ࡱ> JLI{ IbjbjiZiZ !" 0 0!#]l l l l  88 D  52l l  5555555$79D5 " 5! l l =l ! ! ! @l 8 3  l l l l 5! ! I0L  3 ` @$ ! 3, September 20, 2000 The Honorable Janet Reno Attorney General of the United States United States Department of Justice 14th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Dear Attorney General Reno: As an organization of businesses active in the information technology ("IT") area, we are writing to let you know of our deep concerns about the draft Cyber-Crime treaty that has been published for comment by the Council of Europe ("CoE"). The United States ("U.S.") IT industry already has significant reservations about an overly prescriptive tendency in the European approach to the Internet, which reflects a proclivity for comprehensive schemes to categorize, codify and systematically regulate the area, rather than emphasizing freedom for innovation and private initiative. To the extent that a highly regulatory scheme particularly a criminal scheme is applied to the inherently global Internet, many of the conditions that have allowed IT to flourish freely in the U.S. could be compromised. The U.S. IT industry has obvious interests in effective and well-considered means to prevent and deter cyber-crime. However, like many of our IT colleagues, we are not convinced that a persuasive case has been made that a sweeping treaty of the kind proposed by the CoE is necessary, or, if it is, that the CoE is the appropriate forum in which to negotiate it. Given the global nature of the Internet, and the role that U.S. enterprise plays in the IT industry, we question whether a regional organization to which U.S. does not belong is the appropriate forum in which to pursue such a project. As for the draft treaty circulated by the CoE, we doubt that the best answer to the most important international problems of cyber-crime is to create a broad new international body of substantive criminal law. Such substantive crimes would tend to be controversial or burdensome, and to unnecessarily duplicate or conflict with national laws. It would be far more constructive to focus on the most serious and relevant international problems in law enforcement especially problems of mutual legal assistance, law enforcement cooperation, and jurisdiction. A number of provisions of the CoE draft treaty are of deep concern to particular sectors of the IT community. These include provisions that could hamper legitimate security research and testing, require burdensome and controversial monitoring and recordkeeping of electronic traffic, or impose liability on Internet service providers (ISPs) for third-party actions. In response to its publication, a number of U.S. enterprises, organizations and individuals have criticized the draft CoE treaty. Specifically, we are concerned with Articles 2 through 6. Article 2 of the draft treaty would require the criminalization of access to ... any part of a computer system without right. This section could limit legitimate reverse engineering. Article 3 criminalizes "interception without right" and could potentially shut down traffic analysis and the ability to monitor networks. Articles 4 and 5 of the draft treaty would criminalize data and system interference. These sections might be used by spam producers to prevent networks from stopping or limiting unwanted data on a network. Article 6 would criminalize the possession, "production, sale, procurement for use, import, distribution or otherwise making available of a device, including a computer program, designed or adapted . . . [for committing any of the offenses in Articles 2-5.]" This section could limit the use of crucially needed computer security software. We believe any utility of including Articles 2-6 of the draft CoE treaty is outweighed by their likely counterproductive effects. It would be more constructive to dispense with Articles 2-6 and concentrate instead on measures that might more directly and effectively improve the enforcement of existing law. We recognize and appreciate the attention the U.S. government has given to the challenges of cyber-crime and the importance of close consultation between the U.S. government and the U.S. IT industry on these issues. We look to the U.S. government to champion the cause of freedom, innovation and security on the Internet in international fora, and we believe that close cooperation between industry and government is essential to further the American interest in a thriving IT industry and infrastructure. To this end, we intend to work with our colleagues in the U.S. IT sector to share views on the most constructive ways to address international aspects of cyber-crime. In the meantime, we wanted you to have some input from the perspective of the information technology industry. We look forward to further dialogue on this issue. Sincerely, Harris N. Miller President Cc: The Honorable Madeleine K. Albright The Honorable Norman Y. Mineta   (Continued ) PAGE 2  }!"$%67=>?@ADEI jCJU0J0mH0J0 j0J0U jU jUmHh3Y}Z [ $ dH$7$8$H$7$8$$3Y}Z [ \]Z[!DFHI1.\]Z[!#$&'56ABCDF&`#$$$1FGHI 0/ =!"#$%Dd%   c tAPN:\ACE\Graphics Files\Harris Miller.bmpb/Z E(_ufxDnn/Z E(_ufxPNG  IHDRGsRGBPLTE𠠤8:`IDATx^b8Dxap%WU>ykp/HLOMR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5LR9a 5L_6uMշFp*dcZ;)"k~VS_j;~޼7&x+qW)xzwO\# no,dȭMt8Lq v@} >in+U'pA"-A#PWC: `$2$p5 ȐԭK9z)F9-OGgP00_L(\{_jE -/cNI@ -0:]Y*06b,3zY)P0ߊC3xQR X>fO( `061OւnzQp n`pxx >;^g [us#f\f/3chV :0O17afo'P/]2 /Eo){DUn U-ø4+;6lh D',SG@kNphKO]0 n * ױō7h>ϟ!NlUs 00EeXܷchV#9`\֛z @MvXVl-rY5<@oaAZ?V5`p83cmdaja-v:.On ǃpbqR0sKC1} `hZ7zrjDC<;gX / \ {&٬N^wx p/#<&܊9윖p*g8Y{|].fp >|Ϧv[:HXB,e.gl@`P7 &<,;nmmT<}x~t W ؔF[N)zm= XXCZl rPwھbr\m/[ԱN$`[ch;<^`%I_^Ets#'5rZàJ _WZ9 |w64+6uWw٤p?zlA3NU|ek6L\!ΆL,{3g`M0+.]7c_UMúa<}8Uέ("o6~;K6VزbU,X{p/7K}/?.^\7ނ+U,5GL 'O&(Mu0f r^YQzi)y܅MpKof{]`OygS Hyxܫoۗt*ߋ8! jx}|Ӊ7oGpsw]o2 M\4巬d=[=i kyqeӃ[*q"5\+`@glb,V7$䡵ʖkHJkN]\`~螏k^gc;4*@\=T^ U8ᙝOٳWɭa!nA<$N =, we0, ҷ^?>[g` JT rFb͞'["Eeh5M}`a/_XH3ܸ}U[#=;@{O2:<8l5!, z2> Heading 3 & F@& htH u>B> Heading 4 & F@& htH u>R> Heading 5 & F@& htH u4b4 Heading 6 & F@&4r4 Heading 7 & F@&44 Heading 8 & F@&4 4 Heading 9 & F@&<A@< Default Paragraph Font8&@8 Footnote ReferenceH*<O< Double Spaced htH u, @, Footer  !:": Footnote Text`,2, Header  !0/B0 List0^`0T0RT List Bullet, & F h0]^`0H6bH List Bullet 2 & F ]L1rL List Number$ & F h0^`0:: Normal Indent^66 Single Space htH uBB Double Indent]^6*@6 Endnote ReferenceH*8+8 Endnote Text`2 2 Index 1^`:: TOC 1 $ 0x^`0:: TOC 2 $ 0x^`0>> TOC 3! p$p0x^p`0:: TOC 4! $J@ 0x^@ `0:: TOC 5" $ 0x^`0:: TOC 6# $ 0x^`0:: TOC 7$ $J0x^`0:: TOC 8% $J0x^`0:: TOC 9& $ P0x^P`02 2 Index 2'^`2 2 Index 3(^`2 2 Index 4)^`22 Index 5*^`22 Index 6+^`22 Index 7,^`22 Index 8-^`22 Index 9.p^p`.!. Index Heading/&)@& Page Number,B@, Body Text1$a$II"   Io""""%I FI I%!8@(  Z  S   B S  ?It !6@DGJMIS Department+N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter.docMIS DepartmentNC:\WINDOWS\Application Data\Microsoft\Word\AutoRecovery save of CoE letter.asdMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoS.docMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoJ.docMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoJ.docMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoJ.docMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoJ.docMIS Department/N:\CIP Committee\Legislation\CoE letter-DoJ.docJlaszloC:\transfer\ITAA.DoJJlaszloC:\transfer\ITAADoJ.doc b?`xyD:*h4&^:s |L(E8$K4\)(n1'4*B*-D"9BE:AHx(IX@tZ5Px4Ia 2ts< 3z&8  ^`OJQJo(hh^h`. hh^h`OJQJo(0^`0o(.0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.hh^h`>*o(.hh^h`o(-0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.`^``56CJOJQJo(TO:`^``56CJOJQJo(FROM:`^``56CJOJQJo(RE:`^``CC:0^`0()0^`0()0^`0()0^`0()P0^P`0()0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.hh^h`o(-0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.hh^h`o(-0^`0>*CJOJQJo(.0^`0>*CJOJQJ. p0p^p`0CJOJQJ.@ 0@ ^@ `0. 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ() 0^`0CJOJQJ) 0^`0CJOJQJ)P0P^P`0OJQJ.0^`0>*.0^`0>*.p0p^p`0.@ 0@ ^@ `0.0^`0()0^`0()0^`0)0^`0)P0P^P`0.* 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z 3z-Dx(I1^:4\)tZ*B9BEtshD:E8$4IaAH|L ACTIVEzVTCASEzVTCommandPendingzVTCurMacroFlags$ĮzVTINITԮz VTypeCAPFlag$ܮzVTypeJoinDigitFlag$z VTypeLCFlag$zVTypeNoSpaceFlag$ zVTypeSpaceFlag$z VTypeUCFlag$,zCoE letter-DoJ.doc4NONENNNN1TRUEFALSEFALSETRUEFALSEFALSE@zI@GTimes New Roman5Symbol3& Arial;Wingdings?5 Courier New"phiIiILIF!"0d^ݍFIPryceJlaszloOh+'0x   ( 4 @ LX`hpIssPrycefrycrycNormalJlaszlo2asMicrosoft Word 8.0@@?~"@ݡ$@ݡ$՜.+,D՜.+,@ hp  Steptoe & Johnson LLP !^1 I TitleD(RZ _PID_GUID _PID_HLINKSAN{FABFB128-8FE0-11D4-A425-0008C79A22C8}A*D(N:\ACE\Graphics Files\Harris Miller.bmp  !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345678:;<=>?@BCDEFGHKRoot Entry_L_x]1^L^[H8[HZH FI$ $MData 00] ]1Tableh^ ^]H9(^WordDocumentr `!"<@SummaryInformation O](F `(p `p `@^p `^X `9DocumentSummaryInformation84]Ȳ@ZH^ACompObj 0]jObjectPool/_,] ^ $ $  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q