Computing Profession

Verbal sparring over U.S. technology policy has persisted unabated for over one decade and two presidential administrations. As politicians, academicians, and industry representatives continue to volley policy virtues, the nation has watched its strong lead in the world's technology tournament slip another few notches. Industry observers lament that setting priorities, particularly in terms of R&D spending, has reached a turning point.

For the Soviet economy in general, and the Soviet computing community in particular, the last few years have been a period of unprecedented troubles and changes. The old, stable, centrally planned economic system has proven to be far more brittle than almost anyone expected; but attempts to build a market economy have fallen far short of many hopes and expectations. The net result to date is an economy in confusion and shambles (e.g., see [3, 6]).

Applying the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to computerized communication of information is raising many interesting questions. While the general principle of this amendment can be simply stated—it forbids the government from interfering with freedom of speech—the specifies of its application over two centuries of American history have yielded a complex matrix of principles whose application depends on a variety of factors. Where computerized communication of information fits into this schema has yet to be definitely determined. The last “Legally Speaking” column (Mar. 1991) discussed some First Amendment issues raised by treating computerized information as private property, theft of which might be criminally prosecutable. This column will discuss quite a different First Amendment issue. But these two columns can only begin to introduce a few of the challenging First Amendment issues presented by the “Electronic Frontier.”