreme Court review. Whatever the outcome of this appeal, it will likely be analyzed with care, and appear again in this column ...

* (including [non-SIGGRAPH] ACM entities with a public policy focus, e.g. USACM)

[Author's Disclosure: The preceding report was written by a long-time member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (http://www.eff.org), which represented the defendants in the case described.]

Appendix I

Bob Ellis
January 2001

This is the document used to determine if there's interest in a presentation.

Computers, Public Policy and You

As the general public's use of digital technology (computing, recording (CD, DVD, etc.) and data transmission (Internet, HDTV, etc.) has dramatically increased, governments at all levels have been rapidly passing new laws and the courts have been busily interpreting these and existing laws. Many of these new and existing laws directly impact what you can and cannot do with this new technology, even for your personal use. This presentation explores the impacts and what you can do to influence the developing public policy in digital technology.

This material can be presented as a single presentation or as a multi-session course. The presentation format is a 15-minute to one-hour overview of these issues. The course format is a one-hour session on each topic with out of class study of web references.

Prerequisites

There are no formal prerequisites, but an interest in public policy and an understanding of the use of digital technology are useful. Only minor knowledge of digital technology is required. Internet access is required for accessing the course reference material.

Outline

Who can read my email, access my computer files and how can I protect my data and privacy? If I can protect my data will criminals and international terrorists also do this and how will law enforcement agencies deal with the new options?

You mean I don't actually own that software program I just bought and installed and I can't do whatever I want with it? Can I legally own copies of MP3 music files and can I trade them with others? What's all this fuss about Napster and Gnutella? What can I legally do with copyrighted material I download from the Internet? Why can't I get an Internet domain name that's the same as my business?

Why can't I make a copy of the DVD movie I own or even have access to the digital format?

Is it safe to use my credit card to make purchases on the Web? Will I ever have to pay sales taxes on my Web purchases? What can organizations on the Web do with the personal information I supply?

How can I protect my children and grandchildren from objectionable material on the Web when the courts keep throwing out the laws passed to protect children? What are the limits on material I can download and store on my computer? How can gambling websites operate when it is illegal in the US to transmit gambling information over telephone lines?

Can my neighbors really access my computer files and print on my printer if I use one of the new high speed Internet connections? How do these new services differ from my plain old dial up access?

When will I be able to buy an affordable High Definition TV (HDTV)? When will I have to buy a HDTV set? Will I still be able to record HDTV programs for my own personal use?

Why is the government picking on Microsoft? Why does the government need to fund computing research with all the rich computer companies out there? What's this Digital Divide I keep hearing about and why is it important to me?

If I don't like how things are going, what can I do about it?

About the Presenter

Bob Ellis and his wife have lived in XXX since 1995. Bob retired in 1993 as Sun Microsystems' representative on the Technology Committee of the Computer Systems Policy Project (CSPP - an industry policy study organization) and co-manager of Sun's university research program. Previously, he held computer graphics software development and management positions with Sun, GE-Calma, Atari, Boeing and Washington University (St. Louis, MO). He received BS and MS degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from Washington University (St. Louis). Bob currently does work as a volunteer for technical societies; he is a member of the Association for Computing Machinery's (ACM) US Activities Committee (USACM) serves as the Chair of the Public Policy Committee of ACM's Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH).

Copyright © 2001 by Robert A. Ellis. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or educational use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To otherwise copy, republish, post on servers or redistribute in any manner requires specific prior permission.

Appendix II

Robert Ellis
February 2001

This is the handout that goes with the presentation.

Computers, Public Policy and You

Copyright © 2001 by Robert A. Ellis. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or educational use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To otherwise copy, republish, post on servers or redistribute in any manner requires specific prior permission.

As the general public's use of digital technology (computing, recording (CD, DVD, etc.) and data transmission (Internet, HDTV, etc.) has dramatically increased, governments at all levels have been rapidly passing new laws and the courts have been busily interpreting these and existing laws. Many of these new and existing laws directly impact what you can and cannot do with this new technology, even for your personal use.

For example, in the pre-digital days you could access copyrighted printed material by simply buying a book or checking it out of a library. You might copy a few pages for your personal use but it was considerable work, expensive and the copies were generally not high quality. In the digital age, just to read material downloaded from the Internet or contained on a CD-ROM, a copy must be made inside your computer. Once there, perfect copies can be made with little or no trouble and expense. This simple change has had profound effects.

Who can read my email, access my computer files and how can I protect my data and privacy? If I can protect my data will criminals and international terrorists also do this and how will law enforcement agencies deal with the new options?

Email travels through and is stored on may computers even after it has been deleted. Computer files can generally be read by anyone who has access to the computer either physically or via a network. Encryption technology "scrambles" file contents so that they can only be unscrambled by someone who has the mathematical "key". This works for files on your computer as well as files, such as email, sent over the Internet. Encryption is the first line of defense of your privacy. Protect your email address. Access web sites with "cookies" turned off. But remember, almost anything can and has been subpoenaed; computers have very long and accurate memories.

Smart criminals and terrorists all use encryption. Encrypted file can be opened without the key by powerful computers with the effort required depending on the length of the key. Escrowing systems for the keys by independent third parties and available to governments by court order (much like wiretaps) has been proposed, but there are many problems (e.g., how do you protect human rights organizations from totalitarian governments?). Snooping systems like the FBI's Carnivore can collect information subject to court ordered constraints.

You mean I don't actually own that software program I just bought and installed and I can't do whatever I want with it? Can I legally own copies of MP3 music files and can I trade them with others? What's all this fuss about Napster and Gnutella? What can I legally do with copyrighted material I download from the Internet? Why can't I get an Internet domain name that's the same as my business?

Unlike books, video and audiotapes and tangible goods, most software is licensed, not sold, and the rights of the licensee are controlled by the "shrink-wrap" or "click-through" license that can impose any constraints the licensor wants. Common constraints include not making copies, requiring licensor approval before disposing of the software, not analyzing the software, not writing articles about the software without the licensor's approval, etc. The legality of these licenses has been questionable, but a new prospective law, UCITA, attempts to change that.

MP3 is just a form of compression of audio data and is not illegal to use or have MP3 files. An MP3 form of copyrighted material is subject to the same rules as any other copy. Except for "fair use" you cannot copy, sell or perform in public any form of copyrighted material although you can give it away or even resell it (first sale doctrine). Fair use derives from the U.S. Constitution. Fair use is generally defined as including making copies for personal, private or non-profit use, quoting in reviews or scholarly works, etc. Fair use is not precisely defined by statute.

Napster and Gnutella are systems for exchanging MP3 formatted files of data. As long as the work is not copyrighted or otherwise controlled and you have a legal right to share it, using Napster and Gnutella is not illegal. But it is easy to abuse these systems.

Copyrighted material you have legally downloaded from the Internet is subject to all the conditions listed above.

In the pre-Internet days, trademarks had a strong geographical and line of business separation (e.g., Apple Computer and Apple Records). Although country and even further geographical domain names exist, everybody wants to be in the .com top level domain. Who has trademark rights - United Airlines, United Van Lines, and United)? Similar names (e.g., etoy vs. etoys) also cause problems. New top level domains (.biz, etc.) will probably just make it more confusing.

Why can't I make a copy of the DVD movie I own or even have access to the digital format?

DVD movies are weakly encrypted by a scheme called CSS and unless you have a way to unscramble the data (such as a computer program like DeCSS), there is no way you can get a viewable picture. A technology also prevents making VHS tape copies of the analog signal. In addition, there is no digital output data stream from any device that has been manufactured under appropriate license arrangements. The only way currently to see a DVD movie in digital format is on a properly configured laptop computer.

Is it safe to use my credit card to make purchases on the Web? Will I ever have to pay sales taxes on my Web purchases? What can organizations on the Web do with the personal information I supply?

Making a credit card purchase on the web is somewhat safe if the number is sent via a secure connection. But the number is usually stored on an Internet accessible computer and there have been many cases of crackers breaking into these computers and stealing the information. Normal consumer credit card protections apply to Internet transactions.

Current U.S. law says that a seller only needs to collect sales taxes on interstate commerce if it does business in the state where the purchaser lives. Most states have use tax laws that require you to pay an equivalent tax on goods purchased out of state. Use tax laws are very difficult to enforce, but some states have started putting use tax questions on their income tax forms. There is currently a great debate about the fairness of the current laws.

In the U.S. an organization can do anything it wants with the personal information it collects from individuals, unless it has a stated policy limiting its actions. There are efforts to get on-line organizations to state and adhere to a privacy policy and to enact laws limiting what organizations can do with this data.

How can I protect my children and grandchildren from objectionable material on the Web when the courts keep throwing out the laws passed to protect children? What are the limits on material I can download and store on my computer? How can gambling websites operate when it is illegal in the US to transmit gambling information over telephone lines?

The problem with the child protection laws is that there is no practical way to allow adults their First Amendment rights to free speech. You can install and use filtering software, but there are severe limits on the capabilities. You can monitor the child's on- line activities.

Except for explicit exceptions to the First Amendment (child pornography, libelous statements, proprietary information, etc.) you can download and store anything you find on the Internet. Other countries do not have such legal systems and may restrict the accessing and ownership of certain forms of materials. This is an important issue for the Internet because it basically doesn't recognize national borders.

I don't know how gambling sites can operate legally using telephone lines.

Can my neighbors really access my computer files and print on my printer if I use one of the new high-speed Internet connections? How do these new services differ from my plain old dial up access?

Unless you have disabled all file and resource sharing, the people who share your cable data channel can easily access your computer. If you also want to operate a home computer network, you have a problem.

Both cable Internet access and DSL do not use the switched telephone network. In addition, cable companies are not common carriers so they may exercise more control over what you access with your computer than the telephone companies. There are numerous unsolved technical, security, privacy and policy issues using these services.

When will I be able to buy an affordable High Definition TV (HDTV)? When will I have to buy a HDTV set? Will I still be able to record HDTV programs for my own personal use?

Affordable HDTV systems will be available when there is a mass market for them (like UHF enabled TV sets many years ago). There are many unresolved technical and policy issues.

At some point a few years from now (when the broadcasters return their analog channels) you will have to buy a HDTV set or a converter for your present set. This will not happen until these become affordable.

Because of the concerns of the producers of digital TV programming, we are currently headed towards a situation of copy protected technology which will not let you make recordings. Many issues are unresolved such as how to provide fair use. And remember the Betamax decision.

Why is the government picking on Microsoft? Why does the government need to fund computing research with all the rich computer companies out there? What's this Digital Divide I keep hearing about and why is it important to me?

Many people feel that Microsoft illegally used its likely monopoly status in operating systems to restrict competition in other software.

Most companies, even pharmaceutical companies, rely heavily on the results of government funded basic research. Most companies are not equipped to make good decisions on basic research. Many argue that the success of government funded basic research in the last fifty years has been responsible for much of the economic growth in the United States.

The digital divide refers to the fact that computer and Internet access is not uniformly distributed across all ethnic, social and economic classes and this is a potentially limiting situation in equitable access to our legal, government and economic systems. Also, disabled people may not have good access to computers and the Internet. A recent court ruling has said that accessibility laws apply to both computers and the Internet. Computer-based voting systems may become the next big access issue.

If I don't like how things are going, what can I do about it?

As with other policy issues, effective computing policy activity requires informed citizens who then approach their government representatives either individually or in organized groups to effect changes. Fortunately for those who have access, the Internet is an excellent resource for information. Use search engines and be sure to find out who really sponsors a site (e.g., HRRC). Be sure to look at web sites ending in ".org".

Disclaimer

The author is not an attorney and the material in this work should not be considered legal advice. The material is the personal opinion of the author. The references to certain URLs contained in this work are provided as a service to the reader. Their presence should not be interpreted to mean that the author either supports or endorses the referenced material

The author has made a best effort to determine the validity of the material at the time of writing, but makes no claims as to its continued validity.

About the Presenter

Bob Ellis and his wife have lived in XXX since 1995. Bob retired in 1993 as Sun Microsystems' representative on the Technology Committee of the Computer Systems Policy Project (CSPP - an industry policy study organization) and co-manager of Sun's university research program. Previously, he held computer graphics software development and management positions with Sun, GE-Calma, Atari, Boeing and Washington University (St. Louis, MO). He received BS and MS degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from Washington University (St. Louis). Bob currently does work as a volunteer for technical societies; he is a member of the Association for Computing Machinery's (ACM) US Public Policy Committee (USACM) serves as the Chair of the Public Policy Program of ACM's Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH).

References

General

The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) U.S. Public Policy Committee (USACM) -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/
ACM SIGGRAPH Public Policy Program -
           http://www.siggraph.org/pub-policy/

Privacy

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) -
           http://www.eff.org/
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) -
           http://www.epic.org/
USACM on Encryption -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/crypto/
USACM on Privacy -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/privacy/

Intellectual Property (Including Digital Copy Control)

American Library Association (ALA) Policy Activities -
           http://www.ala.org/work/
Home Recording Rights Coalition (HRRC) -
           http://www.hrrc.org/
Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA)/Motion Picture Association (MPA) -
           http://www.mpaa.org/
Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) -
           http://www.riaa.org/
USACM on Copyright -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/IP/#copyright
USACM Intellectual Property Library -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/IP/

Electronic Commerce
UCITA

Americans for Fair Electronic Commerce Transactions -
           http://www.4cite.org/
Association of Research Libraries -
           http://www.arl.org/info/frn/copy/ucitasum.html
Bad Software -
           http://www.badsoftware.com/
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility -
           http://www.cpsr.org/program/UCITA/ucita-fact.html
Digital Commerce Coalition -
           http://www.ucitayes.org/
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) on UCITA -
           http://www.ieeeusa.org/forum/grassroots/ucita/index.html
Federal Trade Commission -
           http://www.ftc.gov/be/v990010.htm
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws -
           http://www.nccusl.org/
UCITA News -
           http://www.ucitanews.com/
UCITA On-Line -
           http://www.ucitaonline.com/
USACM on UCITA -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/IP/#ucita

Free Speech

American Civil Liberties Union -
           http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/burning.html
Center for Democracy and Technology -
           http://www.cdt.org/
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) -
           http://www.eff.org/
Internet Free Expression Alliance -
           http://www.ifea.net/
Responsibility in Free Speech -
           http://www.zondervan.com/green.htm
USACM on Free Speech -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/speech/

Broadband Internet Access

BroadBand Internet -
           http://www.broadband-internet.org/
Broadband Wireless Internet Forum -
           http://www.bwif.org/
CableLabs -
           http://www.cablelabs.com/
DSL Forum -
           http://www.adsl.com/
Federal Communications Commission -
           http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/
NetAction -
           http://www.netaction.org/

Digital Television

Association of Local Television Stations -
           http://www.altv.com/
DigitalTelevision.com -
           http://www.digitaltelevision.com/
Federal Communications Commission -
           http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/
National Association of Broadcasters -
           http://www.nab.org/
PBS -
           http://www.pbs.org/digitaltv/

Computing Research Support

Computing Research Association (CRA) -
           http://www.cra.org/
USACM on Science Research Support -
           http://www.acm.org/usacm/funding/

Equitable Access and the Digital Divide

Closing the Digital Divide -
           http://www.digitaldivide.gov/
PBS -
           http://www.pbs.org/digitaldivide/