Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Global Networks and Local Values
A Comparative took at Germany and
the United States
Committee to Study Global Networks and Local Values
Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R2
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board
of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medi-
cine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special
competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by a grant between the National Academy of Sciences and the
German-American Academic Council. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommen-
dations expressed in this publication are those of the authoress and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-07310-3
Library of Congress Control Number: 2001099571
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW
Box 285
Washington, DC 20055
800/624-6242
202/334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area)
http: / /www.nap.edu
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
National Acaclemy of Sciences
National Acaclemy of Engineering
Institute of Meclicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating soci-
ety of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedi-
cated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general
welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863,
the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on
scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National
Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter
of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding
engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its mem-
bers, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advis-
ing the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors
engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and
research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A.
Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of
Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in
the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Insti-
tute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its
congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its
own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education.
Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sci-
ences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with
the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal gov-
ernment. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the
Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the Na-
tional Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in provid-
ing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering com-
munities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute
of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice
chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OCR for page R4
COMMITTEE TO STUDY GLOBAL NETWORKS
AND LOCAL VALUES
KENNETH H. KELLER, University of Minnesota, Chair
KENNETH W. DAM, University of Chicago Law School (resigned)
PAUL A. DAVID, All Souls College, Oxford University
KENNETH KENISTON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
HENRY H. PERRITT, JR., Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Institute
of Technology
ROBERT SPINRAD, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (retired)
GEORGE VRADENBURG, America Online, Inc. (resigned)
German Delegationfrom the Max-Planck-Projektgruppe
CHRISTOPH ENGEL, Max-Planck-Projektgruppe, Chair of the German
Delegation
KLAUS W. GREWLICH, Center for European Integration Studies, Bonn;
College of Europe, Bruges; Universitat Freiburg
BERND HOLZNAGEL, Universitat Munster, Institut fur Informations-,
Tele-kommunikations- und Medienrecht
MICHAEL HUTTER, Universitaet Witten-Herdecke
RAYMOND WERLE, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gesellschaftsforschung
MARTINA ZITTERBART, Institut fuer Betriebssysteme und
Rechnerverbund (resigned)
U.S. Staff
National Research Council
HERBERT LIN, Senior Scientist
NICCI DOWD, Project Assistant (through September 1999)
MICKELLE RODRIGUEZ, Senior Project Assistant (through February
2001)
rANICE SABUDA, Senior Project Assistant
German Staff
Max-Planck-Projektgruppe Recht der Gemeinschaftsguter
JOACHIM DOLKEN
ANJA MOOSMANN
..
LORENZ MULLER
WOLF OSTHAUS
NOTE: Though this report is formally a report of the National Research Council, prepared
in accordance with NRC rules and procedures, it is in fact the product of a U.S./German
steering group effort that was carried out with Christoph Engel and Kenneth Keller serving
as cochairs.
~v
OCR for page R5
COMPUTER SCIENCE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS BOARD
DAVID D. CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair
DAVID BORTH, Motorola Labs
TAMES CHIDDIX, AOL Time Warner
rOHN M. CIOFFI, Stanford University
ELAINE COHEN, University of Utah
W. BRUCE CROFT, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
THOMAS E. DARCIE, AT&T Labs Research
rOSEPH FARRELL, University of California at Berkeley
rEFFREY M. rAFFE, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies
ANNA KARLIN, University of Washington
BUTLER W. LAMPSON, Microsoft Corporation
EDWARD D. LAZOWSKA, University of Washington
DAVID LIDDLE, U.S. Venture Partners
TOM M. MITCHELL, WhizBang! Labs, Inc.
DONALD NORMAN, Nielsen Norman Group
DAVID A. PATTERSON, University of California at Berkeley
HENRY (HANK) PERRITT, Chicago-Kent College of Law
BURTON SMITH, Cray, Inc.
TERRY SMITH, University of California at Santa Barbara
LEE SPROULL, New York University
JEANNETTE M. WING, Carnegie Mellon University
MARrORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director
HERBERT S. LIN, Senior Scientist
ALAN S. INOUYE, Senior Program Officer
rON EISENBERG, Senior Program Officer
LYNETTE I. MILLETT, Program Officer
CYNTHIA PATTERSON, Program Officer
STEVEN WOO, Program Officer
rANET BRISCOE, Administrative Officer
MARGARET HUYNH, Senior Project Assistant
DAVID DRAKE, Senior Project Assistant
rANICE SABUDA, Senior Project Assistant
JENNIFER BISHOP, Senior Project Assistant
DAVID PADGHAM, Research Assistant
BRANDYE WILLIAMS, Staff Assistant
v
OCR for page R6
OCR for page R7
Preface
BACKGROUND
It is described alternatively as the "third wave," the "information revo-
lution," or the "virtually connected world." Whatever the rhetoric used to
capture the impact of information technology in general and global net-
works in particular, it leads inevitably to the assertion that these develop-
ments will have a profound and increasing impact on individual life, social
communities, commerce, and government. But what kind of impact and
how, specifically, will it occur? For some it appears to be a set of risks and
threats. For others, it amounts to almost unbounded opportunity.
Both assertions may have elements of truth. Opportunities and risks
are twins. Unfortunately, because most discussions of the likely effects
have been rather general and conjectural, there has been little basis for
judging either the optimism of the technophiles or the pessimism of the
technophobes. Where opportunities are concerned, conjecture and uncer-
tainty have few negative consequences; the ingenuity of creative people,
the workings of the market, and the acceptance by society of useful new
tools will determine soon enough which technological applications will
find a place in our lives and in what ways. The risks are another matter. It
is important to try to anticipate the social effects of a new technological
development in order to understand what tools and strategies might be
used to reduce the risks or minimize the negative impacts.
The societal implications of new information technologies have not
been universally welcomed. Most nations, including both fundamentalist
and dictatorial nations as well as liberal democracies that tend to have
vii
OCR for page R8
V111
PREFACE
high respect for personal freedom, have individual values that may be
threatened by new information technologies. For example, in 1996 the
Bavarian Attorney General forced CompuServe to ban a couple of
newsgroups on issues of homosexuality that were perfectly legal in Cali-
fornia. Similarly, some types of Nazi propaganda that would be crimi-
nally prosecuted in Germany are constitutionally Protected as free speech
in the United States.
--) r
Local governments have traditionally been responsible for counter-
measures against information regarded as socially harmful. However,
today's global telecommunications may constrain the options available to
governments for controlling information, limit the effectiveness of old
policy tools, and make it more difficult for governments even to under-
stand or identify the values held by the populace at large. Governments
might lose considerable ability to influence or preserve values that are
different from those elsewhere in the world, or even to manage regional
differences within their own boundaries.
Many questions regarding social organization arise. To what extent is
it possible to organize power along territorial lines in a world of global
telecommunications? What new loci of power and influence are made
possible? To what extent do global telecommunications enable power to
be organized around personal interests rather than geographically based
or limited communities? What is the impact of such organization on so-
cial development? How will the roles of government and of society
change as a result of global networks? Will all governments or even all
democratic governments change in the same way? Are there scenarios
in which governments may use the power of networks to enhance their
power?
To address some of the issues related to the impact of global networks
on local values, the German-American Academic Council asked for a
study in this area. In response, the U.S. National Research Council estab-
lished a committee in accordance with its usual procedures. The German
delegation, under the auspices of the German Max-Planck-Project Group
on Common Goods, Law, Politics, and Economics, were intimately in-
volved in all aspects of the development of this report (participating in
meetings, writing, and so on), but were not formally approved as NRC
committee members.
A comparison of Germany and the United States was thus appropri-
ate for two reasons. The procedural reason is that the expertise of the
committee members was more concentrated on these two nations than on
others, and that it was the German-American Academic Council that
asked for the study. The substantive reason is that Germany and the
United States have many important similarities (e.g., a well-developed
information-technology infrastructure and a commitment to democracy
OCR for page R9
OCR for page R10
OCR for page R11
OCR for page R12
OCR for page R13
OCR for page R14
OCR for page R15
OCR for page R16
OCR for page R17
OCR for page R18
PREFACE
MIX
and the rule of law) and many important differences as well (e.g., differ-
ing values that each nation wishes to uphold). For this reason, this report
is structured around an exploration of the potential impacts of global tele-
communications on values of Germany and the United States specifi-
cally some of the values associated with democracy, privacy, freedom of
information, and free speech.
STUDY PLAN
In carrying out its study, the Committee to Study Global Networks
and Local Values met for the first time in the spring of 1998 and six more
times (including two symposia described below) to deliberate. The sym-
posia were integral to the study, as they involved speakers from a range
of disciplines and helped to expose the committee to a much broader range
of input and perspectives than what was represented by committee
expertise. In this role, the speakers served admirably. (Individually
authored papers from these symposia can be found online at
x
PREFACE
regulatory actions aims at making clear what the present and potential
problems are. The normative analysis assessing the seriousness of the
problems, making judgments on whether they require societal action, and,
if so, commenting on what the course of action might be emphasizes the
different levels and the range of formal and informal structures, institu-
tions, and policies available to deal with the problems identified. Further-
more, the report recognizes that legislators and the traditional political
structures are not the only institutions that societies depend on to deal
with perceived problems. A host of less formal political institutions and
actors can, at times, be more effective, as they have been in much of the
development of global networks that has already occurred. Therefore, the
analysis in this report is not directed exclusively to traditional policy-
makers, but is also intended for professional groups, commercial institu-
tions, nongovernmental organizations, and the broad array of other enti-
ties that make up civil society.
Finally, it is worth noting that the report does not make specific policy
recommendations. Rather, it offers insights that the committee hopes will
be useful to policymakers in thinking about critical decisions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The committee wishes to express its gratitude to the participants in
the two symposia, whose contributions were critical for helping the com-
mittee to better understand the issues. Staff of the Max-Planck-Project
Group on Common Goods, Law, Politics, and Economics and the U.S.
National Research Council's Computer Science and Telecommunications
Board provided helpful support, both logistically and intellectually.
Most importantly, the U.S. and German delegations to the committee
acknowledge each other for a willingness to overcome their cultural dif-
ferences and work through the misunderstandings that often characterize
multinational study teams. At first, a common vocabulary and working
style seemed to elude the committee. But over time and with patience,
committee members from the two delegations were able to work out a
rough consensus on important concepts and definitions. (Indeed, at times
the process of deliberation was self-reflective some of the issues dis-
cussed in this report played out during the committee process.)
The committee also thanks the German-American Academic Council
(GAAC) for making this project possible, noting in particular the help of
Dr. Rolf Hoffmann and Dr. Tohannes Belz in facilitating interactions be-
tween the committee and the GAAC.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for
their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with pro-
cedures approved by the National Research Council's (NRC's) Report
Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to pro-
vide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in mak-
ing the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report
meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsive-
ness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript
remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Michael Froomkin, University of Miami School of Law,
lames Hamilton, Duke University,
Herwig Kogelnik, Lucent Technologies,
Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, Kennedy School of Government,
David Post, Temple University,
Margaret lane Radin, Stanford University, and
Debora Spar, Harvard Business School.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many construc-
tive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the con-
clusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report
before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Morris
Tanenbaum. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was re-
x~
X11
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF REVIEWERS
sponsible for making certain that an independent examination of this re-
port was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that
all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the
final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee
and the institution.
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT
1.1 Aims of This Report, 15
1.2 Background, 17
1.3 This Study, 18
1.4 Germany and the United States: Some Contrasts, 19
1.5 Structure of This Report, 22
2 THE EVOLUTION OF GLOBAL NETWORKS
2.1 Introduction, 23
Evolution and Design of Global Telecommunications
Networks, 26
2.3 The Value Dimension of Networks, 36
2.4 Global Networks and Changing Values: Toward
Convergence or Divergence?, 42
3 UNDERSTANDING LOCAL VALUES AND HOW THEY
ARE AFFECTED BY GLOBAL NETWORKS
Introduction, 46
Are Values Always the Issue?, 48
The Function of Values, 51
The Locality of Values, 58
The Legitimacy of Values, 59
The Impact of Global Networks on Values, 61
x~
1
15
23
46
XIV
4 DEMOCRACY AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
4.1 Democracy, Political Institutions, and Power, 74
4.2 The Impact of the Internet on Democracy, Political
Institutions, and Power, 75
4.3 Constitutional Policy, 97
5
FREE SPEECH AND THE INTERNET
5.1 Introduction, 106
5.2 The Values Involved in Free Speech, 107
5.3 Common and Different Traditions and the Internet, 108
5.4 Operationalizing the Regulatory Goal, 119
5.5 Internet Content Regulation as a Challenge to
Governance, 123
6 PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
6.1 Introduction, 133
Privacy, 135
Freedom of Information, 156
Note Added in Proof, 169
7 THE IMPACT OF GLOBAL E-COMMERCE ON
LOCAL VALUES
7.1 Introduction, 170
7.2 Commerce and Values, 171
7.3 The Impact of E-Commerce on Local Commercial
Values, 173
7.4 Effects on Local Commercial Values, 177
7.5 The Impact of E-Commerce on Global Networks, 185
7.6 The Impact of E-Commerce on Local, Social, and
Political Values, 188
8 GOVERNANCE IN CYBERSPACE: MULTI-LEVEL AND
MULTI-ACTOR CONSTITUTIONALISM
8.1 Introduction, 190
8.2 Governance, 190
9 INFORMATION NETWORKS AND CULTURE
Introduction, 205
Cultural Hegemony, 208
Global Networks and Class Issues, 216
Public and Private Spaces, 218
Generational Phenomena, 221
CONTENTS
74
106
133
170
190
205
CONTENTS
10 PRINCIPLES AND CONCLUSIONS
10.1 Governments and the Evolution of Local Values, 224
10.2 Democracy, 225
10.3 Regulatory Structure, 226
10.4 Free Speech, 227
10.5 Privacy, 228
10.6 Freedom of Information, 229
10.7 Technology Development, 229
10.8 Culture and Technology, 230
APPENDIX BIOGRAPHIES
xv
224
233
Global Networks and focal Values
