University plans to help fight FCC ruling

The extension of a 1994 law controlling federal access to communication networks may result in expensive technology upgrades for colleges and, in the long run, higher tuition rates for students.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted on Aug. 5 to require colleges, libraries and other Internet providers to finance and implement expensive network renovations under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which did not previously apply to Internet service.

The American Council on Education plans to file an appeal challenging the decision and seeking a possible exemption for institutions of higher education, for which several University officials have announced their support.

"The University plans to support the ACE lawsuit based on the grounds that this mandate could potentially put many universities out of business," University spokesperson Cass Cliatt '96 said.

University officials have expressed their concern for the potential financial stress the law could bring.

"Since Princeton and other higher ed institutions already work cooperatively with law enforcement agencies on a case by case basis to provide access to records, it seems to me that requiring an entire network to be reengineered at a high cost to the institution for the few times such access might be needed by law enforcement would be excessive," University Vice President for Information Technology Betty Leydon said in an email.

The change in the 11-year-old law would force Internet providers, including universities, cities and Internet communications companies, to provide network access to law enforcement via wiretaps, according to The New York Times. Such an installation would require a significant overhaul of the University's IT services, OIT security officer Anthony Scaturro said.

"It's going to cost a fortune," Scaturro said, pointing not only to the required equipment upgrades, but also to the increased staff that would be necessary to handle the new system.

Though the University's financial standing is not endangered by the changes, Princeton could still feel the financial repercussions from the requirements.

"Although it is not yet clear exactly what would be required," Leydon said, "it appears that the costs to comply would be prohibitive."

Scaturro also warned that the law could become an obstacle to technical innovation at universities, since new technology would be subject to CALEA's restrictions.

Normally, when the Department of Justice undertakes electronic surveillance on a college campus, it cooperates with the school in question on each specific case. If the new changes are implemented, however, law enforcement agencies will have instant access to the communications networks after obtaining a court order.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Cliatt confirmed that the University has previously cooperated with law enforcement agencies conducting on-campus investigations, including the inquiries concerning charges brought by the Recording Industry Association of America.

The new regulations add controversy to the law, which has already drawn criticism on the grounds of violating civil liberties. Current objections, however, are not centered on the invasion of personal freedoms.

According to Al Gidari, a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm in Seattle, civil rights are "not the main focus or issue in front of the parties" because the capabilities are granted only after a court has deemed them legal.

In addition to the ACE, several other concerned institutions have raised objections to the policy changes. Opponents of the change echo the argument that the law would lead to high costs with small returns.

"Our objection to this is that it would impose a large cost on higher education for a very small gain," Mark Luker, vice president of Educause, said. "Every single campus would need to re-engineer their network just in case a lawful surveillance is required in the future, and there are very few cases of such surveillance."

Others argue that the FCC does not have the authority to change Congress' original interpretation of CALEA, which did not extend to cover the Internet.

"This is not a decision the FCC can make on its own," James Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, said.

Gidari, who represents Educause, also questioned the FCC's authority in the matter.

"The FCC has extended the law for political reasons to information services which Congress decided not to include when it passed the law in 1994," Gidari said. "They made this decision, I think, out of a false sense of patriotism ... That isn't their job."

Regardless of political authority, the new decision forces colleges into a sticky fiscal situation.

"This could cost higher education billions of dollars," Cliatt said. "There is a question on where the funds would come from."

The expenses incurred by colleges and universities could lead to increases in tuition. According to the law, schools must bear the financial burden of the technological upgrades, not the government. A front-page article in Sunday's New York Times cites a tuition increase of $450 at American schools as the most conservative estimate.

"Get ready to pony up more money for tuition at the end of the day, because it will raise significantly," Giradi said. "That's the crime."