NTIA
Published on /NTIA/ (https://www.ntia.doc.gov )
Home > THE GLOBAL INFORMATION
INFRASTRUCTURE: AGENDA FOR COOPERATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE: AGENDA FOR COOPERATION
June 01, 1995
Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF)
Abstract:
The purpose of this /GII: Agenda for Cooperation/ is to identify the
steps the United States, in concert with other nations, can take to make
the vision of the GII a reality.
[Image
Image Credit [1]
THE GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE: AGENDA FOR COOPERATION
Ronald H. Brown, Secretary of Commerce, Chair, Information
Infrastructure Task Force
Larry Irving, Administrator National Telecommunications and Information
Administration U.S. Department of Commerce Chair, IITF
Telecommunications Policy Committee
Arati Prabhakar, Director National Institute of Standards and Technology
U.S. Department of Commerce Chair, IITF Committee on Applications and
Technology
Sally Katzen, Administrator Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
Office of Management and Budget Chair, IITF Information Policy Committee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*THE GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE: AGENDA FOR COOPERATION*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
/Let us build a global community in which the people of neighboring
countries view each other not as potential enemies, but as potential
partners, as members of the same family in the vast, increasingly
interconnected human family./ With these words, Vice President Al Gore
introduced the U.S. vision for the Global Information Infrastructure
(GII) at the first World Telecommunication Development Conference in
March 1994. The Conference, held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, signalled a
new undertaking by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Vice
President Gore called upon every nation to establish an ambitious agenda
to build the GII, using the following five principles as the foundation:
o Encouraging private sector investment; o Promoting competition; o
Providing open access to the network for all information providers and
users; o Creating a flexible regulatory environment that can keep pace
with rapid technological and market changes; and o Ensuring universal
service. Leaders from the world telecommunications community
incorporated these five principles into the ITU's "Buenos Aires
Declaration on Global Telecommunication Development for the 21st
Century." The purpose of this /GII: Agenda for Cooperation/ is to
amplify these five principles and to identify the steps the United
States, in concert with other nations, can take to make the vision of
the GII a reality. We hope that it will also serve as the basis for
engaging other governments in a consultative, constructive, and
cooperative process that will ensure the development of the GII for the
mutual benefit of all countries. In proposing this initiative, we
recognize that market forces and technological advances have already
begun to expand existing interconnections among our respective nations:
o Current state-of-the-art fiber optic systems can now transmit the
equivalent of 80,000 simultaneous telephone conversations over a single
optical fiber and will soon carry 320,000 conversations over a fiber
pair; o Advances in digital compression have vastly improved the
performance and capacity of existing networks by allowing more volume,
including data and video, to be transmitted; o Advances in computer
technology will soon offer storage capacity so great that an individual
using a hand-held device will be able to carry the informational
equivalent of a small library and remotely access many times this
amount; and o New digital wireless systems and proposed constellations
of telecommunications satellites have the potential to provide telephone
and data services to any point on the planet. A nascent GII already
exists. What we seek is a superior GII, one that has higher capacity, is
fully interactive, faster, and more versatile. One that is less
expensive to use than existing systems, and more accessible to all the
people of the world. But our goal is not merely technological
advancement - more bandwidth, faster switching, more powerful processing
capability, and greater compression and storage capacity. We view
technology not as an end in itself but as the means through which the
GII can realize its potential to improve the well-being of all people on
this planet. This /Agenda for Cooperation/ sets forth the U.S.
Government's vision for developing a GII that can yield the benefits
described above and more. It identifies specific areas where
intergovernmental, as well as government-private sector, cooperative
efforts are needed. Also identified are proposals for concrete actions
that the United States can take, by itself or with other nations, to
accelerate the pace of development of the GII. While we believe the
private sector will build, own, and operate the GII, governments have
the power to take actions that can either accelerate or retard its
development. We believe that a concerted and coordinated international
effort can achieve the former and avoid the latter, and we invite other
countries to join us in this cooperative venture.
*I. INTRODUCTION*
*A. Technological Convergence and the New Information Age* As we
approach the end of the twentieth century, information is a critical
force shaping the world's economic system. In the next century, the
speed with which information is created, its accessibility, and its
myriad uses will cause even more fundamental changes in each nation's
economy. These changes will be the result of technological convergence
of the previously distinct telecommunications, information, and mass
media industries. Boundaries that once separated the types of networks
used to deliver voice, data, and video services are increasingly
blurred. In a digital world, these services can be combined and offered
over the same transmission system. Multiple networks composed of
different transmission media, such as fiber optic cable, coaxial cable,
satellites, radio, and copper wire, will carry a broad range of
telecommunications and information services and information technology
applications into homes, businesses, schools, and hospitals. These
networks will form the basis of evolving national and global information
infrastructures, in turn creating a seamless web uniting the world in
the emergent Information Age. The result will be a new information
marketplace, providing opportunities and challenges for individuals,
industry, and governments.
*B. New World Vision through Communications: The GII as a Product of
Technological Convergence and Competition*. The Clinton Administration
has made the development of an advanced National Information
Infrastructure [2] (NII) and the
GII top U.S. priorities. A major goal of the NII is to give our citizens
access to a broad range of information and information services. Using
innovative telecommunications and information technologies, the NII --
through a partnership of business, labor, academia, consumers, and all
levels of government -- will help the United States achieve a broad
range of economic and social goals. Similarly, other governments have
come to recognize that the telecommunications, information services, and
information technology sectors are not only dynamic growth sectors
themselves, but are also engines of development and economic growth
throughout the economy. With this realization, governments have sharply
focused their public policy debates and initiatives on the capabilities
of their underlying information infrastructures. The United States is
but one of many countries currently pursuing national initiatives to
capture the promise of the "Information Revolution." Our initiative
shares with others an important, common objective: to ensure that the
full potential benefit of advances in information and telecommunications
technologies are realized for all citizens. The GII is an outgrowth of
that perspective, a vehicle for expanding the scope of these benefits on
a global scale. By interconnecting local, national, regional, and global
networks, the GII can increase economic growth, create jobs, and improve
infrastructures. Taken as a whole, this worldwide "network of networks"
will create a global information marketplace, encouraging broad-based
social discourse within and among all countries. The GII will depend
upon an ever-expanding range of technology and products, including
telephones, fax machines, computers, switches, compact discs, video and
audio tape, coaxial cable, wire, satellites, optical fiber transmission
lines, microwave networks, televisions, scanners, cameras, and printers
-- as well as advances in computing, information, and networking
technologies not yet envisioned. But the GII extends beyond hardware and
software; it is also a system of applications, activities, and
relationships. There is the information itself, whatever its purpose or
form, e.g., video programming, scientific or business databases, images,
sound recordings, library archives, or other media. There are also
standards, interfaces, and transmission codes that facilitate
interoperability between networks and ensure the privacy and security of
the information carried over them, as well as the security and
reliability of the networks themselves. Most importantly, the GII
includes the people involved in the creation and use of information,
development of applications and services, construction of the
facilities, and training necessary to realize the potential of the GII.
These individuals are primarily in the private sector, and include
vendors, operators, service providers, and users. The GII will both
stimulate and respond to global demand for new information technologies
and services./1/ [3]
The GII can offer consumers in each country unprecedented access to
information from a variety of sources on a global basis. With
appropriate changes in regulatory structure, the GII can also help usher
in an environment more responsive to user demands by providing companies
opportunities to offer any information or telecommunications product or
service to any customer, rendering obsolete past regulatory labels or
technological niches. The business community has become the principal
force for the pro-competitive restructuring of telecommunications and
information markets. Business users, whose commercial activities are
becoming increasingly global, require access to advanced services at
higher speeds and capabilities, and at lower costs, to manage their
global operations effectively. When the national carriers cannot provide
the unified international networks and services that companies need to
conduct business and research, frustrated users develop their own
international "private" networks, often leasing private lines from
different national carriers. However, these private networks -- even the
most sophisticated -- still suffer from the high cost of leased lines in
most countries and the difficulties inherent in attempting to create
global networks based on a patchwork of services subject to widely
varying capabilities and regulation. The scientific and academic
communities also have stringent demands for access to information
resources and powerful computing capacity around the world. The
international research and academic community was instrumental in
developing the Internet, an already global mass of interconnected
computer networks. The astonishing growth rate of the Internet network
-- over ten per cent /per month/ for more than five years -- is just one
indication of the growing demand for and supply of digital information.
*C. Cornerstone of the GII: A Community of Global Interest* The nations
of the world are diverse in size, levels of economic development,
political, economic and social structures, and language and culture. We
believe, however, that despite these differences a broad community of
interest exists among countries to better the lives of the citizens of
the world -- /all citizens/. Regardless of a country's overall level of
technological development, active participation in the evolving GII can
provide the tools to improve the quality of life. For example, the GII
can facilitate health care delivery through telemedicine, linking rural
physicians to major medical facilities for off-site consultations on
difficult diagnoses. If only a computer and a wireless link are
available, they can provide a data base search and on-line questioning
of a consulting expert. If fiber optic networks are available,
telemedicine services can include remote visual examination. Such
services are a boon to rural physicians. Similarly, the GII can quicken
response time for disaster relief. It can transform education with
computer-based multimedia systems that teach with both sight and sound,
greatly increasing retention rates and providing children access to
greater educational opportunities. It can provide new tools to assist
persons with disabilities. The GII can also make factories more
efficient, speed the creation of new and better goods and services, cut
the cost of business by improving efficiency, develop new jobs and
markets, increase trade, and facilitate flows of information across
borders. That is not all. A well-developed GII can enhance democratic
principles and limit the spread of totalitarian forms of government.
Representative democracy is founded on the premise that the best
political processes are those in which each citizen has the knowledge to
make an informed choice and the power to express his or her view. The
GII will allow wider and greater citizen participation in
decision-making by providing the additional means for individuals to
keep informed, as well as to express their opinions. Through the GII,
the world's citizens will have the opportunity to share information and
cultural values, fostering a greater sense of global community. By
encouraging exchanges of ideas, goods, and services among all countries,
the GII can contribute to a framework for lasting peace. Realizing these
benefits will not be easy -- our vision of the GII presents a challenge
that cannot be undertaken by a single country, nor overcome by
government fiat. Rather, its success will depend in large measure on
innovation and investment by the private sector. As the principal source
of expertise and capital, the private sector should, in response to
marketplace demands, determine what technologies to pursue, set the pace
of development, establish the appropriate standards, and develop new
services and applications. For their part, governments can facilitate
these activities by creating a legal and regulatory environment that
supports efficient investment and innovation, and promotes full and fair
competition. Governments can also provide leadership by supporting
testbeds for new technologies, fostering the transfer of resulting
technologies to the private sector, promoting the assimilation and use
of applications and technology through government procurement, and
developing applications that support government operations and
dissemination of government information.
*II. BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR THE GII -- FIVE BASIC PRINCIPLES*
The United States believes that five basic principles -- encouraging
private investment, promoting competition, providing open access to
networks and services for providers and users, creating a flexible
regulatory environment to keep pace with technological and market
developments, and ensuring universal service -- should serve as the
foundation for the development of the GII. In our view, this foundation
will facilitate information infrastructure development in individual
countries and the interconnection of networks on a global basis. It will
also accelerate development of useful applications, and increase sharing
of information among people around the world. We believe these
principles apply equally to the telecommunications, information
technology, and information services industries. In partnership with the
private sector and all users, we believe that governments should take
action to /adopt, apply, and advance/ these principles at national,
regional, and global levels.
*A. Encouraging Private Investment* Given the facts that the worldwide
market for information technology, products, and services is currently
valued at $853 billion, and that worldwide investment in
telecommunications infrastructure alone is expected to exceed $200
billion by 2004, both developed and developing countries need to find
ways to share in this growth and prosperity. Attracting private sector
investment is the most effective way for countries to do so -- as well
as to improve their networks and services, promote technological
innovation, and succeed within the competitive global economy. The
reasons extend beyond the purely financial: In addition to providing
inflows of capital, private investment also stimulates development of
new technologies, equipment, services, new sources of information, and
managerial skills*all of which help speed infrastructure growth and
improvements, increase efficiency in the provision of services, and
permit greater responsiveness to consumer needs. To attract greater
investment from both domestic and foreign sources into their
telecommunications sectors, nations are adopting a variety of
approaches, ranging from revenue sharing initiatives and joint ventures
to direct foreign investment, licensing of privately-owned competitors,
build-operate-own or - transfer schemes, and privatization of
government-owned public telecommunications operators. Countries as
diverse as Chile, India, Jamaica, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, the
United Kingdom, the United States, and Venezuela have encouraged
multiple private companies to provide telecommunications services,
drawing in private investment to varying degrees and leading to lower
service prices and improved communication. In other countries where
privatization is not currently considered a politically viable option,
governments have taken steps to attract foreign investment in the form
of joint ventures for the provision of new services, such as cellular
telephone and Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT)-based overlay networks
for business users. Some countries have permitted lease and franchise
arrangements that include private expansion of part of the
telecommunications infrastructure, often allowing the private equity
share in the network operation to build up over time. Although providing
fewer benefits than full privatization might, these approaches can also
be attractive to private investors, and they provide quantifiable
benefits -- new lines, upgraded switching capabilities, new services and
sources of information, and lower costs to consumers. The need for
capital investment is particularly acute in countries with
underdeveloped telecommunications infrastructures, where limited
government resources often make private financing a necessary
complement. To attract private capital, many countries that seek to
improve their information infrastructures, which will improve
interconnection to the evolving GII, are taking concrete steps to: o
Create a stable operating environment supported by transparent
regulation; o Establish fair and open bidding practices for all
communications and information infrastructure projects; o Recognize the
return on capital that potential investors require; o Establish sound
repatriation policies; and o Demonstrate a political commitment to
private investment through appropriate modifications in the legal
framework. The information services sector, traditionally
privately-owned, has experienced tremendous growth due to the largely
open investment and competitive market environments in most countries
around the world. In the United States, for example, the largely
unregulated information services market is projected to have reached
$135.9 billion in revenues in 1994./2/
[4] Removing
barriers to private investment -- and providing incentives for the
creation and dissemination of information services through effective
protection of intellectual property rights -- is the best means of
sustaining this worldwide growth.
*/Recommended Action/* From the wide range of available options,
governments can develop a strategy best suited to their particular
needs. At the same time, they must institute the appropriate regulatory,
legislative, and market reforms to create the conditions necessary to
attract private investment in their telecommunications, information
technology, and information services markets. To facilitate this
process, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Identify and seek to remove barriers to private investment, and develop
policies and regulations that improve investment incentives in both
growing and mature telecommunications and information markets; o Ensure
that applicable laws, regulations, and other legal rules governing the
provision of telecommunications and information services and equipment
are reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and publicly available; o Engage in
bilateral, regional, and multilateral discussions to exchange
information on the various options that have been successfully pursued
to attract private investment, including, but not limited to,
privatization, liberalization, and market reforms; o Work with major
international lending institutions, such as the World Bank and the
regional development banks, and major private financial institutions to
determine the best means of attracting both private and public capital,
and establish workshops to train officials in the different
liberalization approaches; and o Encourage international lending
institutions to recognize the ways in which funded social projects, such
as the delivery of education and health care services, can be advanced
through improved information infrastructures.
*B. Promoting Competition* Nationally and internationally, the
information technology and information services markets have flourished
in the past decade. The highly competitive computer equipment, software
and networking industries are among the most dynamic in global markets,
providing users with steadily increasing computing power and
functionality and stimulating further demand for more advanced,
integrated capabilities. Similarly, the information services industry
has expanded as barriers to cross-border trade and investment have been
removed. In many countries there are few or no restraints on the
services provided. In other markets there are varying, but fairly light,
degrees of regulation. As a result, the world market for information
services is expected to grow from $275 billion in 1993 to $465 billion
in 1998, a growth rate of 11 percent annually./3/
[5] One important
exception has been a tendency in a few countries to erect barriers to
foreign competition in entertainment programming services. There is no
body of evidence that limiting foreign competition has been successful
in achieving the desired effect of stimulating local entertainment
programming indus- tries. The effects of such measures in retarding the
development of private investment in infrastructure also deserves
greater attention. In contrast to the liberal market and regulatory
environment for information technology and information services, the
pace and scope of liberalization and privatization in the
telecommunication sector is varied, ranging from competition in
particular market segments to full liberalization. For example, there
has been a discernable trend over the past decade toward increased
competition in the provision of both value-added services and
telecommunications terminal equipment. Some countries have liberalized
further, taking steps to open their long distance, local fixed
telephony, cellular, communications satellite, cable, and broadcast
markets. Evidence of positive results from such increased competition is
mounting: Networks have steadily incorporated innovative technologies,
producing greater efficiencies; both residential and business users
enjoy lower prices and greater choices in equipment and services;
service providers are more responsive to user needs; and lower costs of
service have stimulated increased network usage. However, in the largest
and most profitable market segments -- basic public voice telephone
services and the underlying network infrastructure -- both competition
and foreign investment have been restricted. Maintaining barriers
against potential new entrants in these markets will inhibit
infrastructure deployment. Moreover, these barriers will retard the
introduction of new information and telecommunications services that
require competitive access to underlying networks in order to flourish.
Competition in basic telecommunications services has been growing,
however, in a number of key markets around the globe. In countries such
as Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, New Zealand, Sweden, the United
Kingdom, and the United States, the introduction of alternative service
providers and networks, which often deploy advanced technologies at
lower costs, has reduced bottleneck control by the dominant
facilities-based providers. These results have spurred other countries
to reconsider their policies. The member countries of the European Union
(EU), for example, have agreed to introduce competition in the provision
of basic telecommunications services and infrastructure by 1998. The EU
considers these steps to be critical to advancing the goals of their
action plan to create a European Information Society. Increasingly,
countries with national monopoly operators have begun to question
whether they can compete effectively in the dynamic international
telecommunications market. Difficulties in raising capital and in
meeting users' demands for low cost, sophisticated network capabilities
and services are forcing a reconsideration of the monopoly approach to
telecommunications. A recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) study comparing the relative cost of providing
international service among OECD members found that the performance of
countries with competitive international markets was superior to the
average of all OECD members. Furthermore, the OECD study revealed that
the quality of service had improved simultaneously with the
implementation of competition./4/
[6] Competition
within the communications satellite market has also burgeoned. The
intergovernmental International Telecommunications Satellite (Intelsat)
and International Mobile Satellite (Inmarsat) organizations now face
competition from several separate satellite systems, including Astra,
Columbia, AsiaSat, Orion, and PanAmSat. Due in part to competitive
pressures from these separate satellite systems and from alternative
technologies, serious consideration is being given to restructuring both
Intelsat and Inmarsat. Each of these organizations is engaged in an
internal effort to review a range of options for reorganization, from
reform of the cooperative model, to corporatization, to full
privatization. As governments liberalize particular market segments,
regulators, operators, and new market entrants must grapple with
evolving definitions of the boundary between those networks and services
reserved to the monopoly operator and those open to competition. During
the transition from monopolistic to competitive telecommunications
markets, incumbent operators still play a dominant role as network
infrastructure providers. Incumbent operators not only control
underlying facilities and services that new entrants often need to
deliver their services, but frequently compete directly with these new
service providers in particular market segments. In these circumstances,
effective competition cannot emerge and flourish unless incumbents are
subject to competitive safeguards while they maintain market power over
critical bottleneck facilities and services. Competitive safeguards
serve two main purposes. Some are intended to eliminate or reduce
barriers to entry for new service providers that are seeking to
challenge the incumbent operator. Other safeguards serve to ensure that
incumbent firms with market power do not employ anticompetitive means to
prevent or hinder the development of truly competitive markets. Market
entry opportunities are effective only if the incumbent service provider
is required to compete fairly. For this reason, some administrations
have required incumbent carriers to permit resale of their networks and
services. Resale provides an important source of competition in markets
in which telecommunications infrastructure costs are high. Similarly,
market entrants that choose to provide facilities-based services in
competition with the incumbent service provider typically will need to
interconnect their facilities with a dominant service provider's
network. In a pro-competitive environment, the terms and condition of
interconnection would be reflected in published rates that include
nondiscriminatory cost-based access charges and technological "equal
access" to bottleneck facilities. Incumbent carriers may also be
required to "unbundle" network facilities and services so that
telecommunications and information service providers can order only
those elements of the dominant provider's network they need to provide a
service. Finally, establishment of a transparent regulatory scheme open
to all interested parties, and administered by a regulatory authority
independent of the incumbent service provider, helps ensure that rules
governing competition are fair and that private investment is given a
reasonable degree of security. While the political challenges posed by
attempting to restructure the telecommunications market are significant,
the increased opportunities provided by introducing competition far
outweigh the potential difficulties of pro-competitive market reform.
Further, the interconnection of competitive national information
infrastructures can increase the pace of development of the GII. The
more competitive an information and telecommunications market, the more
productive will be its interaction with other markets participating in
the development of the GII.
*/Recommended Action/* The most effective means of promoting a GII that
delivers advanced products and services to all countries is through
increased competition at local, national, regional, and global levels.
To that end, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Assess, through information exchanges and existing multilateral
organizations, the positive experiences of different countries in
introducing competition and progressively liberalizing their
telecommunications, information technology, and information services
markets; o Work constructively to remove barriers to competition in
telecommunications, information technology, and information services
markets; o Include timetables for increased competition in basic
telecommunications infrastructure and services in national information
infrastructure development plans, and, as an interim step, increase the
pace of liberalization through the expansion of resale; o Encourage new
entrants by adopting competitive safeguards to protect against
anticompetitive behavior by firms with market power, including measures
designed to prevent discrimination and cross-subsidization; o Implement
specific regulations to facilitate competitive entry in the
telecommunications sector, including the following essential elements:
1) interconnection among competing network and service providers; 2)
"unbundling" of bottleneck facilities of dominant network providers; 3)
transparency of regulations and charges; and 4) nondiscrimination among
network facilities operators and between facilities operators and
potential users, including resellers; o Ensure that government-sponsored
technical training activities incorporate programs specifically related
to the development of pro-competitive markets and regulations (including
such issues as competitive safeguards and interconnection); o Pursue a
successful conclusion to the General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS) discussions on basic telecommunications to obtain the opening of
markets for basic telecommunications services through facilities-based
competition and the resale of services on existing networks on
nondiscriminatory terms and conditions; and o Consider the full range of
options for promoting competition in Intelsat and Inmarsat, including:
1) pursuing changes designed to increase the operational efficiency of
Intelsat and Inmarsat, retaining their fundamental intergovernmental
character, but substantially reducing the scope of the current
intergovernmental agreements by removing provisions that convey unfair
advantage and inhibit efficient functioning; 2) transforming the
organizations into private corporations; and 3) transforming the
organizations into multiple private service providers that compete with
one another, as well as with others. In selecting among these options,
the goal must be to enhance competition and not diminish it.
*C. Providing Open Access* Achieving the goal of a global information
market will require government action to ensure that all information
service providers have access to facilities, networks, and network
services on a nondiscriminatory and low cost basis. By ensuring open
access to facilities and networks, and thus promoting competition,
governments can dramatically increase the availability of information
services to all consumers. Maximizing consumer choice among diverse
sources of information should be the primary objective. As the
information needs among consumers will vary, both within and among
nations, attempts to predict the information resource requirements of
citizens should be avoided. Rather, governments should foster market and
regulatory climates conducive to the broadest possible access to and
distribution of information. As countries accelerate the development of
their respective information infrastructures, more and more consumers
will seek access to networks and services that cross national and
international boundaries. Improving consumer access to diverse sources
of information has direct social and economic benefits. The ability to
generate, exchange, and use information, technology, and ideas is
central to economic growth and development, increased competitiveness in
a range of industries, and to the improvement of the quality of life. An
essential technical element of the open access concept is
interoperability, /i.e./, the ability to connect applications, services,
and/or network components so that they can be used together to
accomplish tasks. As the GII will be based on many different existing
and emerging components at local, national, and global levels, it is
imperative that these components be interoperable. The key to
interoperability is the development of global standards. We believe such
standards should be voluntary and developed through a process that is
largely market-driven and that takes into account the views of both the
large and well established and the smaller, newer market players. Three
principal international standards organizations involved in the
development of information technology and telecommunications standards
are the International Organization for Standards (ISO), the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU). The ISO and IEC develop information
technology standards through the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1,
while the ITU concentrates on telecommunications standards. Further,
there has long been coordination and collaboration between the ISO/IEC
Joint Technical Committee 1 and the ITU, which has helped minimize the
duplication of standards development work and the possibility of
conflicting information technology and telecommunication standards. The
vast majority of countries adhere to the processes of developing
international standards and the resulting recommendations from all three
organizations. In the U.S., and increasingly in other countries, the
private sector plays an essential role in these international standards
development processes by providing the technical expertise and resources
to develop standards at national and international levels. It may also
be constructive to consider encouraging greater collaboration and
cooperation both domestically and internationally among the different
standards bodies, including less formal organizations. In recent years
in the United States, a significant number of new standards consortia,
whose principal focus is in the standards implementing arena, have been
established outside of the traditional national standards development
organizations. These new consortia have often sped up the widespread
adoption of internationally generated standards, and their memberships
have included small and medium-sized companies. Given the convergence of
technologies and the rapid changes in national and international market
structures, the development and acceptance of voluntary, international
standards are critical to the development of the GII. The international
standards organizations and their memberships must redouble their
efforts to ensure that standards are developed that assist the rapid
delivery of information. Moreover, the pace of the work in international
bodies must continue to increase to better reflect marketplace needs for
technological development, so as not to impede the realization of the
GII. In the absence of timely development and implementation of
standards on a global basis, the benefits of improved interoperability
will be delayed.
*/Recommended Action/* In partnership with the private sector,
governments can take action to improve access to facilities and
networks, and promote the availability of a wide range of diverse
services and information, including strong support for the development
of international standards that promote interoperability. To achieve
these goals, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Develop appropriate policies that encourage increased access by citizens
to diverse sources of information; o Provide unrestricted and equitable
access to networks for providers and consumers of services and content,
based on sound commercial practices; o Hold regular bilateral and
multilateral dialogues on ways of increasing the flow of information
across borders to facilitate greater access to content by consumers; o
Encourage an open, voluntary standards-setting process that does not
denigrate intellectual property rights and which includes the
participation of a broad group of interests, including the private
sector, consumers, and, as appropriate, government agencies; o Work
through regional and international bodies to increase the pace of
consensus-based, voluntary, and transparent standards development and
adoption, and to promote the broad dissemination of standards-related
information; o Work together and with national, regional, and
international standards bodies to identify priority areas for increased
coordination among different private national and international bodies
in support of interoperability of networks and services on the GII.
*D. Creating a Flexible Regulatory Environment* Policymakers worldwide
face a daunting challenge: Creating an appropriate regulatory regime
that minimizes regulation and fosters competition through transparent
rules and processes and is sufficiently flexible to be responsive to
changing technologies and markets. As the pace of technological
innovation quickens, this will become increasingly difficult and yet
increasingly necessary. With the U.S. experience as our guide, we offer
the following observations about the characteristics of
telecommunications legislation that are necessary to respond to changes
in this dynamic sector. The optimal regulatory and legislative
frameworks will: o Identify the goals and objectives of the law,
including the promotion of competition; o Be sufficiently flexible to
permit the introduction of new services and technologies without
requiring amendments to the legislation; o Delegate broad powers to a
regulatory authority independent of a national operator and charge that
independent authority with keeping abreast of technological and market
developments; o Establish a transparent and open process whereby the
public and interested parties are informed and can participate in
rulemaking and adjudicatory proceedings; and o Aim towards open market
access based on nondiscrimination principles. We recognize that
regulatory reform can take many paths. Some countries have established a
regulatory entity responsible for both formulating and implementing
telecommunications and mass media policy, as well as overseeing the
activities of these sectors. Others have relied on the separation of
operational and regulatory functions of the government-owned and/or
franchised national operator, with government bodies assuming
responsibility for regulatory decisions. Still others rely more heavily
on national competition law and policy for oversight. Regardless of the
regulatory model that countries adopt, regulations should clarify the
respective rights and obligations of incumbent operators and new
entrants. New market entrants need assurances that incumbent operators
will not be allowed to use their dominant market positions to hinder the
evolution of successful competition. Similarly, public and transparent
regulatory processes create stable commercial environments, which are
necessary to attract private investment. As such, rules and regulations
should clearly indicate: o The scope of permissible competition, /e.g./,
the particular market segments open to new entrants; o The means by
which new entrants can gain market access, /e.g./, private investment,
licensing requirements, and cross-border services; o The
nondiscriminatory terms and conditions of interconnection to an
incumbent operator's network and of supplying information services over
the network; and o The procedures by which new entrants and users can
bring complaints and obtain redress from the regulator, /e.g./,
enforcement mechanisms. Additionally, it is critical that a
pro-competitive regulatory regime ensure: o The establishment of other
structural or nonstructural safeguards to protect against the
anticompetitive exploitation of market power by the incumbent service
provider to the detriment of the new entrants; o The appropriate
balancing of public service obligations among operators/carriers; o
Charging and pricing policies that are based on the costs of providing
service; and o The efficient, effective, and pro-competitive management
of scarce resources, especially the radio frequency spectrum. In light
of the increasing demands on the radio spectrum for the introduction of
new wireless communications systems and services, the last point merits
particular emphasis. Among these new technologies, none better embodies
the need for an open regulatory model embracing competition andcareful
management of the spectrum than the nascent hand-held mobile satellite
services. If these services are to achieve their global potential,
cooperation among national spectrum regulators will be required, as will
a willingness to permit multiple market entrants to ensure that new
satellite services do not become the exclusive property of a sole
provider. Governments should avoid burdensome regulation that stifles
innovation and new service offerings. Governments must guard against the
expansion of regulation into market segments that have not traditionally
been subject to regulations and that have functioned extremely well on
an unregulated basis. The examples of Australia, Canada, and the United
States in computer and business information services are illustrative.
They are among the leading nations in personal computer penetration
rates among consumers. Not coincidentally, they also provide an open,
dynamic, and almost totally unregulated market for information
technology and services. Equally important, while some government
regulation is necessary as a marketplace transitions from a monopoly to
a competitive structure, once competition is achieved, continued
regulation can be unnecessary or even counterproductive in promoting
efficiency, innovation, and customer responsiveness. In short,
governments must be prepared, and must invest their regulatory agencies
with the authority, to adjust regulatory structures as the demands of
the marketplace and technology require. Just as national regulatory
environments need to be responsive to emerging market and technological
developments, so too must the overarching international environment
continually adapt to new developments. The successful efforts of
governments and industry to improve global interconnectivity and
liberalize international telecommunications demonstrate the value of
working together in various international fora to promote progressive
and flexible national regulations. These efforts must continue.
*/Recommended Action/* Although national regulatory environments
necessarily reflect the specific social, economic, and political needs
of each individual country, the essentially global nature of the markets
for telecommunications, information technologies, and information
services require that national regulations be responsive to global
developments. The United States will join with other governments to: o
Re-examine and adapt regulations and legislation to accommodate market
and technological developments at national and global levels in support
of the five GII principles; o Create, through regulatory and/or
legislative reform, a pro-competitive, technology-neutral regulatory
environment to maximize consumer choice, to provide fair access to
networks, and to stimulate infrastructure development, the introduction
of new services, and the wider dissemination of information; o Exchange
views and information on national regulatory and legislative initiatives
and seek to identify common challenges and options for developing
flexible and transparent regulations in support of the development of
the GII; o Work collectively in regional and international organizations
to convene meetings devoted specifically to encouraging the adoption of
regulatory policies that will promote the GII; and o Encourage creation
of independent national regulatory authorities for telecommunications
separate from the operator that shall promote the interest of consumers
and ensure effective and efficient competition. Such authorities should
have sufficient powers to carry out their missions and should operate
with transparent decisionmaking processes that are open to all
interested parties.
*E. Ensuring Universal Service* The goal of providing access and
affordable service to all members of society is fundamental to the
development of the GII. The definition of universal service, however,
necessarily varies from country to country -- ranging from the provision
of high quality telephone service to every home and business in most
industrialized countries to access to a public telephone in many
developing countries. The ability to provide universal service on a
national basis depends upon a number of factors, including the level of
infrastructure development, the reach and technological capabilities of
national networks, and the cost of access to the network and services.
Other factors to be considered include the availability and use of
advanced methods of network planning and maintenance, and explicit
performance and service quality goals. The definition of universal
service is also being expanded by the advent of digital technologies. In
many countries, including the United States, policymakers face
increasing pressure to expand universal service beyond "plain old
telephone service" to include a broader array of new telecommunications
and information services. In fact, universal service has always been an
evolutionary concept, expanding as the capabilities of the network and
the types of service demanded by the great majority of users have
increased. For example, in the United States fifty years ago, a
party-line was deemed sufficient for universal service purposes; now an
individual line for each subscriber is generally viewed as a component
of universal service, together with such features as direct dialing for
long distance calls and 911 emergency service. In both developed and
less developed countries, wireless technologies can help meet the needs
for both basic and more advanced services. For example, by augmenting
terrestrial-based facilities with satellite facilities and services,
national networks can maximize their potential. The point-to-multipoint
and mobile communications capabilities of satellites, which are global
in reach, permit the extension of services to even the most remote
regions. Moreover, in helping meet universal service goals, one option
for governments to consider is the establishment of community "access
points." For example, institutions such as schools, libraries, or
hospitals could be equipped with basic and advanced information and
communications technologies for use by members of the public. Such
community access points would facilitate the efficient provision of
broader public access to a core set of services. Although several
countries have raised concerns that competition diverts revenues from
the public operator and undermines its ability to provide universal
service, experience shows that access to the telephone has been improved
in the most liberal national markets. In the United Kingdom, for
example, many customers are ordering a telephone for the first time
largely because increased competition -- cable television companies are
now offering telephone service -- has made it more affordable. In the
United States, concerns were raised a decade ago that increased
competition in the provision of long distance services, which had
traditionally subsidized basic local rates, would threaten universal
service. These concerns abated as competition spurred innovation and
price reductions, which in turn have expanded universal service.
Further, studies by the OECD indicate that telephone penetration has not
been eroded in any member country that has introduced infrastructure
competition. The OECD concluded, "Universal service has not been
impaired by market liberalization; [rather] facilities competition can
be applied to complement and enhance universal service."/5/
[7] Indeed, many now
argue that full and open facilities-based competition, by reducing
prices, is the most effective way to promote universal service. As
together we strive to expand the worldwide telecommunications
infrastructure and build the GII, we must all keep the goal of universal
service constantly in mind. With significant decreases in the costs of
information transmission and processing, the creation of the Information
Society has the potential to improve the quality of life of all
citizens. Recognizing that information leads to empowerment, the nations
of the world must work together to ensure that as many citizens as
possible in all societies have access to the resources of the
Information Age.
*/Recommended Action/* Although the provision of universal service
varies from country to country, the goal of providing all people with
greater access to both basic and advanced services is a crucial element
of the GII. The United States will join with other governments to: o
Consider, at the local and national levels, the benefits afforded by the
introduction of competition and private investment in meeting and
expanding universal service; o Exchange information at the bilateral and
multilateral level to address the range of available options to meet
universal service goals; and o Consider, at the national and
international levels, ways to promote universal access as a means of
providing service to currently underserved and geographically remote areas.
*III. ENCOURAGING THE USE OF THE GII*
While we believe that the adoption, application, and advancement of the
five core principles are necessary to create an environment in which the
GII can realize its full potential, such actions alone are insufficient
to guarantee it. Regardless of the sophistication of the technology or
services being offered, users must be assured that they can allow the
GII entry into their homes, offices, and lives to access and share
information safely and without forfeiting any of their rights.
Governments, companies, and public-interest groups, by working together
on information policy and content issues, must address these concerns.
An equally important task for governments and private sectors is to
demonstrate the potential benefits of the GII to citizens. It is only
when people see tangible results of applications that they will begin to
appreciate how it can be used to improve their lives. This appreciation
is the key to stimulating demand for the services and content of the
GII, which in turn will provide the impetus to remove institutional and
regulatory barriers to its full utilization.
*A. Information Policy & Content Issues* Developing an effective
information policy will provide governments with perhaps their greatest
challenge. The central objectives of information policy include ensuring
that: 1) the privacy of individuals and organizations using the GII is
protected; 2) the security and reliability of the networks and the
information that passes over them are preserved; and 3) the intellectual
property rights of those who create the infor- mation, education, and
entertainment content are protected. To assure the growth of an
information infrastructure accessible and accountable to the citizens of
the world, governments must develop and implement these objectives in
close partnerships with each other and with representatives from
business, labor, academia, and the public.
*1. Privacy Protection* By bringing news and information to people on a
global basis, and thereby allowing them to communicate more freely with
each other, communications technologies serve a democratizing function.
These same technologies also permit both governments and the private
sector to transmit, process, and store vast amounts of information
/about/ individuals. While these capabilities are increasingly essential
for governments to function effectively and for businesses to operate
efficiently, questions continue to grow about an individual's right to
privacy and the accompanying responsibilities of holders and
transmitters of this information to safeguard this right. In many
nations, the past two decades have seen the primary gatherers and users
of personal data shift from government entities to private sector firms.
In the 1970's and 1980's, businesses were quick to exploit the explosive
growth in low cost, high performance computers, adapting this technology
to a wide range of economic, financial, and marketing applications. As
electronic commerce spread during the 1980's, there was growing
recognition that the electronic transfer of data across national
boundaries required an international consensus on individual privacy
protection. In 1980, the OECD developed and adopted a set of voluntary
privacy guidelines that were accepted by its 24 member countries. In
1981, the Council of Europe, whose membership consists of the European
Union Member States and other European countries, adopted "fair
information practices" similar to those of the OECD to regulate the
collection, storage, and automated processing of personal data, and
transborder data flow. Both the OECD and Council of Europe privacy
guidelines, which generally recognize that the free flow of information
is critical to transborder economic activity, provide a framework for
domestic legislation that has been used by both member and non-member
nations. They also recognize diverse means of protecting information
privacy, including self-regulation and industry codes of conduct. The
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on
Trade in Services (GATS) Annex on Telecommunications also contain
provisions that recognize national privacy protection regulations. The
United States and other countries around the world are re-examining
existing privacy policies to ensure that they apply comprehensively to
the transfer of personal data over global networks. A balanced privacy
policy -- preserving the individual's right to privacy while maintaining
the free flow of information across national borders -- is important to
the development of global networks and services. Working together,
nations should ensure that the transport of personal data adequately
takes into account the following agreed-upon international privacy
principles: o Personal data should be collected only for specified,
legitimate purposes; o The dissemination, sharing, and reuse of
information should be compatible with the purposes for which it was
originally collected; o Personal data should be accurate, relevant, and
up-to-date; o Individuals should be informed how personal data will be
used and should be allowed to examine and correct this information; and
o Transmission of personal data should not be unduly restricted or
subject to burdensome authorization procedures.
*/Recommended Action/* In order to foster consumer confidence in the GII
and to encourage the growth of interconnected global networks, users
must feel that they are afforded adequate privacy protection. To this
end, the United States will join with other governments to: o Identify
key privacy issues that need to be addressed in relation to the
development of national and global information infrastructures; o Work
with both the public and private sectors to achieve consensus on a set
of fair information principles for the collection, transfer, storage,
and subsequent use of data over national and global information
infrastructures; o Ensure that privacy protection does not unduly impede
the free flow of information across national borders; o Share
information on new privacy protection policy developments and on new
technologies and standards for privacy protection; and o Encourage the
use of voluntary guidelines developed by international bodies, such as
the OECD, as the best means of ensuring the protection of privacy on an
international basis.
*2. Security and Reliability* A network as vast and complex as the GII
will pose difficult security challenges for all nations. The same modern
technology that makes communication faster and easier also makes
communications systems vulnerable to ever greater security risks. These
risks are not new -- most are well-known among security managers. What
is new is that these risks are much more widespread, are potentially
much more serious, and affect a population of users who do not have the
information or training to deal with them. The anonymous and impersonal
nature of computer crime, for example, makes this problem particularly
unsettling, for legal systems depend upon their ability to identify the
malfeasors. Yet serious violation of privacy or property rights can be
accomplished by destruction or alteration of information by anonymous
individuals in remote locations, with not a fingerprint in sight. The
technical challenges of protecting the privacy and integrity of
information stored in computer systems are even greater than those that
apply to information transmitted by telephone. And as was true with the
telephone, legal as well as technological solutions are needed. Security
includes the integrity, confidentiality, and reliability of the networks
and of the information they carry. If users do not believe that an
information infrastructure is a trustworthy, reliable system, they will
be reluctant to use it, thereby diminishing its value. To gain maximum
benefit from global networks, users must be confident that the messages
they receive are authentic, that sensitive information is available only
for authorized use, and that unauthorized users cannot access, alter, or
destroy information. In addition to protecting the security of
information that is transported over the GII, governments and industry
must guarantee the reliability of the network itself. In the event of
breakage or service interruption, network operators must work quickly
and cooperatively to repair damage and provide backup systems to
minimize the duration of any such interruptions. To have a truly global
infrastructure, greater emphasis must be placed on resolving reliability
concerns, including such issues as network performance, network
connections and interoperability, the development of new technology, and
regional and demographic differences in reliability.
*/Recommended Action/* To promote the development of a secure and
reliable GII, the United States will join with other countries to: o
Work collectively to increase the reliability and security of national
and international information infrastructures; o Initiate a broad
international dialogue among users, providers, and all other
participants in the GII on issues related to protecting the
confidentiality and integrity of information transmitted and stored on
global networks; o Exchange information and encourage further
cooperation within regional and international organizations such as the
ITU and the OECD on measures to ensure network security and reliability,
including the sharing of outage information; o Share information
regarding the best means available to advance security goals while not
impeding progress on other GII principles, such as the promotion of
competition and open access; and o Exchange information about, and
accelerate efforts to develop new technologies needed to improve the
security of the GII (e.g. encryption, digital signatures, and firewalls.)
*3. Intellectual Property Protection* Protection of intellectual
property rights is essential to the development of a successful GII. In
order to promote creativity and provide the broadest possible access to
the world's media and information sectors under viable commercial
conditions, countries will need to protect the creative content of the
GII -- text, images, computer programs, databases, video and sound
recordings, as well as multimedia products. Providing for adequate and
effective protection of intellectual property in the digital environment
requires complex legal and technical solutions. Some of these solutions
may be viewed as controversial by some users of the system. However, the
cost to society of inadequate intellectual property protection far out-
weighs these concerns. Inadequate protection of intellectual property
discourages the creation of copyrighted works, creates barriers to
innovation, stifles the use of new applications, and diminishes foreign
investment. It jeopardizes the work of researchers, creative artists,
and a wide variety of entrepreneurs. It goes without saying that if
creative works are not adequately protected, their creators will be
reluctant to permit them to be distributed over the GII. For this
reason, rightsholders must not be compelled to license rights to their
works. Instead, GII participants should cooperate to find legal,
market-based alternatives to compulsory licensing. Reliable and
efficient means of transferring intellectual property rights must also
be assured. They might, for example, adopt various licensing
arrangements, such as on-line and off-line licensing, direct licensing,
and voluntary collective licensing. More sensitive issues, however, may
have to be addressed on an individual basis. For example, licensing of
rights may be done on a per-use, per-work, or other basis. Licensing of
rights for multimedia works, which involve a number of copyrights - not
all of them with obvious attributions - could be facilitated by special
licensing arrangements.
*/Recommended Actions/* The GII cannot achieve its promise if authors,
producers, and other content creators are not guaranteed adequate
protection of their intellectual property rights. To achieve this
protection, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Cooperate in national, bilateral, regional and international fora (such
as the World Intellectual Property Organization) to achieve high levels
of intellectual property and technical protection in order to guarantee
to rightsholders the technical and legal means to control the use of
their property over the GII; o Ensure that voluntary licensing regimes
provide rightsholders and potential users of copyrighted works maximum
flexibility in negotiating the conditions governing the use of
copyrighted works, eliminate compulsory licensing, and guard against the
imposition of standards that would impede the free-flow of information;
o Provide effective enforcement against the unauthorized use of a
copyrighted work (infringement), including severe legal penalties and
vigilant monitoring. Enforcement is particularly critical as
technological innovations jeopardize the existing ability of rights
holders to protect their works; o Encourage the development and use of
technological capabilities and safeguards, such as software envelopes,
headers, assurances of authenticity, and encryption methods to
complement existing copyright management techniques and prevent
infringement at all levels. Cooperative efforts to develop testbeds,
define standards, and construct infrastructure components for these
safeguards should be encouraged, as should measures to prevent or render
illegal the use of devices to overcome these safeguards; and o Work in
collaboration with intellectual property-based industries towards
greater efforts to educate others about the importance of intellectual
property protection.
*B. Applications: Delivering the Benefits of the GII* Given that the
value of the GII will be determined by how people benefit from it,
governments must cultivate active participation by consumers and
businesses in the application of new technologies. By working together
in creative partnerships, the public and private sectors can apply
information and telecommunications technology to a variety of critical
and complex issues: improving productivity and economic growth in an
increasingly competitive and interdependent global economy; providing
adequate health care; ensuring the development of workforce skills
through education and training; providing equitable access to
information through public institutions, such as libraries; enhancing
leisure-time activities; protecting natural resources and the
environment; and ensuring the delivery of government services and
information. Many governments are already examining ways to promote the
development of the information infrastructure and to demonstrate,
through pilot projects and testbeds, the myriad benefits of new
technologies. In the United States, the National Information
Infrastructure (NII) initiative includes a Federal matching grant
program that provides support for planning and demonstration projects
initiated by state and local governments and non-profit entities in such
fields as health care and education./6/
[8] The U.S. NII
initiative also includes a number of other federally supported
applications in the areas of environmental monitoring, digital
libraries, international transportation and trade, and the electronic
dissemination of government information./7/
[9] The reach of
applications being developed around the world can be expanded
internationally through collaborative projects among commercial
entities, academic institutions, and private, voluntary, and
multilateral organizations. International applications have the unique
potential to permit countries not only to bring diverse global resources
to bear upon local problems and needs, but also to find solutions to
needs that transcend national boundaries, such as environmental
monitoring and global trade and commerce. These applications can
transform the possibilities of the GII into realities for citizens
around the world. What follows is an illustrative, but not exhaustive,
list of examples that demonstrate the value of expanding collaborative
efforts in the development of international applications: o Distance
learning projects can make available a wealth of educational resources
to improve local educational and training capabilities, offering
cost-saving, effective alternatives to overseas studies; o Computer
networks linking medical school libraries and remote sites can improve
the delivery of health care services, particularly to rural communities,
by expanding access to demographic, epidemiological, and medical
reference materials. In Zambia, district hospitals are being linked for
clinical consultation, distance learning, health literature
dissemination, and epidemiological data exchange. African medical
libraries are linking up with libraries overseas for research and
document delivery services; o Satellite and radio-based systems that
collect and disseminate health statistics can be used to identify
underserved segments of the population and to target those areas for
expanded delivery of family health services; o Remote sensing can be
used to identify and protect important ecological systems. The
Administration is promoting an international partnership, known as
Global Learning and Observation to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE), that
will allow children all over the world to collect and share
environmental data. Students will work with teachers and environmental
scientists to expand knowledge about weather, air and water chemistry
and quality, biodiversity, and other "vital signs" of the Earth. The
combined data will be transformed into striking "pictures" of the entire
planet, allowing each student to see how their school's observation is
an important part of the global environment; o Computer and satellite
networks can provide monitoring and, in some cases, early warning of
natural disasters, allowing for better coordination of humanitarian
assistance efforts between host and donor countries, speeding the
delivery of aid and assistance. In the South Pacific, the PEACESAT
satellite network has been used to coordinate emergency assistance after
typhoons and earthquakes, and to summon medical teams during outbreaks
of cholera and dengue fever; o Computerized market price data for
agricultural and horticultural products can provide new agribusiness
opportunities and can facilitate direct links between exporters and
clients; o Access to international markets, particularly for small and
medium sized businesses, can be created by providing electronic access
to information such as transportation schedules and costs, insurance and
customs data. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD) trade points system uses electronic data interchange and other
technologies to establish a network of trade points around the globe. In
Algeria, for example, the introduction of a computer-mediated trade
point has stimulated an increase in the number of companies involved in
international trade from twenty to 2,500; o Electronic data interchange
technologies, which can reduce the administrative cost of international
trade transactions by as much as twenty per cent, can help companies
increase productivity by streamlining manufacturing and service
delivery. Through industry-led consortia such as CommerceNet, companies
can explore collaborative engineering, on-line catalogs of products and
services, and mechanisms for electronic payments; o Scientists can
continue to explore the use of "collaboratories," tools and virtual
environments that allow scientists to work together without regard to
space or time. Scientists need the ability to share data and the tools
for data analysis, visualization, and modeling, to control remote
instruments, and to communicate with their colleagues; o Using the World
Wide Web, individuals and institutions all over the globe have begun to
create distributed "virtual libraries" on specific subjects. As these
opportunities continue to grow, tools for information discovery and
retrieval and protection of intellectual property rights will become
increasingly important. In our view, public-private sponsorship of GII
pilot projects and testbeds is worthwhile. It will help identify and
address a number of technical, policy, and regulatory barriers to the
realization of the GII. These include issues of privacy, security,
interoperability, and intellectual property protection, as well as
artificially high prices for telecommunications services and outdated
rules and regulations designed for paper-based transactions. A strategy
that concentrates on "learning by doing" is far more likely to resolve
these barriers. The roles played by governments, the private sector,
academic institutions, and non-profit organizations will vary depending
on the nature of the application. In some cases, such as global
electronic commerce and entertainment services, the private sector
should take the lead, while in other areas, such as international public
health, cooperation between public health agencies, hospitals, clinics,
and universities would be appropriate. Whatever the application,
governments must recognize that while they can play an important
catalytic role in fostering international collaboration, they should not
attempt "top-down" management of this process. The Administration hopes
and expects that many of the best ideas for global cooperation will
bubble up from the grassroots with little or no government involvement.
Successful applications will set in motion a continuous cycle of demand
that will encourage future development of the GII. Demonstrating the
power of the GII to successfully address pressing problems will
stimulate consumer demand for a variety of products and services at
affordable prices. This demand will provide the necessary incentive for
the private sector to broaden the reach and expand the capabilities of
the GII, enhancing its ability to deliver benefits to people and again
increasing demand. As a "network of networks" linking people and
information, the GII can leverage the collaborative potential of
existing efforts and provide real solutions to existing and emerging
global issues.
*/Recommended Action/* International applications are the best way to
demonstrate the potential power of the GII to affect lives all over the
world. The United States will join with other countries to: o Support,
along with the private sector, the initiation of pilot projects and
testbeds that demonstrate the benefits of the GII, in areas such as
electronic commerce, health care, digital libraries, environmental
monitoring, and life-long learning, with opportunities for participation
by both developed and developing countries; o Cooperate in the
facilitation of electronic information exchanges in support of global
trade and commerce; o Facilitate the sharing of information in the
public domain with other countries on government-funded and private
sector applications projects to promote a broader understanding of the
diversity of technology that can be applied to meet various public
needs; o Encourage the assignment of a higher priority for innovative
applications of information technology, which will encourage increased
use of the GII; o Encourage private sector-led efforts to develop
application-level standards (e.g. data interchange formats, application
program interfaces) to ensure interoperability at the application level;
and o Work constructively to assess and eliminate the barriers to the
development and deployment of GII applications./8/
[10]
*IV. IMPLEMENTING THE GII*
The various approaches governments have taken in response to the
technological convergence of telecommunications and information
industries have resulted in the development of asymmetric markets and
regulatory environments around the world. These asymmetries often impede
the cross-border transfer of services and information among business
users, entertainment providers, and consumers. The United States
believes that these differences can be overcome, in part through the
work of market forces and technological developments, but also in part
through collective agreement among all countries to adopt, advance, and
apply the core principles of the GII. By working through existing
international and regional organizations, and engaging in bilateral
efforts, government and industry can remove obstacles blocking the
effective development of the GII. Multilateral organizations will play a
vital role in this effort. In particular, the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU), the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD), the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), and the World Intellectual Property Organization
(WIPO) are uniquely able to contribute practical solutions to problems
affecting the development of the GII. As the preeminent international
organization dealing with telecommunications issues, the United Nations'
ITU was the first multilateral forum in which the GII was discussed.
With its broad membership of 185 developed and developing countries, the
consensus-based ITU serves as a global forum for technical discussions
ranging from voluntary standards development and frequency allocation
activities to network development. Accomplishments already achieved
under ITU auspices in technical telecommunications and development
issues suggest that the ITU can play a significant role in the GII
development process. The OECD, an international think tank which
undertakes economic research on various aspects of its members'
economies and policy concerns, has been constructively addressing
telecommunications and information policy issues for several years. Its
policy and statistical analyses have contributed to a broader
understanding of the economic benefits of liberalization in the
information and telecommunications sectors. Organizations such as the
ISO and the WIPO, which deal with specific cross-sectoral issues, can
serve as important fora to discuss and advance issues of open access and
information policy. For example, any changes made to bilateral or
regional intellectual property regimes may ultimately become issues in
the WIPO. In addition, both Intelsat and Inmarsat, the treaty-based
satellite communications organizations that have played a significant
role in advancing global telecommunications, are now contemplating
options for restructuring. Because of these organizations' broad
international memberships, they could serve as useful fora for review of
commercialization alternatives. The General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT) is a multilateral agreement setting out the rules and
principles by which countries trade, primarily in the area of goods. The
Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations led to the establishment of the World
Trade Organization (WTO), which deals with services, investment, and
intellectual property -- areas that substantively affect
telecommunications trade. The General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS), under the new WTO, includes an Annex on "access to and use of"
the telecommunications networks of WTO members, and includes substantive
commitments from a number of parties on value-added telecommunications
services. More generally, the GATS "access to and use of"
telecommunications annex applies to all services for which countries
have scheduled market access commitments. Now that it is in effect for
the U.S. and most of its major trading partners, the GATS can
substantially reinforce the principles of the GII. In addition, there
are on-going negotiations, to be concluded by April 1996, to liberalize
basic telecommunications services through the Negotiating Group on Basic
Telecommunications. Regional organizations also have important roles in
achieving regional consensus on issues pertaining to telecommunications
and information markets. Organizations such as the Inter-American
Telecommunication Commission (CITEL) of the Organization of American
States (OAS), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Southern
Africa Transportation and Communications Commission (SATCC) and the
European Conference on Postal and Telecommunications Administration
(CEPT), among others, fre- quently serve as fora for the exchange of
valuable information and as test sites for imple- mentation of the most
expedient and beneficial policies. These bodies also serve as effective
vehicles for improving and enhancing network development and technical
cooperation among participants on a regional basis. Finally,
plurilateral and bilateral dialogues can be arranged among and between
nations to focus on particular issues. In addition to the deliberations
in regional and international organizations, these discussions can
become building blocks for cooperation as together we seek to construct
a truly global GII. For example, the G-7 Ministerial Conference
scheduled for February 1995 is one of several such opportunities for
focused, high-level discussion of the Global Information Infrastructure.
As important as these international governmental organizations are,
perhaps even more important are the numerous formal and informal groups
within the private sector. These groups, which range from international
trade organizations to professional associations to advocacy groups to
industry-led standard-setting bodies, provide communication channels
between the people who will actually build and use the GII. Such private
sector groups facilitate the international teaming and strategic
alliances that will ensure the development of a truly seamless "network
of networks," rather than a patchwork of incompatible systems and services.
*V. CONCLUSION*
As Vice President Gore noted in Buenos Aires, it is possible to create a
global information network that transmits messages and images with the
speed of light from the largest city to the smallest village. Through
the interconnection of disparate but interoperable networks, these
information highways will allow us to communicate as a global community
-- giving individuals, businesses, and economies greater access to each
other and to a wider range of information. Equally important, the GII
will offer governments an unprecedented opportunity to equalize global
disparity in telecommunications and maximize the economic and social
benefits of the Information Age for their citizens. Harnessing the
global potential of information and communications technologies to this
end will require collaboration among the industries that will build,
operate, provide, and use services and information available over the
evolving national networks. It will also require cooperative efforts
among countries, working together bilaterally, regionally, and through
multilateral organizations, to facilitate the interconnection of their
respective networks and the sharing of information among nations. In our
interdependent world, technological and regulatory choices made in one
country can affect those made in neighboring countries, creating a
multiplier effect for the GII's development. To help guide this
development, the Administration proposes five core principles -- private
investment, competition, open access, a flexible regulatory environment,
and universal service. These principles, we believe, along with
effective information policies, will provide a foundation upon which the
GII can be built. The overarching goal of the /Agenda for Cooperation/
is to foster the cooperation that will be needed to spur the
transformation of a thousand discrete networks into a connected,
interoperable global information infrastructure. As all nations take
steps to develop and upgrade national information infrastructures, we
invite you to join with us in ensuring that the benefits of the GII will
be available throughout the world.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*ENDNOTES*
1. In general throughout this report, references to "information
services" are meant to be broad and to include all services, content,
and applications to be provided over the networks of the GII. However,
for specific statistics cited from other sources, the definitions from
those sources apply.
(Back to text)
[11]
2. International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
/U.S. Industrial Outlook 1994/, at 25-1, January 1994.
(Back) [12]
3. U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration,
Office of Service Industries, 1994.
(Back) [13]
4. /The Benefits of Telecommunications Infrastructure Competition/,
(DSTI/ICCP,TISP(93)/Rev1), p.23, February 1994.
(Back) [14]
5. /Ibid/, p.3.
(Back) [15]
6. Administered by the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, the basic objective of the Telecommunications and
Information Infrastructure Assistance Program (TIIAP)
[16] is to provide clear and
visible demonstrations to people at the local level of the advantages
that can be accrued in their daily lives as a result of having access to
a modern, interactive information infrastructure.
(Back) [17]
7. Additional information on how information infrastructure applications
can benefit people can be found in two reports from the U.S. Information
Infrastructure Task Force's Committee on Applications and Technology:
"Putting the Information Infrastructure to Work," National Institute of
Standards and Technology Special Publication 857, Gaithersburg, MD.,
1994; and "The Information Infrastructure: Reaching Society's Goals,"
National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 868,
Gaithersburg, MD., 1994.
(Back) [18]
8. A report of the Conference on Breaking the Barriers to the National
Information Infrastructure can be obtained from the Council on
Competitiveness in Washington, D.C. The conference was co-sponsored by
the Council and the Clinton Administration's Information Infrastructure
Task Force.
(Back) [19]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS*
*II. BUILDING A FOUNDATION FOR THE GII -- FIVE BASIC PRINCIPLES*
A. Encouraging Private Investment From the wide range of available
options, governments can develop a strategy best suited to their
particular needs. At the same time, they must institute the appropriate
regulatory, legislative, and market reforms to create the conditions
necessary to attract private investment in their telecommunications,
information technology, and information services markets. To facilitate
this process, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Identify and seek to remove barriers to private investment, and develop
policies and regulations that improve investment incentives in both
growing and mature telecommunications and information markets; o Ensure
that applicable laws, regulations, and other legal rules governing the
provision of telecommunications and information services and equipment
are reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and publicly available; o Engage in
bilateral, regional, and multilateral discussions to exchange
information on the various options that have been successfully pursued
to attract private investment, including, but not limited to,
privatization, liberalization, and market reforms; o Work with major
international lending institutions, such as the World Bank and the
regional development banks, and major private financial institutions to
determine the best means of attracting both private and public capital,
and establish workshops to train officials in the different
liberalization approaches; and o Encourage international lending
institutions to recognize the ways in which funded social projects, such
as the delivery of education and health care services, can be advanced
through improved information infrastructures.
*B. Promoting Competition* The most effective means of promoting a GII
that delivers advanced products and services to all countries is through
increased competition at local, national, regional, and global levels.
To that end, the United States will join with other governments to: o
Assess, through information exchanges and existing multilateral
organizations, the positive experiences of different countries in
introducing competition and progressively liberalizing their
telecommunications, information technology, and information services
markets; o Work constructively to remove barriers to competition in
telecommunications, information technology, and information services
markets; o Include timetables for increased competition in basic
telecommunications infrastructure and services in national information
infrastructure development plans, and, as an interim step, increase the
pace of liberalization through the expansion of resale; o Encourage new
entrants by adopting competitive safeguards to protect against
anticompetitive behavior by firms with market power, including measures
designed to prevent discrimination and cross-subsidization; o Implement
specific regulations to facilitate competitive entry in the
telecommunications sector, including the following essential elements:
1) interconnection among competing network and service providers; 2)
"unbundling" of bottleneck facilities of dominant network providers; 3)
transparency of regulations and charges; and 4) nondiscrimination among
network facilities operators and between facilities operators and
potential users, including resellers; o Ensure that government-sponsored
technical training activities incorporate programs specifically related
to the development of pro-competitive markets and regulations (including
such issues as competitive safeguards and interconnection); o Pursue a
successful conclusion to the General Agreement on Trade in Services
(GATS) discussions on basic telecommunications to obtain the opening of
markets for basic telecommunications services through facilities-based
competition and the resale of services on existing networks on
nondiscriminatory terms and conditions; and o Consider the full range of
options for promoting competition in Intelsat and Inmarsat, including:
1) pursuing changes designed to increase the operational efficiency of
Intelsat and Inmarsat, retaining their fundamental intergovernmental
character, but substantially reducing the scope of the current
intergovernmental agreements by removing provisions that convey unfair
advantage and inhibit efficient functioning; 2) transforming the
organizations into private corporations; and 3) transforming the
organizations into multiple private service providers that compete with
one another, as well as with others. In selecting amongthese options,
the goal must be to enhance competition and not diminish it.
*C. Providing Open Access* In partnership with the private sector,
governments can take action to improve access to facilities and
networks, and promote the availability of a wide range of diverse
services and information, including supporting the development of
international standards that promote interoperability. To achieve these
goals, the United States will join with other governments to: o Develop
appropriate policies that encourage increased access by citizens to
diverse sources of information; o Provide unrestricted and equitable
access to networks for providers and consumers of services and content,
based on sound commercial practices; o Hold regular bilateral and
multilateral dialogues on ways of increasing the flow of information
across borders to facilitate greater access to content by consumers; o
Encourage an open, voluntary standards-setting process that does not
denigrate intellectual property rights and which includes the
participation of a broad group of interests, including the private
sector, consumers, and, as appropriate, government agencies; o Work
through regional and international bodies to increase the pace of
consensus-based, voluntary, and transparent standards development and
adoption, and to promote the broad dissemination of standards-related
information; o Work together and with national, regional, and
international standards bodies to identify priority areas for increased
coordination among different private national and international bodies
in support of interoperability of networks and services on the GII.
*D. Creating a Flexible Regulatory Environment* Although national
regulatory environments necessarily reflect the specific social,
economic, and political needs of each individual country, the
essentially global nature of the markets for telecommunications,
information technologies, and information services require that national
regulations be responsive to global developments. The United States will
join with other governments to: o Re-examine and adapt regulations and
legislation to accommodate market and technological developments at
national and global levels in support of the five GII principles; o
Create, through regulatory and/or legislative reform, a pro-competitive,
technology-neutral regulatory environment to maximize consumer choice,
to provide fair access to networks, and to stimulate infrastructure
development, the introduction of new services, and the wider
dissemination of information; o Exchange views and information on
national regulatory and legislative initiatives and seek to identify
common challenges and options for developing flexible and transparent
regulations in support of the development of the GII; o Work
collectively in regional and international organizations to convene
meetings devoted specifically to encouraging the adoption of regulatory
policies that will promote the GII; and o Encourage creation of
independent national regulatory authorities for telecommunications
separate from the operator that shall promote the interest of consumers
and ensure effective and efficient competition. Such authorities should
have sufficient powers to carry out their missions and should operate
with transparent decisionmaking processes that are open to all
interested parties.
*E. Ensuring Universal Service* Although the provision of universal
service varies from country to country, the goal of providing all people
with greater access to both basic and advanced services is a crucial
element of the GII. The United States will join with other governments
to: o Consider, at the local and national levels, the benefits afforded
by the introduction of competition and private investment in meeting and
expanding universal service; o Exchange information at the bilateral and
multilateral level to address the range of available options to meet
universal service goals; and o Consider, at the national and
international levels, ways to promote universal access as a means of
providing service to currently underserved and geographically remote areas.
*III. ENCOURAGING THE USE OF THE GII* *A. Information Policy & Content
Issues*
*1. Privacy Protection* In order to foster consumer confidence in the
GII and to encourage the growth of interconnected global networks, users
must feel that they are afforded adequate privacy protection. To this
end, the United States will join with other governments to: o Identify
key privacy issues that need to be addressed in relation to the
development of national and global information infrastructures; o Work
with both the public and private sectors to achieve consensus on a set
of fair information principles for the collection, transfer, storage,
and subsequent use of data over national and global information
infrastructures; o Ensure that privacy protection does not unduly impede
the free flow of information across national borders; o Share
information on new privacy protection policy developments and on new
technologies and standards for privacy protection; and o Encourage the
use of voluntary guidelines developed by international bodies, such as
the OECD, as the best means of ensuring the protection of privacy on an
international basis.
*2. Security and Reliability* To promote the development of a secure and
reliable GII, the United States will join with other countries to: o
Work collectively to increase the reliability and security of national
and international information infrastructures; o Initiate a broad
international dialogue among users, providers, and all other
participants in the GII on issues related to protecting the
confidentiality and integrity of information transmitted and stored on
global networks; o Exchange information and encourage further
cooperation within regional and international organizations such as the
ITU and the OECD on measures to ensure network security and reliability,
including the sharing of outage information; o Share information
regarding the best means available to advance security goals while not
impeding progress on other GII principles, such as the promotion of
competition and open access; and o Exchange information about, and
accelerate efforts to develop new technologies needed to improve the
security of the GII (e.g. encryption, digital signatures, and firewalls.)
*3. Intellectual Property Protection* The GII cannot achieve its promise
if authors, producers, and other content creators are not guaranteed
adequate protection of their intellectual property rights. To achieve
this protection, the United States will join with other governments to:
o Cooperate in national, bilateral, regional and international fora
(such as the World Intellectual Property Organization) to achieve high
levels of intellectual property and technical protection in order to
guarantee to rightsholders the technical and legal means to control the
use of their property over the GII; o Ensure that voluntary licensing
regimes provide rightsholders and potential users of copyrighted works
maximum flexibility in negotiating the conditions governing the use of
copyrighted works, eliminate compulsory licensing, and guard against the
imposition of standards that would impede the free-flow of information;
o Provide effective enforcement against the unauthorized use of a
copyrighted work (infringement), including severe legal penalties and
vigilant monitoring. Enforcement is particularly critical as
technological innovations jeopardize the existing ability of rights
holders to protect their works; o Encourage the development and use of
technological capabilities and safeguards, such as software envelopes,
headers, assurances of authenticity, and encryption methods to
complement existing copyright management techniques and prevent
infringement at all levels. Cooperative efforts to develop testbeds,
define standards, and construct infrastructure components for these
safeguards should be encouraged, as should measures to prevent or render
illegal the use of devices to overcome these safeguards; and o Work in
collaboration with intellectual property-based industries towards
greater efforts to educate others about the importance of intellectual
property protection.
*B. Applications: Delivering the Benefits of the GII* International
applications are the best way to demonstrate the potential power that
the GII has to affect lives all over the world. The United States will
join with other countries to: o Support, along with the private sector,
the initiation of pilot projects and testbeds that demonstrate the
benefits of the GII, in areas such as electronic commerce, health care,
digital libraries, environmental monitoring, and life-long learning,
with opportunities for participation by both developed and developing
countries; o Cooperate in the facilitation of electronic information
exchanges in support of global trade and commerce; o Facilitate the
sharing of information in the public domain with other countries on
government-funded and private sector applications projects to promote a
broader understanding of the diversity of technology that can be applied
to meet various public needs; o Encourage the assignment of a higher
priority for innovative applications of information technology, which
will encourage increased use of the GII; o Encourage private sector-led
efforts to develop application-level standards (e.g. data interchange
formats, application program interfaces) to ensure interoperability at
the application level; and o Work constructively to assess and eliminate
the barriers to the development and deployment of GII applications.
*APPENDIX B - GII HEARING TESTIMONY*
The International Telecommunications Working Group of the Information
Infrastructure Task Force's Telecommunications Policy Committee
gratefully acknowledges the contribution of all those individuals and
organizations who offered testimony, either oral or written, at the
public hearings on the emerging Global Information Infrastructure, held
in Washington, D.C., on July 27 and 28, 1994. The views and information
shared during the hearing process were invaluable, and helped shape the
/Global Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Cooperation/. Airtouch
International Alliance to Promote Software Innovation American Committee
for Interoperable Systems American Electronics Association American
Express Company American Mobile Satellite Corporation American National
Standards Institute American Petroleum Institute Association of American
Publishers AT&T British Telecom Business Software Alliance Cable and
Wireless North America, Inc. Center for Strategic and International
Studies Coalition for Networked Information Committee T1
Telecommunications Computer and Business Equipment Manufacturers
Association COMSAT Corporation James D. Earl Electronic Data Systems
Ericsson Corporation Eurobit European-American Chamber of Commerce
Government of the United Kingdom IDB Communications Group, Inc.
Information Industry Association Information Technology Association of
America International Intellectual Property Alliance Internet Society
Iridium Japan Electronic Industry Development Association MCI Brian Moir
Motion Picture Association of America Motorola NBC NYNEX Corporation
ORION PanAmSat Qualcomm, Inc. Recording Industry Association of America
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meaghert & Flom Sun Microsystems, Inc. Sutherland,
Asbill & Brennan (on behalf of Capital Cities/ABC, CBS, NBC and TBS)
Telecommunications Industry Association Teledesic Corporation U.S.
Council for International Business U.S. Chamber of Commerce Viatel, Inc.
*APPENDIX C*
*GLOBAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE KEY CONTACTS* Ronald H. Brown,
Secretary of Commerce Chair, Information Infrastructure Task Force
Department of Commerce 14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C.
20230 Phone: 202/482-3934 Fax: 202/482-4576 Internet: nii@ntia.doc.gov
David J. Barram, Deputy Secretary of Commerce Department of Commerce
14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone:
202/482-4625 Fax: 202/482-3610 Internet: dbarram@doc.gov Larry Irving,
Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information Administrator,
National Telecommunications and Information Administration Chair, IITF
Telecommunications Policy Committee Department of Commerce 14th and
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - Room 4898 Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone:
202/482-1840 Fax: 202/482-1635 Internet: li@ntia.doc.gov Arati
Prabhakar, Director National Institute of Standards and Technology
Chair, IITF Committee on Applications and Technology Department of
Commerce Administrative Building 101, Room A1134 Gaithersburg, Maryland
20899 Phone: 301/975-2300 Fax: 301/869-8972 Internet: ap-iitf@nist.gov
Sally Katzen, Administrator Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
Office of Management and Budget Chair, IITF Information Policy Committee
Old Executive Office Building, Room 350 Washington, D.C. 20530 Phone:
202/395-4852 Fax: 202/395-3047 Internet: ipc@al.eop.gov Don Abelson,
Assistant United States Trade Representative for Services Investment &
Intellectual Property United States Trade Representative Room 301 600
17th Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20506 Phone: 202/395-6864 Fax:
202/395-3891 Richard Beaird, Senior Deputy U.S. Coordinator
International Communications & Information Policy Department of State
Room 4826 2201 C Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20520-5818 Phone:
202/647-5832 Fax: 202/647-5957 Dianne Cornell, Chief Telecommunications
Division International Bureau Federal Communications Commission 2000 M
Street, NW - Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20554 Phone: 202/418-1470 Fax:
202/418-2824 Internet: dcornell@fcc.gov Peter Cowhey, Chief Multilateral
& Development Branch Telecommunications Division, International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission 2000 M Street, NW - Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20554 Phone: 202/418-1470 Fax: 202/418-2824 Internet:
pcowhey@fcc.gov Carol C. Darr, Associate Administrator Office of
International Affairs National Telecommunications & Information
Administration Department of Commerce Room 4720 14th and Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-1304 Fax: 202/482-1865
Internet: cdarr@ntia.doc.gov Michele C. Farquhar, Chief of Staff
Director, Office of Policy Coordination Management National
Telecommunications & Information Administration Department of Commerce
14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - Room 4892 Washington, D.C. 20230
Phone: 202/482-1835 Fax: 202/482-0979 Internet: mfarquhar@ntia.doc.gov
Michael Fitch, Deputy U.S. Coordinator International Communications &
Information Policy Department of State Room 4826 2201 C Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20520-5818 Phone: 202/647-5832 Fax: 202/647-5957 Cita
Furlani, Director Office of Enterprise Integration National Institute of
Standards and Technology Department of Commerce Building 415, Room 102
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899 Phone: 301/975-4529 Fax: 301/948-7242
Internet: cat_exec@nist.gov John Gilsenan, Director for
Telecommunications Policy for Canada International Communications &
Information Policy Department of State Room 2529 EB/CIP 2201 C Street,
NW Washington, D.C. 20520-5818 Phone: 202/647-2592 Fax: 202/647-7407
Jack Gleason, Division Director Office of International Affairs
Department of Commerce 14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - Room 4720
Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-1866 Fax: 202/482-1865 Internet:
jgleason@ntia.doc.gov Scott Blake Harris, Chief International Bureau
Federal Communications Commission Suite 800 2000 M Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20554 Phone: 202/418-0420 Fax: 202/418-2818 Internet:
sbharris@fcc.gov Reed Hundt, Chairman Federal Communications Commission
1919 M Street, NW Room 814 Washington, D.C. 20554 Phone: 202/418-1000
Fax: 202/418-2801 Internet: ftp@fcc.gov Thomas Kalil, Director Science
and Technology National Economic Council Room 233 Old Executive Office
Building Washington, D.C. 20500 Phone: 202/456-2802 Fax: 202/456-2223
Internet: tkalil@arpa.mil Michael Kirk, Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Commerce Deputy Commissioner of Patents & Trademarks U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office Office of Legislation Box 4 Washington, D.C. 20231
Phone: 703/305-9300 Fax: 703/305-8885 Joanne Kumekawa, Special Assistant
for International Affairs Office of the Assistant Secretary National
Telecommunications & Information Administration Department of Commerce
14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - Room 4898 Washington, D.C. 20230
Phone: 202/482-1551 Fax: 202/482-1635 Internet: jkumekawa@ntia.doc.gov
Richard P. Larm, Attorney Foreign Commerce Section Antitrust Division
U.S. Department of Justice Room 3264 10th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530 Phone: 202/514-4687 Fax: 202/514-4508 Bruce
Lehman, Assistant Secretary of Commerce Commissioner of Patents and
Trademarks U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Department of Commerce
Washington, D.C. 20231 Phone: 703/305-8600 Fax: 703/305-8664 David
Lytel, Information Infrastructure Specialist Office of Science &
Technology Policy Room 423 Old Executive Office Building Washington,
D.C. 20500 Phone: 202/456-6037 Fax: 202/456-6023 Internet:
dlytel@ostp.eop.gov Vonya McCann, U.S. Coordinator International
Communications & Information Policy Department of State Room 4826 2201 C
Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20520 Phone: 202/647-5212 Fax: 202/647-5957
Bruce McConnell, Chief Information Policy Branch Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and Budget Room 10236 New
Executive Office Building Washington, D.C. 20503 Phone: 202/395-3785
Fax: 202/395-5167 Internet: bruce.mcconnell@eop.sprint.com Denise
Michel, Senior Policy Adviser Office of the Secretary Department of
Commerce 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW - Room 5835 Washington, D.C.
20230 Phone: 202/482-4127 Fax: 202/482-4191 Internet: dmichel@doc.gov
Michael Nelson, Special Assistant Information Technology Office of
Science & Technology Policy Old Executive Office Building, Room 423
Washington, D.C. 20500 Phone: 202/456-6039 Fax: 202/456-6023 Internet:
mnelson@ostp.eop.gov Richard Parlow, Associate Administrator Office of
Spectrum Management National Telecommunications & Information
Administration Department of Commerce 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW -
Room 4099A Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-1850 Fax: 202/482-4396
Internet: rparlow@ntia.doc.gov Charles Rush, Chief Scientist National
Telecommunications & Information Administration Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, NW - Room 4898 Washington, D.C. 20230
Phone: 202/482-1551 Fax: 202/482-1635 Internet: crush@ntia.doc.gov
Jonathan Sallet, Assistant to the Secretary Director, Office of Policy
and Strategic Planning Department of Commerce Room 5835 14th &
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-4127 Fax:
202/482-4191 Internet: jsallet@doc.gov] Suzanne Radell Settle, Senior
Policy Adviser Office of International Affairs National
Telecommunications & Information Administration Department of Commerce
Room 4701 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone:
202/482-1854 Fax: 202/482-1865 Internet: ssettle@ntia.doc.gov Greg C.
Simon, Domestic Policy Advisor to the Vice President Office of the Vice
President Old Executive Office Building 17th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20501 Phone: 202/456-6222 Fax: 202/456-6231 Internet:
gsimon@arpa.mil Roger Stechshulte, Director Office of Telecommunications
Department of Commerce Room 1009 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-4466 Fax: 202/482-5834 Thomas
Sugrue, Deputy Assistant Secretary National Telecommunications &
Information Administration Department of Commerce 14th and Constitution
Avenue, NW - Room 4898 Washington, D.C. 20230 Phone: 202/482-1830 Fax:
202/482-1635 Internet: tsugrue@ntia.doc.gov Daniel K. Tarullo, Assistant
Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs Department of State Room
6828 2201 C Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20520-5818 Phone: 202/647-7971
Fax: 202/647-5713 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Assistant Secretary for
Telecommunications and Information Administrator, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration Chair, IITF
Telecommunications Policy Committee Larry Irving Associate
Administrator, NTIA, Office of International Affairs Chair, TPC
International Telecommunication Working Group Carol C. Darr PROJECT TEAM
Suzanne Radell Settle Bruce Barnett PROJECT CONTRIBUTORS Office of
International Affairs Sharon Bywater Michael Crowe Nancy Eskenazi Greg
Francis Jack Gleason Larry Palmer Helen Shaw Diane Steinour Tom
Wasilewski Inter-Agency Contributors Don Abelson, Office of United
States Trade Representative Jonathan Baker, Council of Economic Advisors
Mary Good, Department of Commerce, TA Scott Blake Harris, Federal
Communications Commission Tom Kalil, National Economic Council Bruce
Lehman, Department of Commerce, PTO Vonya McCann, Department of State,
CIP Bruce McConnell, Office of Management and Budget Mike Nelson, Office
of Science & Technology Policy Jonathan Sallet, Department of Commerce
Greg Simon, Office of the Vice President We wish to thank Jean Grier,
Eugenia Barton, Randall Cook, Tony Mocenigo, and Chris Wise-Mohr who
reviewed earlier drafts of this report, and the key contacts listed
above for their suggestions and input. We also thank Peter Max for
providing the cover design and Arthur J. Altenburg for the typesetting
and layout of the report. .
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
1401 Constitution Ave., NW Washington, DC 20230
commerce.gov | Privacy Policy
| Web Policies
| FOIA
| Accessibility
| usa.gov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Source URL:*
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/report/1995/global-information-infrastructure-agenda-cooperation
*Links*
[1] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/page/peter-max
[2] http://metalab.unc.edu/nii/toc.html
[3] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#1.
[4] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#2.
[5] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#3.
[6] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#4.
[7] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#5.
[8] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#6.
[9] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#7.
[10] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#8.
[11] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/1
[12] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/2
[13] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/3
[14] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/4
[15] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/5
[16] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/top/index.html
[17] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/6
[18] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/7
[19] https://www.ntia.doc.gov/reports/giiagend.html#/8