Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/reports/info.policy.conference

Internet Message Format | 1993-12-17 | 127KB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06513;
          18 Dec 93 1:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10046
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Sat, 18 Dec 1993 00:52:19 -0600
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 00:52:19 -0600
From: "Patrick A. Townson" <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: bc policy meeting

From [e-mail] Fri Dec 17 23:24:34 1993
Received: from zeta.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu with SMTP id AA05431
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ptownson); Fri, 17 Dec 1993 23:24:15 -0600
Received: from vm1.yorku.ca by zeta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13277; Fri, 17 Dec 93 23:24:05 CST
Resent-Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Received: from VM1.YorkU.CA by vm1.yorku.ca (IBM VM SMTP V2R1)
   with BSMTP id 6028; Sat, 18 Dec 93 00:23:08 EST
Resent-Date:  Sat, 18 Dec 93 00:22:31 EST
Resent-From: [e-mail]
Resent-To: Patrick Townson <[e-mail]>
Received: from YORKVM1.BITNET by VM1.YORKU.CA (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id
 7575; Thu, 16 Dec 93 19:02:08 EST
Date:         Thu, 16 Dec 1993 18:59:19 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Sender: Toronto FREENET Committee <[e-mail]>
Comments:     Resent-From: Sam Sternberg <[e-mail]>
Comments:     Originally-From: [e-mail] (Clyde Forrest)
From: Sam Sternberg <[e-mail]>
Subject:      BC INFO POLICY REPORT
Comments: To: freenet listserve <[e-mail]>
To: Multiple recipients of list FREENET <[e-mail]>
Status: R

For the Telecom Archives.......

----------------------------Original message----------------------------

Hi folks!  I participated in the BC Information Policy Conference, held in
Vancouver on November 19-21/93.  It was an amazing event which clarified
Canadian municipal, provincial, & federal policy issues and FreeNet action.

Please find attached my 43 page "meeting minutes" report.  It has been
designed for on-line distribution but a nice desktop publishing hard copy
version would also be nice (any volunteers?).  Should you wish to download it
into your local word processor, it will come out real clean in Word for
Windows, formatted with 1/2 inch left/right/top/bottom margins and the
Courier New 12 Point font.  In Word Perfect, the same margins and Courier
12 Pitch font works pretty good.

This note/report is going to the following folks...

BC = Gary Shearman, Peter Gordon, and Rick Kool (Victoria FreeNet)
     Gladys We (Vancouver FreeNet & Conference organizer)
     Ken McClean (Trail FreeNet)
     Aldo de Moor (Global Research Network on Sustainable Development)
     Nancy Greer and Jeff Betts (BC Systems)

CANADA = Jay Weston (Ottawa FreeNet & CRTC "Comment" author)
         Stan Skrzeszewski (Council for Public Information)
         Sam Sternberg (Network & Community on-line newsletter)
         Sam LanFranco (York University Distributed Knowledge Project)
         Rory O'Brien (Web & Ontario Network Infrastructure Program)
         Alan Kennedy (Ontario private sector consortium)
         Bruno Bevilacqua (Ontario Gov't Systems Council)
         Don Presant (TV Ontario)
         Angie Hooles & Stephen DeCarie (Canadian CPSR Virtual Chapter)

USA = Judi Clark (Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility)

Feel free to post this report on any lists/gophers you feel would be
appropriate.  Any suggestions for improvement are most appreciated.  Rock on!



              BRITISH COLUMBIA INFORMATION POLICY CONFERENCE
                NOVEMBER 19-21, 1993 -- VANCOUVER, CANADA

                    "PARTNERSHIPS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS"


Section                                                          # of lines
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction...................................................... 43 lines

                       FRIDAY NOVEMBER 19th/93
Keynote Address -- Public Access to the Electronic Highway ...... 213 lines

                       SATURDAY NOVEMBER 20th/93
Government Information Policy:
     Overview ................................................... 133 lines
     Provincial Government Policy ............................... 153 lines
     BC Information & Privacy Commissioner ....................... 66 lines
     Municipal Government Policy ................................ 142 lines
     Federal Government Policy .................................. 163 lines
FreeNets, Libraries, & Telecommunications Access ................ 209 lines

                       SUNDAY NOVEMBER 21st/93
Why a FreeNet? .................................................. 215 lines
What's Free About FreeNet? ...................................... 250 lines
Free Lunch ....................................................... 25 lines
Freedom of Speech: FreeNet and Censorship Issues ................ 198 lines
Equal Access to Electronic Resources ............................ 207 lines
Summary & Resolutions ............................................ 56 lines
Conclusions ...................................................... 27 lines

Canadian Update .................................................. 33 lines
Action Recommendations ............................................53 lines

Appendices (available upon request):
   11/25/93 Ottawa FreeNet CRTC "Review of Regulatory Framework" Comment
   12/06/93 "Networks & Community" Report #1, compiled by Sam Sternberg
   12/07/93 "Council for Public Information" Draft Discussion Paper


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Compiled by:
Clyde "Bird-Dawg" Forrest                      P.O. Box 5935, Station "B"
Multimedia Communications Coordinator          VICTORIA, BC, CANADA V8R 6S8
Forrest Research & Consulting Group            Phone: [phone]
             Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
bcpolicy.foi                                                       15/12/93


              BRITISH COLUMBIA INFORMATION POLICY CONFERENCE
                NOVEMBER 19-21, 1993 -- VANCOUVER, CANADA
                    "PARTNERSHIPS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS"

INTRODUCTION

Last month, 300 concerned citizens met to discuss Canadian electronic
democracy issues & action at Simon Fraser University's Harbour Centre
campus in downtown Vancouver.  The conference sponsors included: the BC
Freedom of Information & Privacy Association; BC Library Association;
Canadian Centre for Studies in Publishing at Simon Fraser University; Legal
Resources Centre of the Legal Services Society; Library Service Branch of
the BC Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Recreation & Housing; and the
Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association.

I was impressed by the depth and diversity of discussion, concluding that
this was indeed an historically significant event, which would be of
interest to a wide range of Canadians concerned about the future of
democracy in our country.  So I thought it would be worthwhile to convert
the 20 pages of hand written notes I took, into this digital form, to
easily share my personal reflections with whoever might be interested.

The conference program provided an excellent introduction to the issues
that were discussed over the course of that cold, damp, (but very lively)
November weekend.

"We are constantly told that we are in an information age.  However, a few
large corporations and institutions control most of the flow of
information.  Many groups and individuals do not have the education or
resources to own or use computers, access networks, make their information
available on-line, or exchange information by computer.  As information
growth continues to expand at an exponential rate, the gap between the
information rich and the information poor continues to widen.

Many community and public organizations are concerned that current
government policies and practices will reduce public access to information.
This conference on information policy is organized to explore the main
issues associated with public access to information in Canada.

The conference programme has been designed to give a general examination of
government information policy as well as explore the role of FreeNet, a
non-profit community computing utility.  FreeNet provides an opportunity
for many non-profit organizations to make their information available to
the public while at the same time giving them and their users access to the
rich resources of the community and government.  FreeNet is a practical
opportunity to redress some of the current inequities in public access to
information."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       FRIDAY NOVEMBER 19th/93

We had a full house for the opening evening session, with 300 of us crammed
into the Fletcher Challenge Auditorium, to hear and contribute to the
conference opening remarks made by Fred Weingarten -- a world leader in
public electronic information policy issues.  Fred's resume is almost as
broad as the issues he discussed with the assembled throng for 2 hours.




        KEYNOTE ADDRESS -- PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE ELECTRONIC HIGHWAY

Gordon Ray, President of the BC Library Association, provided an extensive
introduction to our keynote speaker.  Fred W. Weingarten, is the "Executive
Director of the Computing Research Association (CRA), an association of
academic departments of Computer Science, Computer Engineering, and
industrial laboratories that engage in research in the computing
disciplines.  Prior to joining the CRA, Dr. Weingarten served for several
years as Manager of the Communication & Information Technologies Program at
the [United States] Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), an agency of
Congress responsible for performing technology policy studies.  He was
responsible for over thirty studies on R&D policy, telecommunications
policy, educational technology, government information policy, the impacts
of computers on banking & financial markets, and industrial & office
automation.  Prior to his service at OTA, he was Program Director for
Special Projects in the Computer Science Division of the National Science
Foundation (NSF).  He funded important early research in the areas of
social impacts, including privacy, systems security, and human interface.
He has spoken and written extensively on a wide variety of policy issues
involving the development and use of information technologies.  His columns
and commentaries appear regularly in Computing Research News, SIAM News,
and Communications of the ACM.  He continues to pursue active research on
technology policy, having just completed an NSF-funded study of foreign
national networking programs in conjunction with the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in Paris."

* My job tonight is to kick off discussion at this conference on equitable
  information access issues.  By asking a series of questions, we'll see
  that the issues may be more complex than we might think at first glance.

* From a United States perspective, let's consider the "National
  Information Infrastructure" (NII -- the US electronic super highway
  initiative), and how it pertains to technological change & public policy.

* Why not "Inter-National"?  Many nations are building their own electronic
  super highways.  Depending on where you live, values differ on privacy,
  freedom of information, and intellectual copyright.  How can we be part
  of the global information infrastructure and maintain our own values?

* What is "infrastructure"?  A capital intensive investment to interconnect
  services.  All cultures have communications infrastructures.  We are now
  building an infrastructure based on communications technology, which is
  of the same magnitude as the introduction of printing technology.

* We are re-inventing communication concepts & practices and the economic &
  social stakes are high.  We must ensure that values are protected as the
  balance of power changes.

* Current estimates are that it will cost $400 BILLION to re-wire the USA.

* In 1990, the US communication market accounted for 15.7% of the nation's
  Gross Domestic Product (GDP).  These figures do not include government,
  public, and non-profit information providers.
            Information Services .............. $359 billion.
            Computers & Telecommunications .... $272 billion.
            Publishing & Printing ............. $145 billion.
            Broadcast & Entertainment .........  $87 billion.

* The NII is being pulled in 2 directions: "Computers" & "Communications".
  Computers are ubiquitous & distributed (i.e. Personal Digital Assistant).
  Communications are intelligent digital services (i.e. 1-800 numbers).
  Standards battles are causing stalemates (i.e. High Definition TV).

* The Computer track began with development of the ARPANET in the 1970s,
  using leased lines from the monopoly telephone network and data packets
  to build a separate network.  In the 1980s, the National Science
  Foundation (NSF) networked Supercomputers, which expanded into the
  Internet.  In 1991, under the leadership of Al Gore, the High Performance
  Computer & Communications (HPCC) Act was passed through Congress.
  HPCC II, which focusses on applications, is now moving slowly through the
  Senate and the telephone companies are freaking.

* The Communications track began with the de-regulation of AT&T's telephone
  monopoly in the 1980s.  Since then, a variety of Cable and Lines of
  Business (LOB) Bills are causing chaos with the communications carriers.
  Cross ownership issues from the merging of large cable, telephone, movie,
  and newspaper corporations are impacting on the NII plan.

* The NII Task Force consists of 3 working groups: Infrastructure,
  Applications, & Information Policy.  The Commerce Department has a much
  higher representation than the Regulatory Department, which means that
  economic concerns are very powerful in the debate.  We should not be
  discouraged, but be aware of the powerful forces at work, to ensure that
  the public interest is not run over or ignored.

* Policy stress is being caused by: confusion of roles, merging (and
  diverging) of services, increasing service variety, continuous
  technological change, and access is not necessarily access. <-- A layered
  cake where you can have access to cheap wire, but be locked out of the
  cool applications & information in the higher layers of the cake.

* The NII system may support diversity more than universality.  i.e. The
  Native American Network and the SYSTERS Network (which is closed to men).
  We must support "diversity as a universal goal".

* Information Policy is a balancing act among 4 issues: Property, Privacy,
  Public, & Government.  Privacy & Public Access need strong advocacy to
  balance the dominant voices from corporations and government.

* What is the public interest?  There will definitely be a hierarchy of
  users and uses.  For instance, financial information must be secure.

* What are the conflicting visions?  Where are the users?  Until very
  recently these issues weren't on the libraries' agenda.  Information
  institutions (like libraries) will take on new roles.  Any talk that new
  technologies may "dis-intermediate" the need for human information
  navigation assistance is nonsense.  With the exponential increase in
  electronic information flows, it would be like drinking from a fire hose.



KEYNOTE DISCUSSION

(1) $400 BILLION FOR THE NII?  IF THE PRIVATE SECTOR BUILDS IT, THEY'LL
    WANT TO CONTROL IT.  HOW DO LIBRARIES HAVE A CHANCE?

    Fred says that there must be some trade-offs and bargaining to channel
    some profits into public services.  There are 2 hopeful signs.  The
    current stalemate among the big players opens opportunities for smaller
    activist groups.  Also, the "anarchy" of the Internet may mean it is
    not controllable.  i.e. There was a high ranking NSF dude who was
    recently heard to say that "Maybe one day we'll let other countries use
    the Internet".  (Hundreds of nations are currently using the Internet.)

(2) HOW BIG ARE THESE GLOBAL INFLUENCES?

    Trans-border information flows require compatible intellectual property
    rights rules <-- which are proving difficult to establish.  Expect some
    bruising battles on the international scene.

(3) CAN WE EXPECT BIG WATERGATE-LIKE SCANDALS AS GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
    BECOMES MORE ACCESSIBLE?

    That's a big question.  We don't have standard civil agreements, and it
    is so easy to forward information around the network.  Plagierizing
    other people's work is also very easy to do electronically.  Ethics and
    common courtesies are required.  The Boucher Bill (HPCC II) has a
    provision for funding on "ethics".

(4) WHAT ABOUT FUNCTIONAL ILLITERACY?  I'M CONCERNED THAT LOTS OF FOLKS
    WILL BE UNABLE TO USE THESE ELECTRONIC SERVICES.

    Fred agrees.  The definition of "literacy" is expanding from "print"
    into "electronic information navigation".  Literacy demand continues to
    expand from humanity's original need for just "oral" communication.

(5) CAN WE REALLY BE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE PUBLIC POLICY DEBATE?  WON'T WE
    BE FORCED TO GO TO THE COURTS AND LOBBY CONGRESS?

    Fred says at times he's pessimistic, but each day we each do our bit to
    make a positive difference.  We must get the Administration's
    attention.  A few weeks back, 70 public interest organizations reached
    a concensus and published their NII Public Policy Principles.  They got
    good press coverage.  But it's not just Congress and the President that
    need to be aware of these issues, it's all of us.  The impacts could be
    very profound.  For example, we might lose TV and newspapers.

(6) ETHICAL ISSUES ARE WHAT CAN BE ENFORCED.  FRAMING THE ISSUE AS PERSONAL
    PROPERTY RIGHTS AND SAYING TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING TOO FAST, JUST AVOIDS
    THE REAL ISSUES.

    Fred says lots of folks feel fine sharing copies of software they have
    purchased, but copying for profit is generally considered to be wrong.
    A recent analysis indicated inner city black males were the biggest
    copiers, and most don't fit into a software vendor's market anyway.

(7) I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TECHNOLOGY'S CONSTANT OBSOLESCENCE.  SURELY, THIS
    STUFF HAS GOT TO SETTLE DOWN?

    Fred doesn't expect it to slow down.  You just have to make your best
    guess and lay your money down.  The network was designed for telephones
    and it will be a long time before we fill up the emerging fiber optic
    network.

(8) ARE TELEPHONE COMPANIES BUYING UP CABLE COMPANIES TO AVOID INVESTING
    THE $400 BILLION FOR A FIBER OPTIC NETWORK?

    Alliances are forming to combine capital, avoid duplication of effort,
    and to move into the lucrative high-end consumer & business application
    markets.  Cable is uni-directional but higher bandwidth (good for
    video), while the telephone networks have better switching (good for
    connecting).  Public interest groups are concerned about the potential
    for monopoly services.

(9) I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH SOFTWARE COMPANIES MAKING A PROFIT, BUT I'M
    CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC IMPLICATIONS OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFO
    WHEN IT'S CONTROLLED BY PRIVATE COMPANIES.  WE NEED TO INFORM EACH
    OTHER AND ACT TO SAVE DEMOCRACY.

    Fred agrees, noting that the privacy of personal bank accounts and
    corporate databases must be protected.

(10) WHAT ABOUT THE IMPACT OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS?  ISN'T THIS WHERE
     THE ULTIMATE CONTROL WILL BE?

     Fred says that satellite is just another communications channel, but
     "wire-less" communication paths enable more ubiquitous computing and
     personal privacy ramifications are greater.

(11) THE INTERNET CAN ENCOURAGE MORE DEMOCRACY.  FOR INSTANCE, THE NET WAS
     USED EXTENSIVELY TO HELP BREAK UP THE SOVIET UNION AND TO BLOW THE
     WHISTLE ON AN UNETHICAL OIL COMPANY IN SOUTH AMERICA.  FREENETS CAN
     GIVE US TREMENDOUS DEMOCRATIC POWER.

     Fred noted the increasing opportunities for creative democratic
     expression.  Lots of folks are now producing high quality recordings
     of their own music.  The Czechs are experiencing a film making
     renaissance via videotape.  Ayatollah audio tapes were used during the
     Shiite revolution in Iran.  In the Philippines, video tapes of the
     assassination of the opposition leader were used to "shame" and
     eventually overthrow the Marcos regime.


------------------------------ Friday ends --------------------------------


                       SATURDAY NOVEMBER 19th/93

The Saturday program of events....

9:00 - 9:45  "OVERVIEW OF GOVERNMENT INFORMATION POLICY & INFORMATION
              TECHNOLOGY TRENDS IN CANADA"
             Speaker: Brian Campbell, Vancouver Public Library

9:45 - 10:45  "PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION POLICY" Panel Discussion
      Moderator: Nancy Hannum, Legal Services Society
      Speaker #1: Frank Hudson, BC Ministry of Government Services
      Speaker #2: Barbara Greeniaus, BC Ministry of Municipal Affairs,
                  Recreation, & Housing
      Speaker #3: David Bucabellus(?), BC Freedom of Info & Privacy Assn.
      Questions & Answers

11:00 - 11:30  "THE ROLE OF THE OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY
                COMMISSIONER OF BC"
               Speaker: Commissioner David Flaherty
               Questions & Answers

11:30 - 1:00  "MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION POLICY" Panel Discussion
       Moderator: Leonora Crema, UBC Library
       Speaker #1: Donald Gutstein, Simon Fraser University
       Speaker #2: Harriet Permut, Union of BC Municipalities
       Speaker #3: Barry Jones, NDP MLA, Burnaby North
       Questions & Answers

2:00 - 3:45  "FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION POLICY" Panel Discussion
      Moderator: Greg Buss, Richmond Public Library
      Speaker #1: Michael Nelson, Federal Treasury Board Secretariat
      Speaker #2: Mary Frances Laughton, Communications Research Centre
      Speaker #3: Rowland Lorimer, Canadian Centre for Publishing Studies
      Questions & Answers

4:00 - 5:15  "FREENET, LIBRARIES, & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACCESS" Panel
      Moderator: Michael Hrybyk, UBC Computing Services
      Speaker #1: Brian Milton, Stentor
      Speaker #2: Peter Anderson, Simon Fraser University.
      Questions & Answers

I was up until 4 AM, swailing beer and coffee, reviewing my notes, and
studying the excellent information included with the conference
registration package.  Brian Campbell's February/93 Vancouver Sun article
explained the importance of establishing a comprehensive "BC government
publications depository library program".  The BC Freedom of Information
and Privacy Association's September/93 "FIPA Bulletin" opened a large can
of worms by blowing the whistle on BC government bureaucrats who had been
quietly drafting a policy on selling government information, without
informing the public, cabinet ministers, or even the new FOI Commissioner.
The Canadian Library Association's draft "Information Access Principles"
provide an excellent foundation for the development of equitable electronic
public discourse policies.  And the Vancouver and Prince George FreeNet
brochures proved that the FreeNet phenomenon is spreading like wildfire
across the province.  So, I overslept and arrived 15 minutes late for the 9
AM start, but just in time for the day's opening remarks.

                GOVERNMENT INFORMATION POLICY OVERVIEW

"Public access to telecommunications and government information, and to a
lesser degree technological development, takes place within the framework
of government, legislation, and regulation.  Brian Campbell provides an
overview of the direction of legislation and policy initiatives and links
it to the future of FreeNets, public libraries, and access to government
information.  Brian is the Systems & Planning Director of the Vancouver
Public Library, President of the Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association,
and Chair of the Information Policy Committee of the Canadian Library
Association."  He is most articulate and quite outspoken.

* My remarks are divided into 4 sections: Economic Context, Political
  Context, Telecom Policy, and Information Access Policy.

* ECONOMIC factors which impact on government information policy include:
  the current "recession", government debt, privatization/de-regulation,
  global competition, "free trade", new markets, and re-engineering.

* In the POLITICAL context, we see Canada following a similar approach to
  the National Information Infrastructure initiative in the United States.
  When Al Gore was campaigning for Vice President, he said government would
  play a major role in developing the NII.  Now that he's been elected,
  Gore says the private sector must design and run the NII because of
  government debt limitations.  Ottawa has a similar mindset.

TELECOM POLICY

* Last year's CRTC (Canadian Radio-Television & Telecommunications
  Commission) Decision 92-12 started the de-regulation of the country's
  monopoly telephone services.

* What's at stake?  Billions of dollars in Canada and Trillions in North
  America, as gigantic battles rage among huge global corporations, using
  mergers, buyouts, and alliances to gain competitive advantage.

* Canadian rules are unclear because the technology is moving too fast and
  slow policy development is hindering Canadian telecom development.

* The current CRTC hearings (92-78 "Review of Regulatory Framework") have
  3 players at the table: Stentor (for the phone companies), Unitel (for
  the cablevision companies), and government.  The Public Advocacy Centre
  is a non-profit coalition attempting to raise issues about the public
  good, but is strapped for cash.

* The big issue at the table is cross-subsidization of local and long
  distance telephone rates.  Stentor wants to increase local rates while
  Unitel wants a 5 year freeze.

* While corporations and governments have million dollar budgets, there
  is no funding for public intervenors at the hearings.  "The public is not
  at the table!"

* CANARIE (Canadian Network for the Advancement of Research, Industry, and
  Education) is the private sector led business plan to develop Canada's
  electronic super highway with government support.  No one on the Board
  represents the public and it costs $2500 to join CANARIE.  They plan to
  charge commercial rates for any new services.

* Meanwhile, in the United States, the National Science Foundation (NSF)
  has put a freeze on any more Internet upgrades.

INFO ACCESS POLICY

* Freedom of Information legislation is a trojan horse which is being used
  by corporations to snag government information and re-sell it.

* Cash strapped governments (at all levels) are looking for new revenue
  generation and are encouraged to be more entrepreneurial.  <-- This is
  producing some interesting debates, such as Statistics Canada packaging
  and selling electronic information.

* We don't have a comprehensive Depository Library Program for government
  documents and there is no requirement for public dissemination of
  information, except for some Treasury Board directives.

* The cost of information dissemination is miniscule compared to the costs
  of information creation.  Yet there have been no studies done on the cost
  of NOT sharing information.  <-- i.e. Government buying back our
  information from the private sector.

SUMMARY

* There is almost no public participation in policy development -- except
  for a bit from Libraries.  (In the US, the government is talking about
  building "information silos", figuring that with technology, there won't
  be a need for librarians.  They call it "dis-intermediation".)

* We need to define the roles of Libraries, FreeNets, and Community Groups.

* We need a "Citizens' Information Bill of Rights" and we must act quickly
  to make the general public aware/involved in these crucial policy issues.


             "PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT POLICY" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Nancy Hannum, Director of the Legal Resource Centre of the Legal Services
Society and the panel discussion moderator, provided a thoughtful
introduction to this session focussing on BC government information policy
and practice.

"What are the directions of BC Government information policy now that the
second phase of the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act has been passed?
What is the relationship to government information policy of the recently
developed draft paper on 'Tradeable Information-Licensing Access To and Use
of Government Information'?  Will revenue generation be the major
consideration for access to information?  What is the government doing to
develop province-wide access to information including rural areas?  Why is
the government avoiding dissemination programs such as the Library
Depository Program?  Will government information be disseminated on
FreeNet?"

FRANK HUDSON is the project manager for the Information Management Group of
the BC Ministry of Government Services.  His wife is 8 3/4 months pregnant,
so it was touch-and-go as to whether he would be able to participate in the
conference.  I found that his slick, thick green, overhead slides were
flashing by way too fast as he bravely explained how the policy on
"tradeable" government information was being developed.

* The need for a policy framework was defined in the "Strategic Framework
  for Government-wide Information Management 92/93" document.  In the
  summer of '92, the Deputy Ministers' committee gave the mandate to
  develop a policy on selling government information.

* Information was defined into the broad categories of Personal, General,
  and whether it was publicly available.

* Project participants included the Legislative Library, Information and
  Privacy Branch, etc.  There was extensive internal gov't consultation and
  somewhat more limited external consultation.  A number of people noted
  that perhaps public access policy should have been developed first.

* Tradeable information policies from the United Kingdom, the Canadian
  Federal government, and Ontario (draft) were reviewed.  The purpose of
  the policy is to provide a consistent framework for selling gov't info.

* The proposed policy highlights include: the Province retains copyright,
  Ministries develop an indexed inventory, and are encouraged to partner
  with public & private sectors for value-added products <-- based on full
  cost recovery.  Remember this is for commercial purposes --> "Fees for
  service which benefits a specific section of the public".  Non-exclusive
  licensing is preferred.

BARBARA GREENIAUS is the Director of the Library Services Branch of the BC
Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Recreation, and Housing.  She prefaced her
remarks by noting her Branch is responsible for public libraries and she
will carry back the "word" from this conference, but she is no expert and
has little power.  She also took exception to the conference program's
"loaded and adverserial" wording which said the government is "avoiding"
the Library Depository Program.

* Let's look at where the other provinces are at with depository library
  programs.  Alberta's Queens Printer distributes to 12 libraries.  There's
  nothing in Saskatchewan.  Manitoba's Legislative Library distributes to 7
  libraries.  Ontario probably has the richest program through Publications
  Ontario, distributing to 60 libraries ($1 million budget & 4 staff).
  Quebec has a $250,000 budget and 1/3 of the libraries aren't using the
  info.  Nova Scotia has the Legislative Library and Government Book Store.

* After years of BC Library Association (BCLA) lobbying, in 1991 some
  lottery money was acquired for a pilot program.  It was not really a
  depository program because the Legislative Library ran into some problems
  with their monthly checklist.  The relationship between my Branch and the
  Leg Library is not clearly defined.  UBC has full depository status from
  legislation enacted about 50 years ago.

* Last winter, the 41 libraries involved in the pilot program were
  surveyed.  None of the libraries had maintained usage statistics on the
  government information supplied.  Training in government publications was
  considered a high priority.  Only 5 libraries have government information
  access policies and procedures.  Printed publications are preferred over
  receiving electronic and even both electronic & hardcopy documents.

* The pilot ends in December and then the government will make its
  decision.  I can't predict what that decision will be, but I assure you
  that BCLA's voice is being heard and we can expect more progress.

DAVID BUCABELLUS (?) was a last minute replacement for Darrell Evans,
President of the BC Freedom of Information & Privacy Association.  David
prefaced his remarks by saying he is a lawyer who is quite a neophyte on
these electronic information issues, but a confirmed activist.

* Municipal, Provincial, and Federal information policies are necessarily
  inter-related.

* Why do we now have an FOI act?  Basically, it's a phenomenon of the last
  30 years (with the exception of Sweden, which began FOI in the 1800s).
  The legislation has come in response to public concerns over privacy and
  public participation in the political process <-- to keep politicians and
  bureaucrats accountable.

* BC is one of the last provinces to pass FOI legislation (only Alberta and
  Prince Edward Island are left).

* Some folks are saying that the legislation is already obsolete because of
  technological change.  Some civil servants are hoping that it is a
  "Maytag" act, which they'll never have to use.

* Section 20 of the Act says that government agencies can refuse to provide
  information if it's available elsewhere and Section 71 says that
  bureaucrats can charge for access.

* Where do we go from here?  From a lawyer's perspective, I'm concerned
  that the "rule of law" must be understood.  There is a real danger of
  Treasury Boards dictating public & legal policy by controlling costs for
  electronic information <-- i.e. the Revised Statutes of BC are now sold
  on computer compact disks (CD-ROM).

* We need a coherent & comprehensive policy in BC, which includes reviewing
  the roles of BC On-Line (gov't pay per transaction service) and FreeNets.
  I hope the government will seize the initiative.  I have been impressed
  with the FOI work that NDP MLA Barry Jones has done and the exhaustive
  consultation that went into developing the Act.

* Just one last thought, on the need for a more comprehensive privacy
  policy.  A recent survey indicated that the public is much more concerned
  about privacy intrusions from the corporate sector.  <-- Government came
  up 9th on the list.  There's lots of good privacy legislation in Europe,
  and Quebec is the first in North America.  New BC FOI Commissioner David
  Flaherty has a key role to play and he is world renowned for his work in
  this area.

BC POLICY DISCUSSION

(1) I'M BARRY JONES AND I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I EXPECT A POSITIVE
    GOVERNMENT RESPONSE WHEN THE DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM GOES TO
    TREASURY BOARD.

(2) I'M LYNDA WILLIAMS FROM PRINCE GEORGE AND I'VE SEEN A BIG CHANGE IN
    ATTITUDE TOWARDS ACCESSING DOCUMENTS ELECTRONICALLY.  SO I WOULD
    ENCOURAGE BARBARA TO TAKE LAST YEAR'S SURVEY WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.  THE
    PRINCE GEORGE FREENET IS PUMPING OUT A TON OF DOCUMENTS IN ASCII
    (simple electronic text) ON A $100 BUDGET, SO DON'T BE SNOWED BY THE
    HIGH PRICED TECHNO-BABBLERS.

(3) HI!  I'M WITH WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.  I THINK THE BASIC PROBLEM
    WITH "TRADEABLE" GOVERNMENT INFORMATION IS, THERE ARE NON-COMMERCIAL
    USES FOR COMMERCIAL INFORMATION.  THE POLICY DOES NOT ADDRESS THIS
    CRUCIAL ISSUE.

    Frank replies that the policy is still in draft form and the section
    being cited is from an even earlier July/93 draft.  There's a September
    draft that he can provide, but he doesn't have any copies with him.

(4) I'M A REPORTER WITH THE EDMONTON JOURNAL.  WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY
    FOR GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AGAIN?  WHAT DO WE PAY TAXES FOR?
    GOVERNMENTS TODAY ARE NOT JUST IGNORING THE POOR AND TAXING THE MIDDLE
    CLASS INTO THE GROUND, NOW THEY WANT TO EVEN RIP OFF THE RICH!

(5) TO ACCESS INFORMATION ELECTRONICALLY, YOU NEED AT LEAST $1000 WORTH OF
    HIGH TECH EQUIPMENT, SO WE MUST ENSURE HARDCOPY IS ALSO AVAILABLE.


                THE BC INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

After a quick coffee break, with everyone babbling a mile a minute, I
returned a coupla minutes late to hear the facts straight from the "horse's
mouth".  DAVID FLAHERTY became the province's first Information and Privacy
Commissioner in July/93.  "The office of the Information & Privacy
Commissioner was created in the new Freedom of Information and Protection
of Privacy Act which was formally declared on October 4, 1993.  This is an
independent position which reports to the BC Legislative Assembly."  He
struck me as a most articulate and ethical dude, with a lot of integrity
and experience.

* Corporations are beginning to respond to their customers' privacy
  concerns.  In this month's customer statements, American Express included
  an "opt out" clause which can ensure your personal and financial
  information is not sold to other companies.  I think this is a positive
  step, but even better would be to have an "opt in" clause, where none of
  your information is shared unless you explicitly request it.

* BC On-Line carries the BC Assessment Authority land titles information on
  over 900,000 property owners in the province.  This is a big privacy
  issue.

* The 3 main goals of my office are to: (1) Raise public awareness; (2)
  Encourage investigation; and (3) Quickly resolve disputes.  I plan to
  cooperate with crown corporations and ministries to resolve problems
  through consensus.  If I have to hold a hearing, it will be short (20
  minutes), simple, and in plain language.

* I have no intention of building a bureaucratic empire.  Currently, I have
  about a dozen staff.  I'll have a complement of about 20 people by next
  year, and the maximum number of staff would be 30.  In Ontario, they have
  about 100 staff, but they have a much larger population.

* Libraries and FreeNets have vital roles to play in raising public
  involvement in these issues.  People must know their information rights
  and once they do, they won't be taken away by any government.

FLAHERTY QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

(1) HOW MANY FOI REQUESTS AND APPEALS HAS YOUR OFFICE RECEIVED?

    We've had hundreds of requests for information already and about a
    dozen appeals.  There are big privacy issues around access to PharmaNet
    (medical perscriptions) info.  Last week, some ministry staff inquired
    into the advisability of "data matching" people arrested for protesting
    clearcut logging in Clayoquot Sound with welfare recipients.
    Fortunately, government concluded on their own that this would not be a
    wise thing to do.

(2) WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS TO EXTEND PRIVACY ISSUES TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR?

    I've worked with a wide range of companies on these issues over the
    years.  I strongly believe in self-regulation.  All companies which
    handle personal information should have a Privacy Code.  Ask your bank
    for a copy of their Privacy Code.  Quebecers have the strongest privacy
    protection in North America.

(3) WHAT STICK CAN YOUR OFFICE WIELD?  ISN'T THERE A $2500 FINE FOR MIS-USE
    OF SOCIAL INSURANCE NUMBERS?

    I am strongly opposed to the development of a Universal Personal
    Identifier and encourage as many different, unique personal identifiers
    as possible.  I am more than an Information Ombudsman because I do have
    regulatory powers.


             "MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT POLICY" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Panel moderator Leonora Crema, Head of Circulation for the UBC Library and
Vice President of the BC Library Association, eloquently elaborated on the
issues to be discussed.  "Municipal governments create and store an
enourmous amount of information regarding construction, permits and
licences, property ownership, taxation levels, health and safety reports,
inspections, etc.  Many municipal governments are now examining revenue
generation from the sale of these databases.  Privacy concerns and the
right of public access to municipal data are two of the constraining
factors.  How important is public access to municipal information?  What
effect will charging for this information have on citizen participation in
municipal politics?"

DONALD GUTSTEIN, a lecturer with Simon Fraser University's Communication
Department and Cofounder of Project Censored (which produces reports on the
biggest unreported news stories of the year), introduced himself as a long
time user of municipal information.

* Municipal Councils make decisions on property zoning. Developers get
  their way far too often and I'm concerned that this FOI legislation will
  make things even worse.  After Commissioner Flaherty's comments on BC
  Assessment Authority records, I'm even more concerned that public access
  will be denied, cloaked in the perceived need for protection of privacy.

* Let me give you an example.  In 1971, there was a shopping centre
  proposal for the corner of 25th and Arbutus here in Vancouver.  The city
  planner said no traffic problems were expected.  By digging deeper into
  the civic records, I found out that the city planner had just used the
  developer's traffic study!

* Mike Harcourt (BC's current Premier and former Vancouver Mayor) had a
  reputation as "go slow on development".  But the actual record indicates
  that Mike was about as pro-development as his predecessor and current
  provincial political rival, Gordon Campbell.

* The best way to get access to these records is by getting to know the
  Records Clerks on a first name basis, but this varies with jurisdictions.

* My 2 major concerns are that blanket "privacy" policies will reduce
  public access and increasing charges for information can make it
  basically inaccessible.  The Union of BC Municipalities is proposing that
  there be no access to a 3rd party's financial records & building
  permits.  Meanwhile, over the past couple of years, the cost for property
  title searches has gone from $2 to $10.  So where I used to be able to do
  100 searches on a $200 budget, now I can only do about 20.

HARRIET PERMUT, a Policy Analyst for the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM),
offered quite a different perspective from Donald's and prefaced her
remarks by encouraging us all to get out & vote in today's civic elections.

* The FOI legislation is pretty good.  We devoted quite a lot of effort
  lobbying the province to "tweek" the Act so it makes sense for
  municipalities.

* What are local governments?  Municipalities, Regional Districts, etc.
  which make by-laws to regulate public facilities and spaces.  Local
  governments do not have a lot of staff or money, but they accomplish a
  great deal.  BC has 181 local governments and each is unique.  They are
  the closest to the people and the most open to the public.  Since
  municipalities are incorporated, they are the most likely level of
  government to be taken to court.

* Most councils meet every Monday or Tuesday and you're welcome to attend.
  At the federal or provincial level, this would be like being invited to
  Cabinet Meetings.  The only meetings which are closed to the public are
  "in camera" sessions on Law, Labour, or Land <-- FOI threats to privacy.

* Our biggest constraint on sharing information is money.  We just don't
  have enough in our budgets for staff and photocopying.  However, Council
  meeting agendas, minutes, and background info is almost always available
  at no charge.  Copies of 4 to 8 page documents are generally free.  Some
  folks are "subscribers" who may pay from $100 to $900 per year to cover
  printing and mailing costs.  Other publications may have a nominal cost
  of $5 or $10 and many popular reports are free.  North Vancouver has a
  free computer bulletin board service and Tahsis has a newsletter.

* I take exception to the conference program saying "many municipalities
  are examining revenue generation from the sale of these databases".  Fees
  are only charged for property information, building plans, and file
  searches, which are primarily used by business people.

* We are not withholding information.  We just don't have access to the
  resources to just give everything away.  In most cases, managers can
  waive fees at their own disgression.

BARRY JONES was a last minute addition to the panel.  He has been the BC
Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Burnaby North since 1986 and a
key player in crafting the new FOI legislation.  He prefaced his remarks by
noting that those municipal politicians elected today, will be the first
crop to face the challenges of the new FOI era.

* Thousands of people have been involved in the FOI process.  I must take
  exception to Brian Campbell's opening remarks this morning that the
  public is being shut out of the decision making process.  Public interest
  groups are speaking up, they were included in the FOI process, and since
  the Act won't be proclaimed until next October, we can expect broad
  public input to continue.

* I repeat that a strong case for the implementation of a Depository
  Library Program will be presented to Treasury Board.

* I had 9 years experience as a School Trustee and ran on an "Open
  Government" platform.  Back then, the public couldn't even get meeting
  agendas and we had to fight to establish Question Periods <-- so we've
  come a long way folks.

* In the 1991 election, the NDP became the government because of its Open
  Government platform.  The Opposition loves FOI and governments tend to
  hate FOI, because we all have skeletons in our closets.  That's why I
  pushed hard to rush the Act in while we were still relative "virgins".
  We looked for the broadest Act to use for a model <-- the Ombudsman Act.

* The legislation is being introduced in 2 stages.  The first stage is now
  underway with all of the crown corporations and 18 ministries working on
  the massive $12 MILLION job indexing all government documents.

* "Open-ness is the disarming of controversy" because we can really dig
  into the issues to make optimal decisions.  There have been dramatic
  changes in the past few months, with tons of info going out on a regular
  basis.  We are moving past the seige mentality.

MUNICIPAL POLICY DISCUSSION

(1) WE RECENTLY RESEARCHED MUNICIPAL RECORDS, DETERMINING THAT HOME OWNERS
    ACCOUNT FOR 3/4 OF THE REAL ESTATE AND CORPORATIONS ONLY OWN 1/4 OF THE
    PROPERTY.  BUT IT IS THE VOICE OF BIG BUSINESS THAT GETS HEARD.  WE'VE
    BEEN WORKING AS VOLUNTEERS ON THESE ISSUES FOR OVER 10 YEARS AND WE'RE
    GETTING BURNED OUT.  MY HOPE IS THAT THE NEW FOI LAWS WILL MAKE IT
    EASIER FOR CONCERNED CITIZENS TO CHALLENGE THE CORPORATIONS.

    Barry says that "fees are not to be a barrier to access" and that this
    whole area of public access to municipal property & development records
    needs to be clarified.

We were running well into our lunch hour, so it was agreed that we would
break and re-convene at 2 PM (a half hour later than was scheduled).  It
was an ideal time to compare notes with my brother.  Prior to this weekend,
we hadn't seen each other in 2 years, because I had been living in Toronto.
I had invited him to participate in the conference.  Considering that he
has very little computer or network experience, I was amazed at how quickly
he was grasping the key issues & concepts.  We had a ball, sharing our
brown bag lunch with a raucous seagull, outside under the heavy, dark,
windy November skies, with the bright orange sea buses shuttling across
Burrard Inlet.

            "FEDERAL GOVERNMENT POLICY" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Panel moderator Greg Buss, the Chief Librarian for the Richmond Public
Library and Chair of the Vancouver FreeNet Fundraising Committee, layed out
the framework for discussion.  "Federal government information policy has
been elaborated and expanded since our conference last year.  How is the
Federal government viewing its information resources?  What role do one-
stop information kiosks have in the distribution of government information?
Which is more important, efficiency or information distribution?  What are
the ethical implications of the sale of government information?  Should
citizens have to pay for government information which their taxes have
already paid to create?  Should private companies profit from the resale of
government information?"

MICHAEL NELSON, the Manager for Information Management Practices Policy of
the Canadian government's Treasury Board Secretariat, opened his remarks by
stating that he feels very optimistic about Federal information policy and
the key is striking the appropriate balance between freedom and privacy.

* Currently, Federal policy is in several places: Management of Government
  Information Holdings, Government Communications, Federal Identity
  Program, and Treasury Board Secretariat.  Management of Government Info
  Holdings (MGIH) is the crucial policy area and we're developing info life
  cycle standards and procedures.

* EnviroSource is a good example of a well organized multi-media inventory.

* The policy-making environment includes: Public/Business, Info Industries
  & Competitiveness, Fiscal pressures, Re-engineering, and Technological
  advances.

* A big issue is free public info access vs accessing info for a fee.

* We can expect to see more and more government information created and
  distributed electronically.

* Policy Directions: We now have a Chief Information Officer of Canada, but
  this policy is separate from public access issues; We need better
  integration of policies, to make them less confusing; We need more
  guidelines on production, pricing, & distribution; Electronic Locator
  Systems must be developed; and The Canadian Information Network is being
  developed with clear rules on access & dissemination.

* What the Feds want to know from us?  Be as articulate as possible in
  clearly defining what federal information would be useful for you.

MARY FRANCES LAUGHTON is with the Communications Research Centre of the
Government of Canada.  She is a Chemist and Librarian with 23 years of
experience in the public service.

* Since 1988, I've been working on the Federal Inter-Departmental Working
  Group on Database Distribution.  We would be happy to add you to our
  distribution list to keep you up to date on what we're doing.

* We've published a primer on Database Distribution, we're reviewing
  coordinated licensing options, and help to navigate information requests.

* Our goals are to promote public access to government information and
  expand the Canadian Internet footprint.

* Our Minister wants the Canadian electronic highway to focus first on
  enabling our society's disenfranchised (i.e. First Nations and folks with
  disabilities).

* We are helping the Ottawa FreeNet to facilitate the establishment of
  other FreeNets.  We recently hosted a FreeNet Conference and about 250
  people participated.

* Industry Canada (formerly the Department of Communications) is committed
  to publishing all of our information on the Internet, as well as computer
  disk and paper formats.

* We are currently working on a pilot project for direct access to Members
  of Parliament via the Internet.

* Our priorities are: (1) Access; (2) Affordability; (3) Privacy; and
  (4) Security.  We may not always agree with you, but we're committed to
  working together.

ROWLAND LORIMER is the Director of the Canadian Centre for Studies in
Publishing at Simon Fraser University.  His recently completed video,
"Breakdown on the Electronic Highway" was being continually played in the
conference lobby and being sold for $15.  [Can someone score me a copy?]

* I've got lots of questions, but not a lot of answers on these issues.

* One thing I've been struck by at this conference, is our lack of
  articulation on why we are doing this.  The orientation has been more of
  a management approach, instead of focussing on fundamental guiding
  principles.  For instance "business" is part of "the public", and there
  are many other flavours of "the public".

* I can see 4 potential principles: (1) Information policy to maximize
  public knowledge, subject to privacy constraints; (2) Info policy should
  be proactive in providing every possible kind of info <-- something we
  can take pride in; (3) Government with Libraries must be more aggressive
  in using libraries as a "public information delivery vehicle", otherwise
  they will be sidelined; and (4) We must be aware of other info policies,
  especially in the USA & Europe.

* I have some specific questions for the Feds.  Where are we with cost
  recovery?  Full or marginal cost recovery (i.e. the cost to copy)?  Who
  should have to pay?  Where are we at with copyright and exclusivity?  Is
  it understood that the private & public sectors must work together as
  information providers?  What literacy is required?  Where is the research
  funding?

FEDERAL POLICY DISCUSSION

(1) Michael Nelson responds to Rowland's final panel remarks, while joking
    about his cool colour slides and having trouble with his high tech
    electronic note taking gizmo. <-- "Thanks a lot Mr. Sharp!" (which gets
    a big laugh from the audience).  "I see Libraries as playing a crucial
    role.  I'll post some Internet addresses on the board outside this hall
    on where you can get answers to most of the policy questions raised.

(2) I'M DARREL EVANS, PRESIDENT OF THE BC FREEDOM OF INFORMATION & PRIVACY
    ASSOCIATION.  I KEEP HEARING THAT ACCESS IS LIMITED BY COST.  THE FACT
    IS THAT THESE TECHNOLOGIES ARE HAPPENING IN SPITE OF GOVERNMENT.
    POLITICIANS DON'T SENSE THAT THE PUBLIC IS AT THE CABINET TABLE WITH
    THEM, BUT THE PUBLIC INTEREST MUST BE THERE EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.
    EQUITABLE ACCESS HAS TO BE PRINCIPLE #1.

(3) HI!  I'M LYNDA WILLIAMS FROM PRINCE GEORGE.  I'M PLEASED TO HEAR THAT
    LIBRARIES ARE SEEN AS MULTIMEDIA INFORMATION PROVIDERS.   I'M HAVING
    TROUBLE GETTING INFORMATION FROM THE OTTAWA BUREAUCRACY BECAUSE THEY
    SAY THEY CAN'T PROVIDE INFORMATION IN SIMPLE ASCII TEXT AND SECURE
    INFORMATION IS OFTEN MIXED IN WITH PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.  PRINCE GEORGE HAS
    INTERNET ACCESS THROUGH THE NEW UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BC.  ALL I NEED
    IS $15,000 AND THEN EVERYONE IN PRINCE GEORGE COULD ACCESS INTERNET.

    Mary Frances responds.  "I'll follow up on this bogus information
    you're getting from Ottawa.  The government can't afford to fund all
    these grass roots FreeNets, but I can connect you with some potential
    funding sources."

(4) I'M WITH THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY ASSOCIATION OF BC.  MR. NELSON WANTS TO
    KNOW WHAT INFORMATION WE WANT.  WE WANT: (1) AN INDEX TO ALL GOVERNMENT
    DOCUMENTS & HOW TO ACCESS THEM; (2) ALL LEGISLATION & ORDERS IN COUNCIL
    AND (3) STATISTICS CANADA INFORMATION FREE & ON-LINE.

(5) I'M WITH THE ENERGY WATCH PUBLIC INTEREST GROUP AND I'M NOT HAPPY WITH
    THE FEDERAL INFORMATION POLICY PROCESS.  THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD
    OF IT.  I DON'T SEE HOW I CAN GET INVOLVED.  FOR INSTANCE, WHAT THE
    HECK IS HAPPENING WITH CANARIE?  I'M CONVINCED THAT YOU FEDS ARE TOO
    INVOLVED WITH INTERNAL GOVERNMENT DECISION MAKING PROCESSES & NOT
    ACTIVELY CONSULTING THE PUBLIC.

    Michael says, "Our policy group just got moving in the past 6 months.
    We're beginning to talk with the public and we're getting a discussion
    paper out for feedback.  A very few government staff have the mandate,
    but we're getting organized and the time to dive in is now!"

    Mary Frances says, "I find Treasury Board's open-ness very refreshing.
    We are looking to the grass roots to help us figure out what to do.
    We've got 1700 people on our mailing list.  Give me your names and I'll
    make sure you get added to the list."

    [I gave Mary Frances my card with my Internet e-mail address.  That was
     23 days ago, but I have yet to receive any information from the Feds.]

We had another quick coffee break, with everyone babbling up a storm.  I
connected with Jeff Betts (the BC Systems public access dude) and this wild
cablevision guy.  Then it was time to drag our discourse overloaded bodies
back for the final (most eventful) session of the day.

   "FREENET, LIBRARIES, & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACCESS" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Michael Hrybyk, the Manager of Central Networking at UBC and Chair of the
Vancouver FreeNet Hardware/Software Committee, introduced the session.
"Governments and corporations are preparing to spend enourmous resources to
create high-speed telecommunications networks.  Who are the players and
what are the stakes?  What is existing government policy?  What is CANARIE
and who controls it?  How are public organizations such as community
groups, libraries, and FreeNets going to be guaranteed access to these
networks?  What about the poor?  Those without access to technology?"

BRIAN MILTON is the National Director of Public Policy for Stentor
(umbrella corporation for Canada's telephone companies) and he provided a
very energetic, entertaining, and polished presentation.

* Stentor published our Vision Statement, "The Information Highway Canada's
  Road to Economic & Social Renewal" 3 weeks ago.  The objectives of this
  document are to raise public discussion and awareness of the digital
  convergence which is global in scope, and ensure the federal government
  takes prompt, strategic action.  We have addressed this directly to the
  new Prime Minister.

* What's at stake?  We're talking about a $43 BILLION industry in Canada.

* What's the Vision?  Some might think it's an "hallucination", but
  basically we're gonna build the infrastructure & services that will
  enable information of any kind, to be sent & received anywhere.  And it
  will be easy to use, Open, inter-connected, and fully inter-operable.  A
  seamless, highspeed network of networks.

* These new services will be affordable through full and open competition.
  The customers will be in control because they will have a choice for
  services.  No longer couch potato/consumers, we'll all be more producers.

* The current network reality is a hodge-podge causing immense frustration.
  It's like having big toll roads that don't connect to anything!

* From Vision to Reality: How do we get there?  (1) We are world leaders in
  telecommunications, so we should play to our strengths.  (2) We must
  change mindsets and embrace the need for Open systems.  (3) We gotta work
  smarter.  (4) We have to clarify industry & government roles.

* Stentor companies are investing $4 BILLION each year in network
  modernization.  It is currently estimated that $30 BILLION is required
  for the full Canada-wide network upgrade.  We have excellent long
  distance pipes, but we need to upgrade the access points and local loops.

* Industry will build the Electronic Highway and government can facilitate
  our efforts by: Leading by example; Favourable taxation, policies, and
  regulations; and Funding R&D demonstration projects <-- where there are
  no current markets.

* Our guiding principles are: (1) Fair & Open Access; (2) Affordable
  Services; (3) Common Standards; (4) Privacy & Security; (5) R&D
  Incentives (i.e. Northern Telecom missed out on Automated Tellers); and
  (6) Promotion of Canadian Cultural Diversity.  Support for Canadian
  culture and partnerships are crucial for success.

* We have defined the following action items.  (1) Secure government
  leadership at the highest level.  The Prime Minister must recognize this
  as a National Priority.  We need a solid working team, not everyone and
  their dog involved.  (2) Industry must invest, promote, cooperate, and
  develop the new network.  (3) Government must act quickly to clearly
  define policy & regulations and provide R&D funding.

* We spun off 5000 copies of our Vision document 3 weeks ago and we're now
  working on a second printing.  We want to ensure that all people who
  should know, do know.  We intend to work closely with government,
  industry associations, select CEOs, and consumer groups.

* We have a one year "sunset" clause, so our goal is to have everyone's
  buy-in by January 1995.  So that's the "big picture".  Looking down from
  30,000 feet you can see quite a lot, but you need to land and get on with
  the job.  Otherwise, you're just getting "high".  (He gets a few laughs.)

PETER ANDERSON is the Assistant Professor at Simon Fraser University's
Department of Communication and Associate Director of the Centre for Policy
Research on Science & Technology at SFU.  He gave a very thoughtful
presentation, making tons of great points.  But he wasn't too sparky, so it
took a real effort to stay focussed, rather than dozing off.

* Well I've got a tough act to follow.  I thought Brian Campbell did a good
  job with this morning's opening remarks.

* CANARIE is Canada's major initiative to build our electronic super
  highway.  The vision is to support development of a communications
  infrastructure for a knowledge-based Canada.  The goals are to: (1) Help
  business development; (2) Provide a good environment for our Information
  Technology industry; and (3) Support more effective R&D, education
  collaboration, and global access.  What's unclear is "Where's public
  policy & participation in all of this?"

* In 1987, the following Canadian telecommunication policy objectives were
  set.  (1) Universal & affordable telephone service.  (2) Foster an
  efficient telecommunications infrastructure.  (3) Provide the same level
  of service in all regions of Canada.

* Today AGT (Alberta Government Telephone) is suggesting per use charges
  for local calls, claiming it will be cheaper for poor people.  Industry
  still does not provide switched telephone access to all communities,
  especially a large number of Native communities.  Many BC rural areas
  must share 2 and 4 line services and only telephone company equipment
  is allowed to be connected (i.e. no modems).

* Many Federal government staff in BC don't have access to the Internet.
  BC Systems (provincial crown corp) provides Internet access, but many
  BC civil servants are not using it.

* The CRTC is under-staffed, suffering from budget cutbacks, and has more
  responsibilities.  <-- So expect less public disclosure from telephone
  companies, claiming the need for speed to compete on global markets.  The
  CRTC is no longer providing their Annual Report, which has lots of good
  info on the industry, key points from public hearings, and how the public
  can get involved in the process.

* We've got Open Systems standards, but we don't have Open Information
  Policy standards.

* Management issues are affecting computer mediated communications.  E-mail
  systems can enable flatter decision-making structures and influence
  organizational autonomy.  There are a wide range of legal, ethical, and
  security issues which are not being addressed.

* Most network development has been through government funding and operates
  primarily on good will.  The trend is now moving from technical into
  administrative issues & standards.  i.e.  Now there are concerns about
  e-mail being sent uncensored across multiple networks.  The new Internet
  Society was established in 1991 to coordinate efforts & services.  Over
  the past 3 years, network outages have increased as the net has expanded
  exponentially, so we need more cooperation to improve service levels.

* CANARIE needs to be opened up for public dialogue.  Government & network
  providers need to demonstrate a commitment to equitable and universal
  access.

FREENET, LIBRARIES & TC DISCUSSION

We started off with a lively exchange between Brian Campbell (FreeNet) and
Brian Milton (Stentor), which I like to call "The Battle of the Brians".

(1) I READ THE STENTOR VISION LAST NIGHT.  THERE DON'T APPEAR TO BE ANY
    COPIES OF YOUR DOCUMENT ON THE WEST COAST, SO I HAD TO GET IT FAXED.  I
    DON'T SEE MUCH ON THE PUBLIC GOOD, EXCEPT FOR A FEW ESTEEMED CITIZENS
    AND CEOs APPOINTED BY THE PRIME MINISTER.  WE HAVE NO PUBLIC
    PARTICIPATION AT THE CURRENT CRTC HEARINGS.  HOW ABOUT STENTOR & UNITEL
    PROVIDING 10% FROM YOUR MILLION DOLLAR PR BUDGETS TO HELP FUND & FOSTER
    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION?

    Hmmm.  Well, we shipped 1000 copies of the Vision document to BC Tel
    last week.  There is a public interest coalition at the CRTC hearings
    but they're so disorganized that they're basically non-existent.

    CAN YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION?  WILL STENTOR PROVIDE SOME FUNDING TO
    ENABLE PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE VISION DISCUSSION?

    Do you really think that would be appropriate?

    YES!  I NOT ONLY THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE, IT'S ESSENTIAL.

(2) STENTOR'S "VISION" SMELLS TO ME LIKE A CLOSED CORPORATE/GOVERNMENT
    CLUB.  HOW CAN MARKET PRICING CO-EXIST WITH EQUITABLE UNIVERSAL ACCESS?

    Brian Milton explains that we have to go whole hog, to get out of the
    current hybrid situation, and then competition will balance it out.

(3) I'M WITH THE SEA & SKY FREENET (Whistler/Squamish) BUT I DIDN'T HEAR
    MUCH DISCUSSION ABOUT FREENETS IN THIS SESSION.  INSTEAD OF "CUSTOMERS"
    IN CONTROL ACCORDING TO THE STENTOR VISION, GET ON THE FREENET AND
    WE'LL HAVE "THE PUBLIC" IN CONTROL.

    Peter says the key issue will be the costing for local access points
    and the public should be involved in the current CRTC hearings.

(4) I DON'T THINK WE CAN RELY ON CORPORATIONS LIKE STENTOR TO SUPPORT
    CANADIAN CULTURE.  LOOK AT THE NEW CANADIAN AIRLINES INTERNATIONAL
    LOGO WHICH REFLECTS THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE DEAL WITH AN INTER-
    TWINED MAPLE LEAF AND STARS & STRIPES.  ANYWAYS, WITH NAFTA, AREN'T WE
    HOSED ON TRYING TO DEVELOP A NATIONAL POLICY?

    Brian Milton says that it is not NAFTA but the GATT (General Agreement
    on Tariffs & Trade) where the international policy decisions will be
    made.  If we don't act, the US multimedia corporations will just wash
    across the border, snag all of our lucrative business & consumer
    markets, and we'll be left with the loss leaders.  Brian's much more
    concerned about market forces, than federal policy debates.

(5) I'M WITH THE PRINCE GEORGE FREENET AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT FREENETS ARE
    GREAT FOR THE PHONE COMPANIES, BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE A GOOD SOURCE FOR
    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & TEACHING LITERACY FOR KEY NEW STENTOR MARKETS.

    Brian Milton says he was involved in the establishment of the Ottawa
    FreeNet.  "It's a terribly important phenomenon, but it's fragile."

(6) I'D LIKE TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT MARKETS vs THE CUSTOMER.  CUSTOMERS
    DIDN'T WANT CDs, BUT THE GLOBAL CORPORATIONS JUST PHASED OUT LPs.  AND
    CAN YOU TELL ME WHO ARE THE MEMBERS OF STENTOR?

    Basically, Stentor is the amalgamation of the old provincial telephone
    companies and the corporation is divided into 3 different companies.
    We had to join forces because the old concensus model just took too
    long and today you've gotta get your products on the market pronto.

    CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT YOU NEED TO ACCOMPLISH WITH YOUR 1 YEAR DEADLINE?

    It's a deadline to implement action.  There's not enough time for drawn
    out public participation.  The Ontario Libraries Association is the
    only other public advocacy group.  "You've got to get yourselves
    organized.  Again, is it really appropriate for companies to fund
    public participation?"

(7) (MY BROTHER STANDS UP AND SAYS), IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING
    IS "IF WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU, THE AMERICANS WILL EAT UP & DOMINATE THE
    MULTIMEDIA HIGHWAY, SO WE SHOULD LET YOU DOMINATE US WITH YOUR
    MULTIMEDIA HIGHWAY."

Wow!  What a way to end a most stimulating day.  Afterwards, many of us
hung around to compare perceptions and try to snag a copy of Stentor's
Vision document <-- No such luck.  My brother (whose first name is also
Brian) waited patiently for his turn to ask Brian Milton one more question.
"If you are driving a Cadillac down the electronic super highway, will you
pick up a FreeNet hitchhiker?"  Mr. Milton says "Sure!".

------------------------------ Saturday ends ------------------------------




                          SUNDAY NOVEMBER 21st/93

The Sunday program of events...

9:00 - 10:15  "WHY A FREENET?" Panel Discussion
      Moderator: Jacqueline Van Dyk, North Vancouver Public Library
      Speaker #1: Bill Andrews, West Coast Environmental Law
      Speaker #2: Larry Kuehn, BC Teachers Federation
      Speaker #3: Alan Etkin, Simon Fraser University & "Adbusters"
      Questions & Answers

10:30 - 12:00  "WHAT'S FREE ABOUT FREENET?" Panel Discussion
       Moderator: Jacqueline Van Dyk, North Vancouver Public Library
       Speaker #1: Gil Evans, Information Services Vancouver
       Speaker #2: Stuart Hertzog, Energy Watch
       Speaker #3: Tracey Reiter, MindLink! Communications Inc.
       Speaker #4: Phil Lyons, National Academy of Older Canadians
       Questions & Answers

12:00 - 1:00  FREE LUNCH!

1:00 - 2:30  "FREEDOM OF SPEECH: FREENET & CENSORSHIP ISSUES" Panel
      Moderator: Allison Haupt, North Vancouver Public Library
      Speaker #1: John Westwood, BC Civil Liberties Association
      Speaker #2: Beverley Burke, Affinity Castle BBS
      Speaker #3: Frances Bula, Vancouver Sun newspaper
      Questions & Answers

2:45 - 4:30  "EQUAL ACCESS TO ELECTRONIC RESOURCES" Panel Discussion
      Moderator: Margaret Coates, Eastside Family Place
      Speaker #1: Guy Thomas, Native Education Centre
      Speaker #2: Gladys We, Simon Fraser University
      Speaker #3: Theresa Andrews, VIPER BBS
      Questions & Answers

4:30 - 5:00  "SUMMARY & RESOLUTIONS"  Plenary Session


I had another late night, reviewing and pondering the multitude of
perspectives from Saturday's public information policy extravaganza.  I was
most thankful that my good friend Fernanda Pires had kindly lent me the
exclusive use of her East End apartment for the weekend.  Her cool suite
provided a quiet place to contemplate the significance of all this stuff.
With the thick wet clouds dripping and rattling all over the balcony, the
poor heroin junkies across the alley briefly bellowed their profound pain
at 3:30 in the morning.  So I overslept (again!), arriving about 20 minutes
late for the 9 AM start of the day's proceedings --> which would move us
from government policy into FreeNet action!

                   "WHY A FREENET?" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Moderator Jacqueline Van Dyk, the North Vancouver Public Library Systems
Librarian and Chair of the Vancouver FreeNet System Design Committee, did a
fine job introducing the session.  "Why bother to establish a FreeNet?
What are the needs FreeNets are trying to satisfy?  Who will use FreeNet?
Where does FreeNet fit in with libraries and other non-profit information
providers?  What kind of information will be available?  If there are all
these commercial bulletin boards, why is FreeNet necessary?"

BILL ANDREWS is the Manager of West Coast Environmental Law's Electronic
Crossroads Project.  Bill prefaced is remarks by noting that "FreeNet =
Public access for the public interest".  His delivery was quite Zen-like.

* West Coast Environmental Law maintains a large library.  The "GenCat"
  document database indexing software provides full text searching.  Using
  "Folio Views", we can readily jump into other information resources.  The
  system is part of a much larger system <-- a node on the info network.

* We also distribute information on computer disks for folks without modems
  or phone lines (i.e. Native communities).  The network interconnections
  are still being worked out.  By January, you'll probably be able to
  access our information either directly or through other Bulletin Board
  Systems (BBSes) or via the Internet.

* ASCII (simple computer text) is the standard nuts and bolts of the
  electronic information revolution, because it is the standard format for
  exchanging information, regardless of the type of hardware or software
  you might be using.

* Just as the introduction of the railways opened up our country and
  introduced unforeseen land use and other social changes, we can expect
  many unanticipated consequences from the introduction of the electronic
  highway.  So we must keep our wits about us.

* The industrial revolution introduced the production line, resulting in
  the loss of many valuable crafts.  We are now seeing a reverse situation
  in the world of computer networks.  For many years, society's knowledge
  base was being dis-integrated into bits of computer data.  With the
  emerging public electronic discourse, we are re-integrating from Data -->
  to Information --> to Knowledge --> and hopefully to Wisdom.  In the Ying
  and Yang of the world, we have been focussing too much on Control and not
  enough on Harmony.

* I have copies of our Unix library system and I can give you a demo on my
  notebook computer if you like.

Jacqueline notes that Bill's simple hand drawn overhead projections easily
rivalled yesterday's glossy high tech Federal Treasury Board slides (and
gets a big laugh from the audience).

LARRY KUEHN is the Director of the BC Teacher Federation's Research and
Technology Division.  Larry is one of Canada's network pioneers, who has
played an important role introducing computer network communications into
BC schools.

* Information Technology (IT -- what an acronym!) was not developed for
  everyone.  Its roots are in the military and government.  Funding for
  Virtual Reality initiated with the military, to train jet pilots and then
  was used to mediate bomb delivery.  The power of the technology was
  proven in the Gulf War, with virtually no losses on the higher-tech side
  while 1000s of Iraqis were killed.

* But we can also harness the power of Information Technology for the
  benefit of the Virtual Community.  Let me give you a personal example.
  Last summer, we found a tick on my daughter.  After leaving an urgent
  phone message for the doctor, I logged on to the WELL computer
  conferencing system in San Francisco, asking for advice on what to do.
  Within minutes, I had dozens of electronic answers and we were
  implementing the remedy long before the doctor arrived.

* It is vital to know that we cannot let the military and corporations
  decide on the uses of technology.  We need to define alternative uses and
  ideas, other than control and profit.

* FreeNets are opening up enourmous spaces for free exploration of ideas
  and decisions.

* We must focus on useful information content.  Three years ago, we started
  the Southern Interior Telecommunications Project (SITP) for some schools
  here in BC.  One of the applications was access to news databases for
  Social Studies.  We recognize that the text book era in education is
  coming to an end and students have to know how to use these network
  databases.  Unfortunately, cost drives access.  Since USA Today was
  available for $12/hour and Southham (Canadian news) cost $40/hour, most
  schools could only afford the United States current events perspective.
  This problem is happening right now with Lower Mainland schools on EdNet
  only having access to USA Today!

* There are distinct Canadian perspectives, yet there is a prominent
  computer conference focussed on establishing a North American identity.
  Consider futurist Howard Granville's recent seminar here in Vancouver.
  It was largely sponsored by public institutions.  By contrast, Howard's
  speaking tour in the United States is funded by corporations.  The same
  structure applies to higher education.  In the United States, the major
  universities are private & exclusive <-- like Harvard.

* Does control of information make a difference?  You bet!  Recently, the
  New York Times bought out the Boston Globe for $1 BILLION.  Not for the
  newspaper, but for the information access rights!  Every day there is
  more of this convergence of information production & dissemination into a
  smaller and smaller elite group.  Conrad Black owns the Southam chain of
  newspapers which not only controls many major newspapers in Canada, but
  also England and South Africa.  Conrad has a giant world-wide information
  monopoly.

* We must look for as many diverse information sources as possible.  Just
  take a look at your typical news stand.  It's primarily US magazines,
  even though there are hundreds of small, excellent Canadian magazines.
  We must ensure this does not happen in the electronic world.

ALAN ETKIN is an SFU Communication Graduate Student and Coordinator of
"Take Back the News".  He specializes in environmental issues and is also
an ADBUSTERS magazine editor (a quarterly activist publication poking large
holes in the mass media's democratic facade).

* FreeNet offers access and variety/diversity of information and ideas.

* Biodiversity works in 2 ways: the inter-relation of species and genetic
  variety & strengths within species.  Our planet's biological diversity is
  being lost to things like black-topping and tree farms nuking ecosystems.

* Now let's look at the current mass media mono-culture.  It is controlled
  by a very few owners and the constant concentration of power into fewer &
  fewer hands is reducing information quality & diversity.

* I propose that our existing mass media systems are unsustainable.  We can
  think of the mass media as a natural system that's out of balance.  One
  of the biggest risks is the perception that we have limited options.

* The general public cares about these issues.  We recently hosted a "Take
  Back The News" symposium (with David Suzuki, Joyce Nelson, etc.) and
  there was a huge response.  Initially, we rented a 300 seat auditorium,
  but at the last minute, we had to acquire a larger hall to accommodate
  the over 700 folks who showed up.  Now we're following up with 3 lectures
  on "Alternate Media & The Environment".  <-- I've got flyers!

* FreeNet has the potential for a wide variety of perspectives and we need
  an alternative news service where people can pass their own information
  back and forth.  We all have to help each other to pull it off.  The key
  point is the need for diversity.

WHY FREENET DISCUSSION

(1) I'M A REPORTER WITH SOUTHAM'S EDMONTON JOURNAL NEWSPAPER.  I AGREE WITH
    YOUR ANALYSIS AND I'M WORKING ON POSITIVE CHANGE FROM THE INSIDE.
    REPORTERS HAVE GOT BILLS TO PAY AND THE VANCOUVER SUN NEWSROOM BUDGET
    IS ABOUT $1.5 MILLION PER MONTH.  SO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA GET THE NEWS FOR
    FREE.  I EXPECT MANY MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DIVERSITY.  THERE ARE GIANT
    BARRIERS TO ENTRY.  TO ESTABLISH A NEWSPAPER IN A LARGE CANADIAN CITY,
    YOU'D NEED TO INVEST ABOUT $150 MILLION AND YOU STILL WOULDN'T MAKE ANY
    MONEY INITIALLY.  I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEW ALTERNATIVE, FAST,
    FLEET, SUITE OF NEWS SERVICES.

(2) I'VE GOT SOME IDEAS FOR FREENET FUNDING.  A PERCENTAGE OF CABLEVISION
    COMPANY BUDGETS IS ALLOCATED FOR COMMUNITY TV CHANNELS.  COULDN'T WE GO
    AFTER THE CRTC TO DO THE SAME THING FOR FREENET?  TRAINING & NETWORK
    LITERACY FUNDING WOULD ALSO BENEFIT THE CABLE & TELEPHONE COMPANIES.

(3) "DIVERSITY" IS NOW A CODE WORD IN THE UNITED STATES FOR RELEASING GOV'T
    INFORMATION TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR FOR VALUE-ADDED RE-SELLING.  SO WHEN
    WE THINK WE HAVE AGREEMENT ON LANGUAGE & TERMS, LOOK DEEPER.  FOR
    INSTANCE, RECENTLY A MAC-BLO (MacMillan Bloedel -- a Canadian forest
    corporation) EXECUTIVE SAID HE WAS AN "ENVIRONMENTALIST".

We had another quick coffee break with everyone buzzing away and then we
returned for the second session of the day.

           "WHAT'S FREE ABOUT FREENET?" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

"Nothing is free.  Who will pay for it and how?  Is it naive to create a
free service in 1993?  How will non-profit organizations pay for the
creation of the information that they want to provide for free?  What is
the relationship between commercial bulletin boards and FreeNet?  How can
we pay for the creation of information that is not currently available?
Should FreeNet be made easily available to professional associations to
conduct their work?  Should FreeNet provide commercial news services as
part of its information?"

GIL EVANS, the Executive Director of Information Services Vancouver,
discussed FreeNet issues from his perspective as the non-profit publisher
of the "Red Book".

* FreeNets want to have access to databases to expand their audiences.  I
  expect that we'll see an electronic version of the "Red Book" in perhaps
  a year's time.

* The "Red Book" is an index of public information and referral services.
  We publish it for a fee which helps to cover our office's operational
  costs.  I'm concerned about funding limitations and we'll still need
  people to help folks navigate & give meaning to our information
  resources.

* Information referral services in Canada are concentrated in the wealthier
  provinces of BC, Alberta, and Ontario.  We are working on coordinating
  our efforts across the province, Canada, and the United States.
  "Information Referral -- Bringing People & Services Together".  We are
  also working on a standardized title to improve public awareness & use.

* 60% of our Vancouver clients are low income, and in some communities it's
  up to 90%.  These folks really need to know where to get help.

* Our database lists over 5000 public services throughout the province.

* Calgary provides a fully funded non-profit service, but here in Vancouver
  we have to generate our own funding to cover 28% of our $700,000 budget.
  Selling the "Red Book" produces 24% of our income.  Our operational costs
  include a 1-800 toll-free telephone number.

* We currently have a proposal to our Board of Directors to provide our
  database to FreeNets, as long as they agree to post a prominent message
  on the screen which says who/how to call for more information.  One
  FreeNet decided they would not agree to post this message, so they won't
  get our database.

* There is a paper available which states our position on providing info
  for the electronic super highway.  Basically, providers must be
  compensated for their information, if they need the funds.

STUART HERTZOG from "Energy Watch" was a last minute addition to the panel,
so he spent a minute or 2 explaining who he is.

* Over the past 5 years I've been a full time Public Environmental Advocate
  although we receive very little funding.  I've worked with SPEC (Society
  for Pollution & Environmental Control) and GreenPeace.  At Energy Watch,
  we research, educate, and promote environmental awareness through the
  media.

* I helped to establish the Vancouver FreeNet organizing team and am now
  establishing the Energy Watch electronic information system.

* There is currently a battle of competing world views through information
  creation & dissemination.

* Dangers of the FreeNet.  The use of FreeNet is free, but how do we
  acquire funding?  Through government, business, and individuals.  Let me
  give you an example of a FreeNet pitfall.  We want to set up the "Energy
  Board" electronic bulletin board service for the full BC Energy community
  to help coordinate our efforts and better define funding opportunities.
  This includes the BC Energy Coalition (whose roots go back to the big
  battle over the Peace River Site "C" dam) and the BC Energy Council
  (which includes provincial & municipal governments & power providers).
  BC Systems Corporation (the provincial crown corp responsible for the
  government computer network services) reviewed our proposal and said "Use
  the Victoria FreeNet".  But our community doesn't want to use FreeNet and
  this has been proven.  If non-profits can't build their own BBSes, we're
  all hosed.  FreeNet is a good general electronic information service, but
  the signal-to-noise ratio is way too high for our purposes.  So, FreeNets
  could become "black holes" where governments can just dump information
  and then walk away.  This is a minimalist solution for public access to
  information.

* We must pull together a broad coalition of public citizen activists that
  cooperate & respect diversity.  This group won't be based on traditional
  political party lines, but reflect the fundamental nature of democracy.
  Together we can succeed, divided we can be manipulated & hosed.

TRACEY REITER is the Founder & Director of Operations for MINDLINK!
Communications Inc., a commercial Internet enabled bulletin board service.
It sounds like an ideal service for small businesses and professional
organizations.

* MindLink was founded nine years ago, in 1986.  I found that without any
  face-to-face preconceptions (based on race, culture, religion, age, sex)
  we can communicate better over the Net.

* We provide a gateway to the Internet with an easy to use interface and
  excellent support.

* What are Internet services?  TelNet enables you to log on to different
  computer systems around the planet.  FTP, File Transfer Protocol, lets
  you send & receive computer files world-wide.  IRC, Interactive Response
  Chat, lets you type messages back and forth with your correspondents in
  "real time".  The Internet is growing by 14% per month (this is the most
  conservative estimate I've been able to find), and it's easy, quick,
  cheap, & global.

* There are more than 400 free & commercial Bulletin Board Services (BBSes)
  in BC.  We maintain a list, which I'm happy to share with you.

* The "CIA World Fact Book" is available on-line for free & Queen Elizabeth
  now has an Internet e-mail address.

* Have you heard the Internet joke about Hilary Clinton (the wife of the US
  president)?  Bill Clinton's e-mail address is "president@whitehouse".
  But, Hilary's is "root@whitehouse" -- the highest level of Unix (computer
  operating system) access.  (She gets a pretty big laugh.)

* Electronic information navigation tools must be as easy to use & learn
  and as consistent as possible.  A good human interface is one of our
  guiding principles, and it is continually improved via end-user input.

* Knowing how to locate the information you want, is crucial to customer
  satisfaction.  We find that more than 80% require help in the first 3
  weeks for telecommunications configuration (i.e. modem setup) and
  locating information.  We provide a hardcopy guide, on-line help, and
  discussion groups on Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).  Our success
  depends directly on our quality of customer service.

* We are going nuts keeping up with the exponential growth of UseNet News
  Groups.  Comparing August 1992 to August 1993, the number of monthly
  posted articles has increased from 242,000 to 406,000.  We strive to keep
  accurate lists, but we'll need additional staff to meet our client's
  needs.

* Providing value-added info access is the key to commercial success.

PHIL LYONS is the Executive Director for the National Academy of Older
Canadians and the Endorsement Coordinator for the Vancouver FreeNet.  Phil
is a very strong speaker and he gave a most frank & clear presentation.

* I'd like to elaborate on the Vancouver FreeNet's "official" position on
  commercial services and also give you my personal perspectives.

* I cut my teeth on Time Magazine.  I don't hate "commies", so I've learned
  to appreciate the motivations behind information sources.

* We're preparing older Canadians on how to access and use information
  technology.  We were looking at building our own National Seniors
  Network, but why bother when there's FreeNet (a network of networks)?

* The FreeNet title captures the concept, although this isn't the present
  reality.  There are big pressures on "free" from the likes of Stentor and
  Nintendo.  I feel the recent re-naming of the federal "Communications
  Canada" department to "Industry Canada" reflects that the agenda is being
  dictated by the corporate community.  FreeNet are the "mice" which will
  stand back & wait to inheret the swamp, while the corporate/government
  "dinosaurs" battle away.

* A key FreeNet principle is that we will neither pay nor charge for info.

* We have a task group working on establishing public terminals in
  community centres, banks, etc. for disenfranchised groups.

* We are assisting non-profit groups in getting "electronicized" and we're
  chasing governments for a piece of their communications budgets.

* The electronic "for-profits" will either become dinosaurs or provide
  specialized niche FreeNet services.

* Telephone delivers ubiquitous access and we need a dirt cheap graphical
  interface which can be used by everyone.

* The big issues are content and freedom of discussion & debate <-- which
  the mass media cannot (by definition) deliver.

* FreeNets challenge the belief that "economics rules".  It is a myth that
  government has no money.  It's B.S.!  They've got billions at their
  discretionary disposal.  FreeNet is both political and non-partisan,
  which is necessary to address the great democratic challenges before us.

WHAT'S FREE DISCUSSION

(1) (PRINCE GEORGE's LYNDA WILLIAMS AGAIN.)  I'M IMPRESSED.  WE'VE BEEN
    STRUGGLING WITH FREENET DEFINITIONAL & FUNDING PROBLEMS.  I HELPED TO
    PUT TOGETHER PRINCE GEORGE'S RED BOOK.  WE ALL HAVE TO FIND OUR NICHES
    AND ROLES TO PLAY, IDENTIFYING AREAS FOR NATURAL ALLIANCES & DIVISION
    OF DUTIES.  SO DON'T CONFUSE BBS & FREENET MARKETS.  FOR INSTANCE, I
    REFER ANYONE THAT WANTS COMMAND LINE TELNET SERVICES TO MINDLINK.

(2) (THE EDMONTON JOURNAL REPORTER AGAIN.)  "HOMO-ECONOMUS" IS A CONCEPT
    THAT DEFINES SOCIETY AS CONSISTING OF CONSUMERS, IT'S BEEN AROUND QUITE
    SOME TIME, AND FREENET BUYS INTO THIS CONCEPT.  IF YOU THINK FREENET
    MEANS "NO CHARGE", YOU'VE MISSED THE CRUCIAL POINT <-- FREENET SHOULD
    BE FREE FROM POWERFUL INFLUENCES.  CRAWLING TO GOVERNMENTS AND
    CORPORATIONS FOR FUNDING IS NOT FREEDOM.

    Stuart says, "No, you've got it backwards!  Currently we are faced with
    control from global corporate interests.  We want the freedom to have
    open discussions, which is NOT an economic argument.  As an
    environmentalist, I'm always presented with the limited 'economic'
    argument from the corporate/government 'authorities' (i.e. the current
    Clayoquot Sound controversy).  If we limit public discussion to this
    narrow economic view of the world, we will guarantee a 'dead planet'".

(3) WE ARE NOT "CRAWLING", WE ARE DEMANDING OUR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS!  FREENET
    IS NOT FOR COMMERCIAL USE!!

(4) I'M A SMALL PUBLISHER OF THE "PIONEER SPIRIT", FOCUSSING ON FREEDOM OF
    INFORMATION.  REGARDING "TRADEABLE INFORMATION", WE'VE ALREADY PAID FOR
    IT WITH OUR TAXES.  PAY ATTENTION TO PEOPLE'S LANGUAGE.  A "COMMERCIAL
    ENTERPRISE" CAN BE BASED ON PROFIT OR NON-PROFIT.  IS PROFIT REALLY
    NECESSARY?  PROFIT IS DIFFERENT FROM A "SURPLUS" WHICH CAN PAY STAFF,
    PROVIDE VALUE-ADDED SUPPORT, & IMPROVE SERVICE.  I AM OFFENDED BY
    TRACEY'S COMMENTS THAT PEOPLE CAN'T COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY BECAUSE OF
    RACE.  IT'S MAINLY DUE TO SOCIO-ECONOMIC FORCES.  HOW I MAKE A LIVING
    IS MUCH DIFFERENT FROM THIS EDMONTON JOURNALIST GUY WHO IS PAID BIG
    BUCKS TO BASICALLY CENSOR THE NEWS.  (Jacqueline, the moderator, asks
    that the speaker wrap it up, to give equal time for others.)  YEAH
    RIGHT!  YOU'RE JUST CUTTING ME OFF BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT I HAVE
    TO SAY!

    Tracey says that she's sorry for any offence and MindLink volunteers
    help to get non-profit organizations on-line.

    Jacqueline clarifies that she wasn't cutting the speaker off because
    she disagreed, but to keep the show on the road.

(5) IT'S NOT FREENET VERSUS MINDLINK.  WE'RE BOTH SMALL SCALE OPERATIONS.
    I INTEND TO BE BOTH A FREENET VOLUNTEER AND A MINDLINK SUBSCRIBER, TO
    GET THE BEST FROM BOTH WORLDS.

(6) I ALSO HAVE A COMMENT ON BEING "FREE" FROM GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE AND
    POWER INFLUENCES.  I'M WORKING ON "FREE" INSTEAD OF "GOVERNMENT"
    EDUCATION, BUT IT'S A HUGE BATTLE.

(7) HI!  I'M GARY SHEARMAN FROM THE VICTORIA FREENET, AND I'D JUST LIKE TO
    REITERATE THAT WE ALL SUPPORT EACH OTHER.

(8) I DISAGREE WITH STUART'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE BC SYSTEMS DECISION TO
    PROVIDE ENERGY INFORMATION/DISCUSSION VIA THE VICTORIA FREENET.  A PIPE
    COULD BE EASILY ESTABLISHED TO ENABLE ALL GOVERNMENT "DESKS" ACCESS TO
    THE FREENET.  THE SIGNAL-TO-NOISE PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED BY USING
    ELECTRONIC MAIL.

    Stuart says, "Our proposal was to link our BBS to both the Vancouver &
    Victoria FreeNets, but BC Systems just said no way.  Instead of
    providing direct access, they just want to bury it.  You under-estimate
    the importance of the signal-to-noise problem."

    Gary Shearman clarifies that it wasn't BC Systems, but the Ministry of
    Energy, Mines, & Petroleum Resources which made the decision.  Gary
    would prefer Stuart's approach, rather than loading it all on Victoria
    FreeNet's limited computer disk space.

                                 FREE LUNCH

With everyone itching to check out the "free lunch" provided by the
conference organizers, Brian Campbell grabbed the floor to throw in a few
closing comments on the morning's discussions and put in a big plug for the
Vancouver FreeNet.  Brian noted that Adam Smith coined the term "homo-
economus" back in the 1700s.  There are other perceptions of humanity.  The
American model, based on "evil government" can be transformed.  We will NOT
crawl!  The strength of the Vancouver FreeNet depends directly on the
number of folks who sign up.  Get your organization to endorse us and chip
in $100 to $300.  We hope for over half of our funding to come from
memberships.  We're also looking for donated computer equipment and
encouraging as much diversity of information providers as we possibly can.
The Vancouver FreeNet is expected to be up & running in the "first quarter"
of 1994 (I've learned to hedge my deadlines a bit).  We have an
inexpensive, nutritious lunch of sandwiches, juice, brownies, and Nanaimo
bars.  Enjoy and we'll re-convene at 1:00 PM!

It was a good free lunch and we all had a chance to mill around and chat
with each other some more.  I congratulated Phil Lyons on his excellent
presentation and we made jokes about the "Stentorsaurus".  Gladys We and I
shot the breeze for a while.  I first met Gladys in October, at the
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility annual meeting in Seattle.
I thanked her for a most excellent conference, wished her good luck with
her afternoon presentation, and promised to share my conference report.

                "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

Moderator Allison Haupt, the Coordinator of Children's & Young Adults'
Services for the North Vancouver District Public Library, gave a lively
introduction to this session.  She noted there were 4 basic censorship
levels: self, institutional, market, & government.  She also made a string
of jokes about "surfing the Internet" looking for sexual material about
"teledildonics" & peering into the "alt.sex.bestiality.hamsters" news
group.  Then she got down to business.  "Does free speech apply to
electronic networks?  Are there network ethics or appropriate policies that
should take precedence over free speech?  Do we allow racist, sexist,
homophobic jokes or materials on FreeNet?  What about pornography?  Should
we worry about children having access to material on the network?  Is there
a difference between being able to access material and having it shoved in
your face?  Who will monitor FreeNet?  Who will monitor the monitor?  Is it
possible to control what individuals have access to?"

JOHN WESTWOOD is the BC Civil Liberties Association Executive Director and
he began by clarifying the BCCLA position on freedom of information and
democracy.

* Democracy is based on the principle that sovereign citizens are society's
  collective rulers.  We must have access to the widest range of ideas,
  subject to the laws of elected governments.  We cannot let government
  control ideas and the public.  The cream may not always rise to the top,
  but ANY withdrawal from free speech cannot be allowed.  Democracy may not
  be perfect, but it's the best model for public governance that we've got.

* There are 3 basic restrictions to free speech: (1) Children in sexual
  situations; (2) Graphic depictions of violent acts & torture; and
  (3) Incitement to violence.

* There is a fine line between regulation and censorship of ideas.
  However, there are some guiding principles: (1) It is appropriate that
  children should have limited access; (2) People should not be subjected
  to messages that they don't want (i.e. a big billboard); and (3) People
  should be forewarned of potentially offensive content.

* Messages on networks that are public communications (not private) are
  subject to the same basic rules.  But Canada and BC have not yet endorsed
  these principles.  However, there are Criminal Code sections and you
  could be sued in Civil Court as well.

* Should sexual and hate material be deleted?  SysOps (System Operators)
  are not bound to post material which they may find offensive.  On the
  other hand, artists, galleries, and book stores have had a moral
  obligation to carry "avant garde" material which challenges society's
  boundaries.

* There should be special passwords for classified file areas, which would
  be acceptable by either SysOps or the State.

BEVERLEY BURKE is the SysOp for the Affinity Castle BBS and she provided
numerous perspectives about sexual material on the Net, that I had not
considered before.

* About 4 years ago, I was shell-shocked, trying to recover after leaving
  an abusive marriage.  I looked to adult BBSes for conversation and
  "erotica" to learn more about who I was.  Then I established my own adult
  BBS.

* We must clearly understand the difference between "erotica" and
  "pornography".  Gloria Steinem and Margaret Lawrence have defined
  "erotica" as not involving any aggression, force, or rape.  It is caring,
  loving, adult sexual intercourse.  Pornography lies about women & their
  sexuality.

* Anything showing explicit sexual acts is currently illegal.

* Consent is crucial.  I won't carry any Linda Lovelace material because
  her boyfriend asked her to pose and then sold the pictures world-wide
  without her knowledge.  I get a lot of really rotten files -- bondage,
  beastiality, incest -- which I will not post, or only provide restricted
  access.  I don't tolerate any shit.  So if someone gets abusive, I have
  no problem cutting them off and banning them from my system.

* Not all "adult" areas are sexual.  However, for various reasons, there
  may be limited access to minors.

* Erotica provides room for fantasies, safe sex, imagination, and satisfies
  a basic human need.  It is a good outlet in our stressful society, which
  can contribute to well-being, by allowing the unconscious to come out and
  play.

* Every area is moderated and people remain anonymous to minimize dangers.
  There are many cases of harassment, so it's important to know how to set
  boundaries.  "Flaming" (exchanging abusive messages) is not tolerated and
  I continually encourage anyone who is feeling threatened, to contact me
  directly.

* "Bev's Serenity Shop" was the first BBS in Vancouver's lower mainland to
  offer adult counselling.  Later on, I opened my adult BBS in the Fraser
  Valley, which grew rapidly, despite the large Fundamentalist Christian
  community.

* Our strict registration process ensures that no minors get access <-- 2
  pieces of picture ID, delivered by Canada Post.

* I have never been on a BBS where offensive material has been "shoved in
  my face".  We all have choices.  I recommend that FreeNets have an adult
  section, with appropriate controls.

FRANCES BULA is a Vancouver Sun reporter, who has had a fair amount of
experience reporting on BBS and Internet issues.

* One of the most troubling issues that I've run into is that those who
  profess to defend free speech on the net, are often the worst offenders.
  Let me give you an example to make my point.  I sent an electronic mail
  message to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) looking for info on
  pedophiles using the Internet.  I got over 70 nasty "flaming" responses
  to my 4 line request for information, condemning me and the mass media
  for giving the Net a bad name.

* In my article on the Internet, I strove to provide balance and show that
  the Internet reflects issues in greater society.  Folks on the Internet
  feel they have more control than in the mass media, and rightly so.

* There is an overwhelming male presence on the Internet, so it is not a
  perfect democratic instrument.

* I challenge the argument that the same freedom & privacy issues and rules
  apply, that it's just a different communications medium.  They are all
  different (telephone, TV, movies, etc.).

* I think you need a better BBS restricted access check than a photocopy of
  a driver's licence.  If a university decides not to carry "alt.sex"
  groups, it is no big infringement on freedom of expression, because you
  can easily log on elsewhere to get it.

* Be wary of free speech versus free speech acceptable to certain groups.
  We must take the complications caused by these new communication media
  into account.  There are no definitive answers or boundaries.

FREE SPEECH DISCUSSION

(1) HERE'S A SITUATION I'D LIKE BC CIVIL LIBERTIES TO COMMENT ON.  SINCE IT
    PROMOTES AN ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, SHOULD THE "MARIJUANA GROWERS HANDBOOK"
    BE AVAILABLE ON-LINE?

    I don't see why not.  If we are not able to read or discuss illegal
    activities, then we wouldn't even be able to read Agatha Christie
    murder mysteries.  Advocacy is the heart of the democratic process.

(2) I THINK THAT RESTRICTING INFORMATION ACCESS TO PEOPLE OVER 18 IS
    ARBITRARY & QUESTIONABLE.  KIDS ARE CURIOUS AND ACCESS TO SEXUAL INFO
    COULD SAVE THEIR LIVES.  REASONING IS A BASIC SOCIAL SKILL AND KIDS
    NEED ACCESS TO INFO TO FULLY DISCERN THEIR CHOICES.  THINK ABOUT WHERE
    KIDS GO TO FIND INFORMATION WHICH THEIR PARENTS FORBID THEM.  KIDS
    BEGIN EXPLORING THEIR SEXUALITY LONG BEFORE THEY'RE 18.

    The BCCLA agrees that age and information range restrictions are
    debatable.  The 18 years old barrier is based on our society's standard
    voting age.  Kids can probably handle a lot more info than we give them
    credit.

    Beverley says, "I have a 14 year old and I don't give him access to my
    BBS.  Yet kids can access information on bomb building, but not on
    human sexual fantasy".

    Frances notes, "Parents have a right on how they choose to bring up
    their kids.  I don't even want my son to have access to 'alt.romance'.
    And some things, you're only ready for when you're like 40!"  (She
    gets big laughs from the audience).

    THE REASON WHY I RAISED THIS QUESTION IS BECAUSE I WAS SHELTERED AS A
    CHILD, AND IT HAS TAKEN ME YEARS IN MY 20s TO FIGURE OUT MY OWN
    SEXUALITY.

(3) (PHIL LYONS SEZ) SEXUAL INFORMATION IS A HOT TOPIC OF DEBATE AMONG THE
    FREENET ORGANIZERS.  CENSORSHIP IS REACTIVE, NOT PROACTIVE.  WE PLAN TO
    PROVIDE THE MAXIMUM BREADTH OF INFORMATION, BASED ON THE 9 FREENET
    PRINCIPLES.  FREENET WILL RELY ON THE SELF-POLICING OF SEVERAL 10s OF
    1000s OF USERS, AND THE BOARD WILL RESPOND ACCORDINGLY.

    Frances says that it sounds like a good strategy to her, noting that
    the universities got into trouble with sexual UseNet news groups
    because they just reacted, instead of anticipating the issue and
    thinking it through.

(4) IF A SYSOP IS RESPONSIBLE FOR BBS CONTENT, SHOULDN'T PHONE COMPANIES BE
    RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTENT ON THE TELEPHONE LINES?

    Pick up the latest issue of "Internet World" at your local news stand.
    There's an excellent article on these censorship issues, by the EFF
   (Electronic Frontier Foundation).

(5) "BOARDWATCH" IS ALSO A GOOD MAGAZINE WHICH DISCUSSES THESE ISSUES.  I'D
    LIKE TO NOTE THAT MOST OF OUR DISCUSSION HAS BEEN ABOUT SEX, BUT THERE
    ARE ALSO REALLY BIG ISSUES ABOUT COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE COMING UP.

(6) FREENET CURRENTLY HAS NO POLICY AND INFORMATION IS NOT BEING CHECKED
    FOR QUESTIONABLE CONTENT BEFORE IT'S POSTED OR PASSED ON TO OTHER NETS.

    The BCCLA dude notes that the law is quite hazy on the requirements for
    filtering "unlawful" (dehumanizing, degrading, or hate speech) info.
    Basically, it is up to the judgement of the Attorney General to define
    what is unacceptable on a case by case basis.

        "EQUAL ACCESS TO ELECTRONIC RESOURCES" -- PANEL DISCUSSION

We had time for one last coffee break before the final panel discussion of
the conference.  There was still a tremendous amount of animated
conversation, although our numbers were rapidly dwindling, because people
had to travel home or were just plain burned out from the weekend's
communications cornucopia.

Margaret Coates, the Executive Director of Eastside Family Place and Chair
of the Vancouver FreeNet Task Force on Equal Access, succinctly introduced
this crucial session.  "Only 20-25% of the population own microcomputers.
A far smaller percentage have modems.  An even smaller percentage have the
skills to create and distribute information on the network.  Does this
matter?  Do we care if an information rich and information poor society is
created?  There are rich and poor in the real world.  Why should it be any
different for information technology?  What ways can we equalize access if
it is important?  Do the poor, minority groups, small political and
community organizations have a right to access electronic technology and to
create and distribute their information?"

GUY THOMAS is the Library Coordinator for the Native Education Centre and
the Vancouver FreeNet Community Content Committee Chair.  He began by
quoting Douglas Cardinal's comments on the information/communication
revolution and the potential for harmony.  Gadzooks Guy was eloquent!

* Technology is changing daily, but the timing is good for discussion about
  the implications of public electronic communications design & production.

* We can compare this new computerized information revolution with the
  development of Canada's electric power grids.  For at least half of the
  First Nations, we've only been "electrified" in the last generation,
  while the majority of Canadians have had access to electricity for about
  6 generations.

* FreeNets are often justified by using the Public Library analogy.  But
  the primary language of libraries is English and the information content
  is predominantly based on the European Tradition.  Also library services
  are limited to specific taxation areas and some rural libraries deny
  access to nearby First Nations communities.

* Information is the raw sense data from our experiences, whereas Knowledge
  is based on our abilities to effectively apply information.  But the
  definition of "knowledge" varies with different cultures.

* A central instruction of Native cultures is "quietness" <-- preparing
  carefully & thoughtfully.  Does this behaviour sound like people you know
  on-line?  (He gets a big laugh from the audience.)

* The Empiricist/Positivist Tradition says knowledge can be theological,
  metaphysical, and physical.  Empirical Truths & the Scientific Method
  are based on the physical perspective, while the First Nations world
  view is more metaphysical.

* Information systems designers face a big challenge to effectively
  incorporate all perspectives of knowledge.  How can we translate
  knowledge between cultures?  It requires equitable participation.

* Looking back on Joseph Weisenbaum's comments on the promises of radio
  and TV for excellence, we see how it pales with our current reality,
  where the occasional gem of wisdom is lost in a flood of banal and
  insipid noise.

GLADYS WE is an SFU Communication Grad Student and the Vancouver FreeNet
Member-At-Large.  She gave a superb presentation on gender issues.

* In 1974, the Vancouver Status of Women report on newspapers concluded
  that "freedom of the press belongs to those who own one".  Today,
  FreeNets provide a free electronic printing press.

* System and interface design are crucial.  For instance, where would you
  put information on "abortion"?  Under "family", "health", "women", or
  all 3 information categories?

* Most women are still in the "pink collar ghetto" at work, limited to word
  processing, while many men are being taught how to access the Internet.

* Men have more disposable income than women.  So it's tough for, say a
  single mom, to buy a computer and/or find the time to use the Net, while
  dealing with housework and child care duties.  The statistics confirm
  that men own most of the computers and only 1/3 of Computer Science
  bachelor degrees are held by women.

* At SFU, when we posted a Women's Internet Discussion Group, we received
  many messages from men howling about "reverse discrimination".  Women
  comprise only about 10-15% of the Internet audience.  Unmoderated
  Feminist Internet News Groups receive 80% of their postings from men.
  When these News Groups are moderated, postings are equally 50/50 male and
  female.  ECHO, the East Coast Hang Out, has 57% female postings because
  women are encouraged through a free first year subscription.

* Women do experience sexual harassment on the Internet.  How many of you
  men get messages like "Gee you have a pretty name"?  This happens often
  enough to women that they tend to withdraw from active discussions.

* The IGC (Institute for Global Communications) non-profit network is a
  great source of information on gender and other equity issues.

* There are definite benefits from being able to access the Internet.  For
  instance, the recent news blackout on a Vancouver court case could be
  circumvented by logging onto the Denver FreeNet from the Victoria
  FreeNet.  When a "flame war" broke out about the FreeNet video, I felt
  strong enough to speak up to a big man, even though I am much smaller.

* Judi Clark from Berkeley has established an Internet role playing game,
  where men can learn a little bit of what it is like to be a single mom,
  feminist activist, or a grandmother.

* The Internet was designed by primarily white, educated males, but FreeNet
  can help to expand the discourse.  There are about 15 million people on
  the Internet, but this only accounts for less than 0.001% of the world's
  population.  There are more phone lines in greater New York City than in
  all of India.  Internet access reflects current power structures.  Grass
  roots efforts like FreeNet can help to tackle these inequities.

THERESA ANDREWS manages the VIPER BBS and discussed FreeNet issues from the
perspective of people with visual impairments.

* I'm the SysOp for the VIPER BBS, which we started in 1988.  Today we have
  about 300 users and most of them are visually impaired.  We have plenty
  of shareware files, but very few graphics files.

* We have computers which have been modified to speak back text displayed
  on the screen.  We also have Braille display boxes which can read the
  screen one line at a time, which is good for finding capitalized letters
  and control characters.

* Highlighted menu bars are hard to find for most of us and garbage on the
  screen really slows us down.  We have to hear all those stars and dashes
  which sighted folks use to present a flashier interface.

* Often we don't have enough time to make selections before BBS systems
  will automatically disconnect us.  For systems that charge by connect
  time, we get less bang for the buck.  We would appreciate a reduced fee
  structure.

* It is better to have menus that are not too long and making menu
  selections by typing a letter, works best.

* We would like to have more access to newspaper articles, classified ads,
  and government information on-line and on computer disk.

* Recently, we've been feeling kind of at a loss because the technology is
  changing so fast and going "windows" & graphics.  We felt we were on a
  par with sighted computer users in the mid-1980s, but not any more.

EQUAL ACCESS DISCUSSION

(1) YOU CAN'T CONVINCE ME THAT WOMEN MAKE LESS MONEY THAN MEN.  I KNOW SO
    MANY WOMEN WHO ARE NOT DOWN IN YOUR PINK COLLAR GHETTO.  57% OF REAL
    ESTATE IN VANCOUVER IS BOUGHT BY WOMEN.

    (There are quite a few heckles from the audience.)  Gladys notes that
    even the Vancouver FreeNet Hardware/Software Committee consists of 25
    men and just 3 women.

(2) I'M A MEMBER OF THE DEEP COVE BBS AND RECENTLY I WAS INTERRUPTED BY A
    GUY WHO WANTED TO HAVE AN INTERACTIVE CHAT.  AFTERWARDS, I TALKED ABOUT
    IT WITH MY WIFE AND SHE SAID IT SURE SOUNDED LIKE A "PICK UP" TO HER.
    MY NAME IS "RANDY", WHICH CAN BE EITHER A MALE OR FEMALE NAME, AND ALL
    BBSes CAN LET YOU LOOK UP WHO IS CURRENTLY ON-LINE.  WHAT GLADYS SAYS
    IS TRUE.  MY WIFE HAS BEEN BOTHERED BY HARASSMENT AND BOORS USING AN
    "ELECTRONIC PERSONALITY".  I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH THE PREVIOUS DUDE.
    GENDER ISSUES ARE SERIOUS, CONFIRMED BY BOTH PERSONAL & STATISTICAL
    EXPERIENCE.

    Gladys notes that "Flaming is a real male trip.  Also, guys tell me
    that they get a lot more mail when they take on a female personna to
    play Multi-User Dungeons & Dragons (MUDDs)."

(3) THESE INEQUITIES ARE VERY REAL.  I HAVE HAD PERSONAL EXPERIENCE BEING
    EXCLUDED FROM OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROMOTIONS & SUFFERING HARASSMENT.

(4) PART OF MY JOB IS COMPILING WAGE STATISTICS AND THEY PROVE THAT WOMEN
    DO MAKE SUBSTANTIALLY LESS MONEY.  THIS EVEN HAPPENS IN A UNIONIZED
    SHOP, WHERE THE FEMALES ARE CASHIERS, WHILE THE MALES MAKE MORE AS
    GENERAL CLERKS.  THE COMPUTER INDUSTRY IS LARGELY NON-UNIONIZED, SO
    THERE'S A FAIR AMOUNT OF DISCRETION ON PAY SCALES -- BUT AGAIN, IT IS
    PRIMARILY MEN WHO HAVE THE DECISION-MAKING POWER.

(5) MY NAME'S PEG MERCER AND I'M A VISUALLY IMPAIRED USER OF THE VIPER BBS.
    WE WOULD ALSO LIKE FLYERS FROM SAFEWAY & LONDON DRUGS TO BE ABLE TO
    FIND OUT ABOUT SALES.  PERHAPS ADVERTISERS COULD FUND AN ON-LINE
    SERVICE?  BEING ABLE TO ACCESS NEWSPAPERS ELECTRONICALLY WOULD BE
    GREAT.  CD-ROM DICTIONARIES & ENCYCLOPEDIAS FOR THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED
    IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT GOAL.  WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR VOLUNTEERS AND YOU
    CAN FIND US IN THE PHONE BOOK UNDER THE "WESTERN ASSOCIATION FOR VISUAL
    IMPAIRMENT".

(6) I GOT INVOLVED WITH THE VICTORIA FREENET BECAUSE MY HUSBAND GARY WAS
    INVOLVED.  WHEN I ANSWERED A PROBLEM PHONE CALL AND TRIED TO REFER HER
    TO GARY, THE WOMAN SAID "NO.  I WANT TO TALK TO YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE A
    WOMAN AND I'M SURE WE CAN FIGURE IT OUT BETTER."  I'M A HOME ECONOMICS
    TEACHER AND IT'S TIME FOR YOU GUYS TO LEARN HOW TO MAKE THE COFFEE.

(7) I'M MARY FRANCES LAUGHTON FROM INDUSTRY CANADA.  THERE HAS BEEN A LOT
    OF GOVERNMENT BASHING AT THIS CONFERENCE, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS
    DESERVED.  WE ARE WORKING ON FIRST NATIONS FREENETS & LANGUAGE ISSUES,
    AND THE GLOBE & MAIL WILL BE TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY TWICE DAILY
    USING THE VERTICAL BLANKING INTERVAL (VBI) VIA THE TV NETWORK.

(8) I'M BILL ANDREWS FROM WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL LAW.  I'D LIKE TO THANK
    THERESA FOR HER VALUABLE TIPS ON WHAT THE VISUALLY IMPAIRED NEED AND
    WE'D LIKE TO FIND SOME SHAREWARE TO SHARE OUR INFORMATION WITH YOU.

Margaret Coates took a couple of minutes to encourage folks to become
involved in the Vancouver FreeNet Task Force for Equal Access.  "We want to
be proactive in linking together those people having difficulties
connecting.  We are looking for donated equipment and volunteers.  We want
to put public terminals into neighbourhood houses, which can be accessed by
single mothers.  So far, the East End Community Centre is interested and
we're contacting multi-cultural groups."


                            SUMMARY & RESOLUTIONS

It was getting close to 5 PM and we were all feeling fairly wasted, but
Brian Campbell summoned up the energy to charge us into the final plenary
session of the conference.  He started off by thanking dozens of folks who
had helped to organize and run the conference.  Then he posed a series of
potential opportunities to continue our progress.

* For the past 3 years, we've sponsored BC Information Rights Week.  This
  year we are going national via the Canadian Library Association, on the
  week of April 11-17, 1994.  We'll also have a presence at the Canadian
  Journalists Association annual meeting.

* We must continue to raise public awareness & involvement.  For the most
  part, people don't even know they're not involved in decision making.

* Do we need a coalition of public interest organizations that is even
  bigger than FreeNets and Libraries?  Where do we move now to protect the
  public interest?

* We're looking forward to any verbal or written comments you may have on
  this conference or the draft CLA "Information Access Principles".  Do we
  have any comments from the floor?

(1) (MY BROTHER "BEAKS OFF".)  HI!  MY NAME'S BRIAN BION AND I'M A POLICY
    ADVISOR FOR THE UNITY HOUSING PROGRAM OF THE WEST COAST MENTAL HEALTH
    NETWORK.  ON OUR $70,000 ANNUAL BUDGET, WE CURRENTLY HAVE 8 HOUSES
    PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION FOR ABOUT 50 PEOPLE.  TODAY I'VE HEARD NUMEROUS
    "PROFESSIONALS" TALK ABOUT LOW INCOME & POVERTY ISSUES.  I FEEL KINDA
    OUT OF PLACE HERE.  I'M PRETTY SURE I'M THE ONLY "REAL" LOW INCOME
    PERSON AT THIS CONFERENCE.  THERE ARE LOTS OF COMPUTERS AT THE CARNEGIE
    CENTRE, TRAC, AND DERA.  HAVE YOU CONTACTED ANY OF THEM ABOUT HOOKING
    UP TO THE FREENET?

    Margaret Coates responds that they are looking for endorsements and
    trying to find out what these groups need to access & contribute
    information.  Poverty is one of the major groups they want to address.

    Brian Campbell says mailouts were sent to 250 local community groups.

(2) I THINK WE MUST ESTABLISH THE BROADEST POSSIBLE COALITION OF PUBLIC
    INTERESTS TO REALIZE THE TRUE POTENTIAL OF FREENET SERVICES.

(3) (GARY SHEARMAN) THERE ARE SOME GOOD WORKING MODELS OF PUBLIC COMPUTER
    NETWORK SERVICES THAT HAVE BEEN USED BY & BENEFITTED THE POOR.  FOR
    INSTANCE, THERE'S SANTA MONICA'S "PEN" WHICH MOBILIZED THE HOMELESS &
    OUR VICTORIA FREENET PUBLIC TERMINALS ARE BEING USED BY HOMELESS FOLKS.

(4) THANKS FOR THE GREAT CONFERENCE.  WE NEED A BROAD COALITION TO ADDRESS
    THESE HIGH SPEED CORPORATE/GOVERNMENT NETWORK PLANS.  WE MUST APPROACH
    THE ISSUES WITH REALLY OPEN MINDS.  ONE COMMON THEME MIGHT BE "PUBLIC
    BANDWIDTH" -- THE NOTION THAT THERE SHOULD BE FREE ELECTRONIC SPACE.
    WE MUST FIGHT TO GET TO THE DECISION-MAKING TABLE & SCORE THAT "SLICE
    OF PUBLIC BANDWIDTH", AND I THINK WE CAN GET IT!  WE MUST ENCOURAGE
    OPEN COMMUNICATION & PLAY, TO ENCOURAGE INNOVATION FOR NOT JUST
    "INFRASTRUCTURES" BUT ALSO "SUPERSTRUCTURES"!!


                              CONCLUSIONS

There were only about 50 hard core public information junkies left in the
auditorium.  We all wandered around, shaking hands, introducing ourselves
to each other, swapping business cards, commenting on the immense success
of the conference, and hatching plans to continue moving ahead for the
public good.

I learned that on Saturday night, the Prince George, Vancouver, Victoria, &
Whistler FreeNet activists got together over dinner and established the BC
FreeNet Association to improve coordination of efforts province-wide.

My brother had good chats with Margaret Coates, Brian Campbell, and Gary
Shearman about setting up a Mental Health section on the Vancouver FreeNet.
After many "good-byes" and "good lucks", my brother & I strolled out into
the cold windy streets, caught a bus back to his East End suite, and spent
a coupla hours sketching out the FreeNet Mental Health Business Case.

Then it was time to charge off with my brother-in-law Paul, to pick up and
hug my dearly missed, wonderful wife Cris (a bright, brave "she-wolf" of a
woman).  She had miraculously managed to fly home, through the American
Airlines strike, after making a presentation at the American Anthropology
Association in Washington DC.  Shortly after her arrival, the Lower
Mainland plunged into blizzard conditions.  Whew!  What a wild weekend!


------------------------------ Sunday ends --------------------------------



                             CANADIAN UPDATE

So what has happened in the 3 weeks since that historic conference?  Quite
a lot.  My brother has managed to score a donated 286 PC & modem.  He's
logged on to quite a few local BBSes, but he's going nuts trying to secure
Internet access.  The FreeNet Mental Health Business Case continues to
evolve, as alliances are made and funding opportunities chased.

The following 3 excellent documents are available from me or the contacts
noted below.

On November 25th, the Ottawa FreeNet folks submitted a well crafted
"Comment", on behalf of all Canadians involved in FreeNet development &
support, to the CRTC 92-78 Hearing on "Review of Regulatory Framework".
Thousands of copies of the document have been shared electronically over
the Internet.  (Last week, the CRTC approved the telephone companies'
request to introduce charges for local business calls.)
CONTACT: [e-mail] (Jay Weston).

On December 6th, Sam Sternberg (we worked together last spring helping to
establish the Toronto FreeNet organizing team) began a weekly Internet
electronic newsletter with tons of great analyses and additional
information sources about "Networks & Community".
CONTACT: [e-mail] (Sam Sternberg).

On December 7th, the Ontario Library Association used the Internet to
publish a draft discussion paper on establishing "The Council for Public
Information".  It is a Canada-wide coalition to promote equitable
electronic public discourse services.  They intend to actively lobby the
CRTC and attempt to acquire public slices of the CANARIE ($60 million) and
Ontario Network Infrastructure Program ($100 million) budgets.  Their
inaugural meeting will take place in Toronto on January 19th/94.
CONTACT: [e-mail] (Stan Skrzeszewski).


                          ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS

Stentor claims that there is not enough time for open public discussion to
reach concensus on how to best implement Canada's electronic super highway
services.  However, the corporate/government world has an abysmal track
record on public computer network services -- i.e. "Telidon" and "Alex" --
because they have focussed too much on charging for access to information.

By contrast, through the volunteer efforts of a growing number of concerned
Internet-enabled Canadian citizens, we are rapidly reaching the critical
mass required to successfully implement the fundamental policies and
services for equitable electronic public discourse, nation-wide.  Here are
some suggestions on how we can continue to move ahead at the provincial,
federal, and global levels.

BRITISH COLUMBIA has the best provincial government computer network system
in the country, largely due to BC SYSTEMS -- the crown corporation which
has been coordinating the development of these services since 1977.  About
2 years ago, the high speed fiber optic Metropolitan Area Network (MAN) was
established to link together government offices in Victoria.  This summer,
BC Systems began rolling out their high speed province-wide Integrated
Backbone Network (IBN), capable of supporting voice, data, and video
transmissions.  Stentor's "Vision" is "reality" in BC today.  In
January/94, the BC FreeNet and Library Associations could submit a proposal
and make a presentation to the BC Systems Corporation Board of Directors,
requesting a public slice of government bandwidth for FreeNets & the
Depository Library Program.

CANADA is a telecommunications world leader.  In addition, we are more open
to the concept of a "public information utility" service, than our friends
in the United States.  We can take a page from Stentor's "Vision" and
expand upon on it with a MULTIMEDIA PUBLICITY CAMPAIGN.  In January/94, our
continually broadening coalition of concerned citizens could distribute an
electronic & hardcopy press release to all provincial & federal members of
Parliament and all major newspaper, magazine, and television networks,
clearly stating the issues, policies, and action required.  The press
release can be followed up with a series of public events to directly
engage Canadian citizens in the process.  As Commissioner Flaherty wisely
noted, "once people are aware of their information rights, no government
can take them away".

GLOBAL corporate market forces could seriously threaten the development of
free public electronic discourse services.  We must research and clearly
understand the potential impacts of NAFTA, GATT, and multimedia corporate
mergers.  A good first step would be to establish an information sharing
agreement between the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
(CPSR, United States public interest group) and the new Council for Public
Information (Canadian public interest coalition).

What do you think?  Rock on!


------------------------------ Report Ends --------------------------------


--
Clyde Bion Forrest
a.k.a. "The BirdDawg"
[e-mail]