- Email: [email protected]
Information policy
The Information Superhighway and the National Information Infrastructure (NH) by Jane Bortnick Griffith
and Marcia
T
he term “information superhighway” has become the metaphor for describing the evolving telecommunications infrastructure that will link homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, and libraries to each other and to a vast array of electronic information resources. Championed by Vice President Gore, supported by Congress through various legislative proposals, and fueled by private sector competition for new markets, development of the information superhighway and the associated National Information Infrastructure (NII) are considered by many critical for enhancing American leadership in the information age. Congress is considering a number of bills designed to promote private sector investment in the NII, while protecting the public interest. These include proposals to update telecommunications regulations, promote applications of the NII, and develop information policies for the digital era.
Information
Superhighway
and the NII
The “information superhighway” and the NII have become virtually synonymous, although actually the NII encompasses much more than telecommunications links. The White House defines the NII as “a seamless web of communications networks, computers, databases, and consumer electronics that will put vast amounts of information at users’ fingertips.” In reality, there is no single highway, but rather a diversity of networks that carry a variety of voice, data, and video signals. Substantial portions of the information superhighway already exist. Approximately 94 percent of American households have telephone service, 60 percent have cable, 30 percent have computers, and almost 100 percent have radio and television. Local and long-distance companies are investing heavily in fiber optic cables that will carry greater amounts of information, cable companies are increasing their capacity to provide new services, and new wireless personal communications systems (PCS) are under development. One prototype, the Internet (a “network of networks”), connects approximately 15-20 million people worldwide. What the government and the private sector do in the months and years ahead will profoundly affect major industries in this country, including telecommunications, computers, entertainment, and publishing. Some claim that these will be the most significant source of jobs and economic growth in the next century.
lane Bortnick Griffith Division, Congressional Washington,
and Marcia S. Smith, Science Policy Research Research Service, Library of Congress,
D.C. 20540.
S. Smith
The Clinton-Gore
Vision
IITF. On September 15, 1993, the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF), created by the Vice President and chaired by Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown, released the report National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action.’ The same day, the President created a National Information Infrastructure Advisory Council to facilitate private sector input (Executive Order 12864). Nine Principles for Government Action. The Vice President’s report identifies nine principles for government action to: l
l
l
Promote private sector investment; Extend “universal service” to ensure that information resources are available to all at affordable prices; Promote technological
innovation
l
Promote seamless, interactive,
l
Ensure information
l
Improve management
l
Protect intellectual
l
l
and new applications;
user-driven
operation;
security and network reliability; of the radio frequency
spectrum;
property rights;
Coordinate with other levels of government foreign) and other bodies; and Provide access to government ernment procurement.
information
(domestic
and
and improve gov-
Economic Benefits. The report also points out anticipated economic benefits of the NII, and outlines major applications. Since the report was issued, the Vice President has made two speeches providing further details on the NII, one at the National Press Club (Washington, DC) on December 21, 1993, and the other to the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (Los Angeles, CA) on January 11, 1994. In these speeches, he narrowed to five the principles on which he saw the government taking the lead role: encourage private investment, provide and protect competition, provide “open access,” avoid creating information “haves and have nots,” and encourage flexible and responsible government action. A particular emphasis is on assuring that all classrooms, libraries, hospitals, and clinics are connected to the superhighway by the year 2000.
Regulations Creating a regulatory environment that permits the NII to evolve to its fullest potential is a key aspect of White House and congressional efforts today (see Table 1). Since the 1930s Congress has enacted legislation that treats the cable, broadcast, and telephone industries separately. The advent of new technologies has blurred the distinction among these services, however.* In 1990, researchers at General Instrument Corp. changed the com-
May 1994
93
munications landscape when they were able to compress and send television signals in digital form, rather than analog. This esoteric breakthrough has been likened to the “technological equivalent of the fall of the Berlin Wa11,“3 eliminating the distinctions among the cable television, telephone, and computer industries. With technology outstripping the regulatory environment, historic clashes among communications giants have been replaced by an emerging consensus to deregulate the industries and pass legislation to supersede the “MFJ” rules (the 1982 Modified Final Judgment consent decree that implements the court-ordered break-up of AT&T). The immediate focus is on breaking down regulatory barriers between cable and telephone companies (called “cable/ telco cross-ownership”) to allow each industry to provide similar services, and ending existing business restrictions on the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs or “Baby Bells”).4 The failed Bell Atlantic-TCI talks may have temporarily dampened expectations about mergers among telecommunications and entertainment firms, but other alliances are still expected in the future. Plans by a long-distance telephone company (MCI) to offer local telephone service, and proposals by electric utilities like Baltimore Gas & Electric to use fiber optic cables (now used by many utilities to connect electrical substations) as interactive information networks, demonstrate the activity underway to position corporate America to take advantage of the new environment.
Applications The Vice President’s report notes that the NII encompasses a wide range of equipment including cameras, scanners, keyboards, telephones, fax machines, computers, switches, compact disks, video and audio tape, cable, wire, satellites,5 optical fiber transmission lines, microwave nets, televisions, monitors, and printers. All of these would be interconnected “in a technologically neutral manner so that no one industry will be favored over any other.” Many users of electronic mail and other computer-based information systems already are familiar with the Internet, sometimes viewed as a prototype of the information superhighway. While it does not have all the features envisioned for the ultimate system, the concept of allowing users coast to coast and around the world instant access to each other and to a storehouse of information is the superhighway’s goals, only on a grander scale.6 All of this would be used in a plethora of applications, including health care, education, government information, scientific research, and government efficiency. Applications are addressed in several bills (see Table 2). The private sector, rather than government, undoubtedly will spearhead most applications of the superhighway. Plans by network (ABC) and print (Washington Post) news media to provide on-demand services to homes so consumers can access news whenever they wish illustrate the new trend. Many see a role for government in developing public service applications, such as those for schools and libraries. Yet, most material contained in the major research libraries is not digitized and questions remain about copyright issues and who will pay the costs of conversion. Making these digital resources available to all communities and ensuring that we do not become a nation of information “haves” and “have-not? is a major concern.’
Information
Policy
Development of information policy is required for this new age. Lack of security is seen as a major impediment to the devel-
94
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
Table 1 Major Pending Legislation Related to Regulation H.R. 3626 (Brooks-Dingell). Antitrust Reform Act of 1993. Ordered reported from committee. March 16, 1994.
A bill to supersede the 1982 “Modification of Final Judgment” and amend the Communic&ons Act of 1934.
H.R. 3636 (Markey-Fields). National Communications Competition and Information Act of 1993. Ordered reported from committee, March 16, 1994.
To promote a national communications infrastructure encourage deployment of advanced communications services through competition.
S. 1822 (Hollings et al.). Communications Act of 1994. Introduced on Feb. 3, 1994 (Replaces S. 1086 from 1993). Hearings held.
To foster the further development of the nation’s telecommunications infrastructure and protection of the public interest.
to
Table 2 Major Pending Legislation Related to Applications H.R. 1757 (Boucher). The National Information Infrastructure Act of 1993. Passed House on July 26, 1993.
Builds on existing federal programs to develop and disseminate applications of high performance computing and high speed networking technologies.
H.R. 2639 (Markey). Telecommunications and Information Infrastructure and Public Broadcasting Facilities Assistance Act. Passed House on November 8,1993.
Promotion and development of telecommunications and information infrastructure and for the construction of public broadcasting facilities.
H.R. 820, National Comoetitiveness Act of 1993. Pas&d House, May 19, 1993. Passed Senate, March 16, 1994. (substituting text of S.4).
Senate version includes Title VI, the Information Technology Applications Program Act of 1993 (corresponds to H.R. 1757).
opment of business uses of the superhighway, for example. Privacy, protection of intellectual property rights, and access to government information are three major issues, and the IITF has working groups in each of these areas. S. 68 1, the Paperwork Reduction Reauthorization Act of 1993 (Senator Glenn), and S. 560, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1993 (Senator Nunn), would establish policies for the electronic dissemination of govemment information.
Issues Detailed examination of the issues involved in this debate is not possible in this brief article. Following is a brief look at a few broad areas.* Private Sector/Government Relationship. The private sector firmly maintains that companies, not the government, already have created much of the information superhighway, and that the private sector has a critical role in the evolution of the NII. Two reports from the Council on Competitiveness and one from the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) outline the private sector’s view.9 ITAA, for example, delineates between the federal and private sector roles by stating that the government should facilitate, not duplicate, industry efforts; that industry is responsible for developing, planning, designing, and implementing the NII in the marketplace; that
industry is responsible for developing standards; that the government should facilitate pre-competitive technology development; that the government should adopt industry standards; and that government should create a conducive legal and regulatory environment. Open Access and Universal Service. Two principles emphasized by the White House and Congress are open access (e.g., requiring local telephone companies to interconnect their networks with the facilities of competing providers on a nondiscriminatory basis), and universal service (allowing everyone access to the superhighway at affordable rates regardless of income, disability, or location). A particular emphasis is being made to ensure that schools, libraries, hospitals, and clinics have access by the year 2000. The government has established a matching grants program administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to connect public institutions to advanced networks such as the Internet, but advocates strong private sector commitment to this goal. Bell Atlantic has agreed to provide access for 26,000 schools, but left unanswered is the question of who will pay for other equipment and training needed by the schools to use the superhighway. Another question is how broad the tenet of universal service should be constructed. Today, it applies only to telephone service. In the future, for example, would everyone be entitled to low-cost access to two-way video communication? Who will subsidize such access? Privacy and Security. Ensuring that confidential information (such as medical records or business data) traversing the superhighway remains confidential, and that data on the viewing habits or buying practices of subscribers are not misused are clearly of tremendous importance to network users. How to ensure the security of the system from unauthorized use is also a significant concern,1° as is the debate over how to provide for the legitimate requirements of law enforcement officials to be able to catch criminals on the network versus privacy concerns
of users (the so-called “Clipper chip” debate).” Intellectual Property Rights. Protecting intellectual property rights will be a challenge in an age of easily accessible digitized information. Calls for strengthening copyright laws and ensuring that the technical architecture of the superhighway protects copyright owners and provides for their remuneration already have been heard. Libraries, scholars, and the public also have voiced concern that some form of “fair use” be established for digital materials.
Notes and References 1. Vice President Albert Gore. Information Infrastructure Task Force, The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action (Washington, DC, September 15, 1993). Hereafter called the Vice President’s report. 2. David Hack, Telephone Companies--and Six Other Contributors to Competition in Local Telephone Services. CRS (Congressional Research Service) Rept. 93-234 SPR (February 18, 1993). The Griffith and Smith article is drawn from CRS 94- 112 SPR. For a copy of a CRS report mentioned in this article, readers must make a request through their Senator or member of the House of Representatives. 3. “Spirit of Cooperation Breaks Media Industry Gridlock,” Congressional Quarterly (January 15, 1994), p. 66. 4. See also Angele Gilroy, Telephone/Cable Cross-Ownership: A Time for Reassessment? CRS Rept. 93-674 E (July 23, 1993). 5. Some satellite industry representatives think the role of satellites needs to be more visible in this debate. See Jill A. Stem and Tondri LaRene “A Space-Based Information Highway,” Space News (November 8-14, 1993), p. 15. 6. See Stephen Gould, U.S. Telecommunications Infrastructure: Projected Future Evolution. CRS Rept. 93-161 SPR (February 3, 1993). 7. For a discussion of the public policy issues involved in making digital information available, see Library of Congress, Delivering Electronic Information in a Knowledge-Based Democracy. Summary of Conference Proceedings (Washington, DC, July 14, 1993). 8. For a discussion of cable/telco cross ownership, see Angele Gilroy, Telephone/Cable Cross-Ownership: A Time for Reassessment? CRS Rept. 93-658E. NII applications are addressed in Stephen Gould, National Information Infrastructure: The Federal Role. CRS Issue Brief 93101. 9. Council on Competitiveness, Ksion for a 21st Centmy Information Infrastructure (Washington, DC, May 1993); Council on Competitiveness, Competition Policy: Unlocking the National Information Infrastructure (Washington, DC, December 1993); Information Technology Association of America, National Information Infrastructure: Industry and Government Roles (Arlington, VA, July 1993). 10. Paul Wallich, “Wire Pirates,” Scientific American (March 1994). pp. 90-105. 11. “Keeping the Cybercops Out of Cyberspace,” Newsweek (March 14, 1994), pp. 38-39.
May 1994
95
and Marcia
T
he term “information superhighway” has become the metaphor for describing the evolving telecommunications infrastructure that will link homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, and libraries to each other and to a vast array of electronic information resources. Championed by Vice President Gore, supported by Congress through various legislative proposals, and fueled by private sector competition for new markets, development of the information superhighway and the associated National Information Infrastructure (NII) are considered by many critical for enhancing American leadership in the information age. Congress is considering a number of bills designed to promote private sector investment in the NII, while protecting the public interest. These include proposals to update telecommunications regulations, promote applications of the NII, and develop information policies for the digital era.
Information
Superhighway
and the NII
The “information superhighway” and the NII have become virtually synonymous, although actually the NII encompasses much more than telecommunications links. The White House defines the NII as “a seamless web of communications networks, computers, databases, and consumer electronics that will put vast amounts of information at users’ fingertips.” In reality, there is no single highway, but rather a diversity of networks that carry a variety of voice, data, and video signals. Substantial portions of the information superhighway already exist. Approximately 94 percent of American households have telephone service, 60 percent have cable, 30 percent have computers, and almost 100 percent have radio and television. Local and long-distance companies are investing heavily in fiber optic cables that will carry greater amounts of information, cable companies are increasing their capacity to provide new services, and new wireless personal communications systems (PCS) are under development. One prototype, the Internet (a “network of networks”), connects approximately 15-20 million people worldwide. What the government and the private sector do in the months and years ahead will profoundly affect major industries in this country, including telecommunications, computers, entertainment, and publishing. Some claim that these will be the most significant source of jobs and economic growth in the next century.
lane Bortnick Griffith Division, Congressional Washington,
and Marcia S. Smith, Science Policy Research Research Service, Library of Congress,
D.C. 20540.
S. Smith
The Clinton-Gore
Vision
IITF. On September 15, 1993, the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF), created by the Vice President and chaired by Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown, released the report National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action.’ The same day, the President created a National Information Infrastructure Advisory Council to facilitate private sector input (Executive Order 12864). Nine Principles for Government Action. The Vice President’s report identifies nine principles for government action to: l
l
l
Promote private sector investment; Extend “universal service” to ensure that information resources are available to all at affordable prices; Promote technological
innovation
l
Promote seamless, interactive,
l
Ensure information
l
Improve management
l
Protect intellectual
l
l
and new applications;
user-driven
operation;
security and network reliability; of the radio frequency
spectrum;
property rights;
Coordinate with other levels of government foreign) and other bodies; and Provide access to government ernment procurement.
information
(domestic
and
and improve gov-
Economic Benefits. The report also points out anticipated economic benefits of the NII, and outlines major applications. Since the report was issued, the Vice President has made two speeches providing further details on the NII, one at the National Press Club (Washington, DC) on December 21, 1993, and the other to the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (Los Angeles, CA) on January 11, 1994. In these speeches, he narrowed to five the principles on which he saw the government taking the lead role: encourage private investment, provide and protect competition, provide “open access,” avoid creating information “haves and have nots,” and encourage flexible and responsible government action. A particular emphasis is on assuring that all classrooms, libraries, hospitals, and clinics are connected to the superhighway by the year 2000.
Regulations Creating a regulatory environment that permits the NII to evolve to its fullest potential is a key aspect of White House and congressional efforts today (see Table 1). Since the 1930s Congress has enacted legislation that treats the cable, broadcast, and telephone industries separately. The advent of new technologies has blurred the distinction among these services, however.* In 1990, researchers at General Instrument Corp. changed the com-
May 1994
93
munications landscape when they were able to compress and send television signals in digital form, rather than analog. This esoteric breakthrough has been likened to the “technological equivalent of the fall of the Berlin Wa11,“3 eliminating the distinctions among the cable television, telephone, and computer industries. With technology outstripping the regulatory environment, historic clashes among communications giants have been replaced by an emerging consensus to deregulate the industries and pass legislation to supersede the “MFJ” rules (the 1982 Modified Final Judgment consent decree that implements the court-ordered break-up of AT&T). The immediate focus is on breaking down regulatory barriers between cable and telephone companies (called “cable/ telco cross-ownership”) to allow each industry to provide similar services, and ending existing business restrictions on the Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs or “Baby Bells”).4 The failed Bell Atlantic-TCI talks may have temporarily dampened expectations about mergers among telecommunications and entertainment firms, but other alliances are still expected in the future. Plans by a long-distance telephone company (MCI) to offer local telephone service, and proposals by electric utilities like Baltimore Gas & Electric to use fiber optic cables (now used by many utilities to connect electrical substations) as interactive information networks, demonstrate the activity underway to position corporate America to take advantage of the new environment.
Applications The Vice President’s report notes that the NII encompasses a wide range of equipment including cameras, scanners, keyboards, telephones, fax machines, computers, switches, compact disks, video and audio tape, cable, wire, satellites,5 optical fiber transmission lines, microwave nets, televisions, monitors, and printers. All of these would be interconnected “in a technologically neutral manner so that no one industry will be favored over any other.” Many users of electronic mail and other computer-based information systems already are familiar with the Internet, sometimes viewed as a prototype of the information superhighway. While it does not have all the features envisioned for the ultimate system, the concept of allowing users coast to coast and around the world instant access to each other and to a storehouse of information is the superhighway’s goals, only on a grander scale.6 All of this would be used in a plethora of applications, including health care, education, government information, scientific research, and government efficiency. Applications are addressed in several bills (see Table 2). The private sector, rather than government, undoubtedly will spearhead most applications of the superhighway. Plans by network (ABC) and print (Washington Post) news media to provide on-demand services to homes so consumers can access news whenever they wish illustrate the new trend. Many see a role for government in developing public service applications, such as those for schools and libraries. Yet, most material contained in the major research libraries is not digitized and questions remain about copyright issues and who will pay the costs of conversion. Making these digital resources available to all communities and ensuring that we do not become a nation of information “haves” and “have-not? is a major concern.’
Information
Policy
Development of information policy is required for this new age. Lack of security is seen as a major impediment to the devel-
94
The Journal of Academic Librarianship
Table 1 Major Pending Legislation Related to Regulation H.R. 3626 (Brooks-Dingell). Antitrust Reform Act of 1993. Ordered reported from committee. March 16, 1994.
A bill to supersede the 1982 “Modification of Final Judgment” and amend the Communic&ons Act of 1934.
H.R. 3636 (Markey-Fields). National Communications Competition and Information Act of 1993. Ordered reported from committee, March 16, 1994.
To promote a national communications infrastructure encourage deployment of advanced communications services through competition.
S. 1822 (Hollings et al.). Communications Act of 1994. Introduced on Feb. 3, 1994 (Replaces S. 1086 from 1993). Hearings held.
To foster the further development of the nation’s telecommunications infrastructure and protection of the public interest.
to
Table 2 Major Pending Legislation Related to Applications H.R. 1757 (Boucher). The National Information Infrastructure Act of 1993. Passed House on July 26, 1993.
Builds on existing federal programs to develop and disseminate applications of high performance computing and high speed networking technologies.
H.R. 2639 (Markey). Telecommunications and Information Infrastructure and Public Broadcasting Facilities Assistance Act. Passed House on November 8,1993.
Promotion and development of telecommunications and information infrastructure and for the construction of public broadcasting facilities.
H.R. 820, National Comoetitiveness Act of 1993. Pas&d House, May 19, 1993. Passed Senate, March 16, 1994. (substituting text of S.4).
Senate version includes Title VI, the Information Technology Applications Program Act of 1993 (corresponds to H.R. 1757).
opment of business uses of the superhighway, for example. Privacy, protection of intellectual property rights, and access to government information are three major issues, and the IITF has working groups in each of these areas. S. 68 1, the Paperwork Reduction Reauthorization Act of 1993 (Senator Glenn), and S. 560, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1993 (Senator Nunn), would establish policies for the electronic dissemination of govemment information.
Issues Detailed examination of the issues involved in this debate is not possible in this brief article. Following is a brief look at a few broad areas.* Private Sector/Government Relationship. The private sector firmly maintains that companies, not the government, already have created much of the information superhighway, and that the private sector has a critical role in the evolution of the NII. Two reports from the Council on Competitiveness and one from the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) outline the private sector’s view.9 ITAA, for example, delineates between the federal and private sector roles by stating that the government should facilitate, not duplicate, industry efforts; that industry is responsible for developing, planning, designing, and implementing the NII in the marketplace; that
industry is responsible for developing standards; that the government should facilitate pre-competitive technology development; that the government should adopt industry standards; and that government should create a conducive legal and regulatory environment. Open Access and Universal Service. Two principles emphasized by the White House and Congress are open access (e.g., requiring local telephone companies to interconnect their networks with the facilities of competing providers on a nondiscriminatory basis), and universal service (allowing everyone access to the superhighway at affordable rates regardless of income, disability, or location). A particular emphasis is being made to ensure that schools, libraries, hospitals, and clinics have access by the year 2000. The government has established a matching grants program administered by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to connect public institutions to advanced networks such as the Internet, but advocates strong private sector commitment to this goal. Bell Atlantic has agreed to provide access for 26,000 schools, but left unanswered is the question of who will pay for other equipment and training needed by the schools to use the superhighway. Another question is how broad the tenet of universal service should be constructed. Today, it applies only to telephone service. In the future, for example, would everyone be entitled to low-cost access to two-way video communication? Who will subsidize such access? Privacy and Security. Ensuring that confidential information (such as medical records or business data) traversing the superhighway remains confidential, and that data on the viewing habits or buying practices of subscribers are not misused are clearly of tremendous importance to network users. How to ensure the security of the system from unauthorized use is also a significant concern,1° as is the debate over how to provide for the legitimate requirements of law enforcement officials to be able to catch criminals on the network versus privacy concerns
of users (the so-called “Clipper chip” debate).” Intellectual Property Rights. Protecting intellectual property rights will be a challenge in an age of easily accessible digitized information. Calls for strengthening copyright laws and ensuring that the technical architecture of the superhighway protects copyright owners and provides for their remuneration already have been heard. Libraries, scholars, and the public also have voiced concern that some form of “fair use” be established for digital materials.
Notes and References 1. Vice President Albert Gore. Information Infrastructure Task Force, The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action (Washington, DC, September 15, 1993). Hereafter called the Vice President’s report. 2. David Hack, Telephone Companies--and Six Other Contributors to Competition in Local Telephone Services. CRS (Congressional Research Service) Rept. 93-234 SPR (February 18, 1993). The Griffith and Smith article is drawn from CRS 94- 112 SPR. For a copy of a CRS report mentioned in this article, readers must make a request through their Senator or member of the House of Representatives. 3. “Spirit of Cooperation Breaks Media Industry Gridlock,” Congressional Quarterly (January 15, 1994), p. 66. 4. See also Angele Gilroy, Telephone/Cable Cross-Ownership: A Time for Reassessment? CRS Rept. 93-674 E (July 23, 1993). 5. Some satellite industry representatives think the role of satellites needs to be more visible in this debate. See Jill A. Stem and Tondri LaRene “A Space-Based Information Highway,” Space News (November 8-14, 1993), p. 15. 6. See Stephen Gould, U.S. Telecommunications Infrastructure: Projected Future Evolution. CRS Rept. 93-161 SPR (February 3, 1993). 7. For a discussion of the public policy issues involved in making digital information available, see Library of Congress, Delivering Electronic Information in a Knowledge-Based Democracy. Summary of Conference Proceedings (Washington, DC, July 14, 1993). 8. For a discussion of cable/telco cross ownership, see Angele Gilroy, Telephone/Cable Cross-Ownership: A Time for Reassessment? CRS Rept. 93-658E. NII applications are addressed in Stephen Gould, National Information Infrastructure: The Federal Role. CRS Issue Brief 93101. 9. Council on Competitiveness, Ksion for a 21st Centmy Information Infrastructure (Washington, DC, May 1993); Council on Competitiveness, Competition Policy: Unlocking the National Information Infrastructure (Washington, DC, December 1993); Information Technology Association of America, National Information Infrastructure: Industry and Government Roles (Arlington, VA, July 1993). 10. Paul Wallich, “Wire Pirates,” Scientific American (March 1994). pp. 90-105. 11. “Keeping the Cybercops Out of Cyberspace,” Newsweek (March 14, 1994), pp. 38-39.
May 1994
95