5 September 1998
Thanks to JC


   
   Ziff-Davis News Network 
   Tauzin: FBI won't get crypto key and more on high-tech and Capitol
   Hill 
   By Michael Fitzgerald,
   ZDNN
   September 3, 1998 5:55 PM PT
   
   Updated at 6:58 PM PT
   
   SAN FRANCISCO -- An influential Congressman says Congress is close to
   resolving the bitter dispute over encryption software, and it looks as
   though it will be decided in favor of the high-tech industry.
   
   U.S. Rep. Bill Tauzin, R-La., said flatly that "we're not going to
   give the FBI the keys to the encryption system." The remark came as
   part of a wide-ranging interview with ZDNN.
   
   Encryption software is used to scramble data sent electronically. The
   Federal Bureau of Investigation and other law enforcement agencies
   have demanded that current crypto software not be exported without key
   escrow capabilities, which give it the code to unlock encrypted files.
   The high-tech industry has argued that this policy has ceded most of
   the world market to foreign software makers.
   
   While Tauzin was emphatic that the FBI would not get keys, he noted
   that "at the same time, we have to give the FBI enough capacity to do
   their job, protect us from people that want to bomb us, terrorize us
   and create mayhem in this country."
   
   He said the issues had not been reconciled, but he was clearly
   optimistic that Congress would pass a crypto bill this session.
   
   "We're close to resolving it, but it's going to take a little more
   work," he said.
   
   Tauzin chairs the House Commerce Committee's sub-committee on
   telecommunications, trade and consumer protection. This puts him in
   the middle of the debate on telecom deregulation and, by extension, on
   a number of other high-tech issues.
   
   Several key high-tech issues

   He expects Congress will move forward on several high-tech issues that
   did not make it past the committee stage in the last session of
   Congress. Besides encryption, he cited privacy and Internet taxation
   as core high-tech issues on Capitol Hill.
   
   "All those issues are critical not only to the industry that is
   developing e-commerce, it's also critical to consumers, and we're
   going to have to settle some of those," he said.
   
   He's also confident that Congress will decide to pass a law putting a
   three-year moratorium on Internet taxation.
   
   "The Internet ... is exploding right now. We've got to have some
   realistic understating about who can tax a transaction on the
   internet. And our bill to declare a moratorium and to give some time
   to settle the issue is a very good one," he said.
   
   The issue of privacy is a little dicier.
   
   "In a world where our medical records are being transmitted ... where
   our financial records are more accessible, how will we be assured in
   that world that we're not going to be abused?"
   
   High-tech industry needs to self-regulate

   Tauzin thinks the high-tech industry can effectively handle the
   privacy issues the Internet has raised, but said it has to move more
   rapidly, or Congress will be forced to take action.
   
   "I don't want to have the government do it, and the sooner the
   industry does its own job, and does it ... to the satisfaction of
   consumers, the less pressure there is for government to come in and
   try to regulate," Tauzin said. "I can assure you if we have to do it,
   we're going to gum it up real good. I much prefer the industry do it
   right."
   
   At the same time, Tauzin said Congress will probably need to take
   several cracks at the legislation before it gets it right.
   
   "My guess is we'll be involved in these issues for several years to
   come, until we've got them really tied down well," Tauzin said. "As
   fast as technology moves, we're going to find out we were pretty
   stupid in some area or another."
   
   "Technology always makes a fool of us," he said. He encouraged the
   high-tech industry to reach out and educate Congress people about
   technology.
   
   "Instead of cursing the darkness, light a few candles," Tauzin said.
   "The fact is, when you enter Congress you find out you're supposed to
   be an expert on every subject in the world, and you're not. If there
   aren't people who know a lot more than you who are willing to help you
   through it and teach you, then you're in a fog."
   
   Other topics

   On the year 2000: "My advice to people is to underpay their taxes. I'm
   real concerned about (the IRS's) capacity to send refund checks."
   
   On whether the Telecom Act of '96 has failed and needs to be changed:
   "It can work and it will work. We made one bad mistake in 1996 ... we
   left the 1930s agency (FCC) in charge of deregulation. So we have to
   take this 1930s FCC and we've got to redo it. I want to give them a
   mission to work themselves out of a job."
   
   On the Internet infrastructure and regulation: "We're at a very
   interesting point right now in the history of communications. The
   unregulated side of communications -- computers, software and all the
   marvelous technologies that are Internet-related -- are all now
   merging rapidly with the regulated structures - telephones and
   televisions and cable systems and what have you.
   
   Either the FCC is going to . . . extend into this unregulated world
   all the old regulations and subsidy requirements -- all the old
   cholesterol that's clogging up the system. Or it will be wise enough
   to let the new unregulated services show the way. My guess is they're
   going to choose the former."
   
   On technology and the gap between the haves and have-nots: "Computer
   technology is a bridge, the likes of which we've never yet been able
   to build. Long-distance learning . . . is a way to bridge that
   insitutionally handicap that's been a generational problem for my
   state. If you see that potential . . . to put the best teacdher in the
   state in front of every child for some period of the day . . . how can
   you not see it as the way to make sure that every American is a have
   instead of a have not."
   
   Why homes don't have to have PCs to get access to the Net:
   
   "Keep doing what we're doing, converge computers and televisions. They
   all have televisions, and sooner or later someobdy's going to give 'em
   a little simple device like a Nintendo that they can work with the
   television and do their homework."