Testimony of Dr. Albert Vezza, MIT and the World Wide Web Consortium April 12, 1996 14 AFTERNOON SESSION 15 THE CLERK: All rise. 16 JUDGE SLOVITER: Good afternoon. 17 JUDGE DALZELL: Good afternoon. 18 JUDGE SLOVITER: I hope you are virtually, if not 19 actually nourished. 20 MR. MORRIS: Good afternoon, your Honor, I'm John 21 Morris, counsel for the ALA plaintiffs and somewhat out of 22 turn, we are presenting Dr. Albert Vezza as our next witness, 23 he -- next and final witness in this portion of the 24 proceeding. 25 ALBERT VEZZA, Plaintiffs' Witness, Sworn. 145 1 THE CLERK: Please state and spell your name. 2 THE WITNESS: My name is Albert Vezza, V-E-Z-Z-A. 3 MR. MORRIS: Plaintiffs would at this time move that 4 Mr. Vezza's declaration, signed and submitted to the Court on 5 April 9th, be accepted as his direct testimony in this case. 6 MR. BARON: Your Honors, good afternoon. Jason R. 7 Baron for the Justice Department. We do not object to Mr. 8 Vezza's declaration being put into evidence, subject to the 9 caveat that I will be asking Mr. Vezza questions regarding 10 his technical expertise on PICs, as opposed to his general 11 familiarity with PICs, during the course of my 12 cross-examination and his declaration will be submitted 13 subject to his expertise as an expert on the areas that I 14 question him about. 15 JUDGE SLOVITER: Fine. Our rulings have been 16 consistent on this matter. 17 MR. MORRIS: He is now available for examination by 18 defendants and the Court. 19 CROSS-EXAMINATION 20 BY MR. BARON: 21 Q Good afternoon, Mr. Vezza. 22 A Good afternoon, Mr. Baron. 23 Q Would you please tell the Court what the W-3 Consortium 24 is? 25 A The W-3C or W-3 Consortium is a consortium of about 130- 146 1 135 companies worldwide that have joined the consortium and 2 the goal of the consortium is to further the protocols in the 3 standards -- the de facto standards, if you would. 4 JUDGE SLOVITER: Speak up, please. 5 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Yes. 6 THE WITNESS: The de facto standards of the 7 Worldwide WEB. 8 BY MR. BARON: 9 Q And your declaration indicates that you are chairman of 10 the Worldwide WEB Consortium? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q The consortium is comprised of a number of companies, 13 correct? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q And Microsoft is part of it? 16 A Microsoft is a member of the consortium. 17 Q Netscape? 18 A Netscape is a member of the consortium. 19 Q America On Line? 20 A America On Line is a member of the consortium. 21 Q CompuServe? 22 A CompuServe is a member of the consortium. 23 Q Prodigy? 24 A Prodigy is a member of the consortium. 25 Q Could you look at Exhibit 167 in the binder that I've 147 1 provided to you and I believe binders have been provided to 2 the Court, as well, of defendants' exhibits, starting at 167. 3 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Did you say 167? 4 MR. BARON: Yes, it's a smaller black binder, your 5 Honors. 6 JUDGE SLOVITER: Here it is, the black. 7 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Sorry, I had it upside down. 8 Go ahead. 9 BY MR. BARON: 10 Q At the back of Exhibit 167, there's a listing titled 11 members of the W-3 Consortium, it's the last three pages of 12 the exhibit, do you see that listing? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And you testified at your deposition last Friday that 15 this was a "pretty good list in terms of accuracy", correct? 16 A I said that it was, as of that date it was a pretty good 17 list. We try and keep it up to date. I can't tell you today 18 whether this list is accurate or not. 19 Q Okay. Now, you would agree, would you not, that there 20 are benefits to companies in joining the consortium, correct? 21 A There is one benefit. 22 Q And what is that? 23 A You get to sit at the table and argue about what and how 24 the Worldwide WEB standards should evolve. But in point of 148 1 fact, we give everything away to non-members also. 2 Q In fact, at your deposition last Friday, you said that 3 the benefit was and I quote, that's Page 18, Line 22, I'll 4 just read it to you, Mr. Vezza, if it's okay. "You get to 5 sit at the table and discuss with all of the other members, 6 the evolution of the protocols of the Worldwide WEB", 7 correct? 8 A That's correct. 9 Q There are conferences and advisory meetings and workshops 10 on the evolution of standards and protocols, correct? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q Some of the workshop topics have included security and 13 payment issues, correct? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q And PICs, correct? 16 A That's correct. 17 Q We'll get to PICs in a few minutes. You've had a number 18 of payment workshops, including one in which VISA, MasterCard 19 and Microsoft attended to discuss various ideas on payment 20 mechanisms for credit cards, correct? 21 A That's correct. 22 Q In fact, on that specific topic, you told me at your 23 deposition, that there are anticipated other ways of making 24 payment on the net, including CyberCash, DigitCash and debit 25 cards, correct? 149 1 A There will likely be such ways of making payment on the 2 WEB. 3 Q And work on protocols to enable those to occur is 4 ongoing, correct? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q And the W-3 Consortium has frequently taken the lead 7 and/or has made recommendations for the way certain protocols 8 have evolved on the WEB, correct? 9 A Sometimes we lead, sometimes we follow. 10 Q And sometimes you make recommendations? 11 A And sometimes we make recommendations, that is correct. 12 Q The W-3 Consortium is currently working on furtherance of 13 HTTP, the HyperText Transport Protocol, correct? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q And W-3C is working on HTML, specifically how to put in 16 mathematical formulas into HTML documents, correct? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q And as I indicated before, W-3C has taken the lead on 19 PICs, correct? 20 A That is correct. 21 Q Just as a preliminary matter, you agree, Mr. Vezza, with 22 the proposition that standards are at the heart of the 23 Internet, correct? 24 A Yes, they -- without standards we wouldn't have any 25 operability. 150 1 Q With respect to the Internet, if you don't have 2 predictability, if you don't have a standard, then everything 3 fragments, correct? 4 A That is correct. 5 Q And as a general statement subject to exceptions, you 6 would agree that for the Internet, you have to have a 7 protocol that suppliers and vendors, platforms and 8 communication providers adhere to, so that there can be 9 intercommunication on the Internet -- 10 A Yes. 11 Q -- correct? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q It's also true, is it not, that the U.S. Government was 14 heavily involved in the creation of the Internet, correct? 15 A Well, let's back up a minute. I'm not sure that that's 16 -- they were involved, but all the people involved were 17 technical people. The fact of the matter is the Government 18 funded lots of the work, early work on the ARPA net. But it 19 was the technical people in the university community and in 20 the laboratories that did all the work of ironing out all the 21 standards, okay. The Government supplied the money, it did 22 not mandate, do it this way. 23 Q You're familiar with the Advanced Research Project 24 Agency? 25 A I am very familiar with the Advanced Research Project 151 1 Agency. 2 Q And the acronym for that is ARPA? 3 A That's correct. 4 Q And ARPA funded the development of the ARPA net through 5 the 70s and 80s, correct? 6 A That is correct. 7 Q And the U.S. Government has funded the IETF, correct? 8 A They have provided some funding to that, I believe, yes. 9 Q And the U.S. Government has funded the creation of the 10 Internet Society, correct? 11 A That is correct, although lots of funding for the 12 Internet Society now comes from private sources. 13 Q And the U.S. Government through the National Science 14 Foundation, NASA and DOD continues to fund lots of work 15 today, correct, on the Internet? 16 A It funds work associated with the Internet. 17 Q Indeed, the U.S. Government also supplied seed money to 18 the W-3 Consortium itself, correct? 19 A That is correct. 20 Q ARPA gave 1.5 million for research to M.I.T., of which 50 21 to $100,000 went to the consortium, correct? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q Now, your role at W-3C is that of chairman, right? 24 A Yes. 25 Q And what are your duties? 152 1 A My duties basically are to make sure that we behave in 2 the manner that doesn't get us into trouble with our members. 3 Okay. It's very easy to do that. We are -- we -- develop 4 pre-competitive standards software and we try and remain 5 neutral to the industrial community at large. And doing that 6 requires some sophistication, both technically and 7 managerially and executive-wise. And that's my role. 8 Q You said at your deposition that your responsibilities 9 would be for what "most people would call marketing", that 10 is, your responsible for going out and explaining to people 11 what W-3C does, correct? 12 A That's one of the responsibilities, yes. 13 Q You have a technical staff at W-3C that works on PICs, 14 right? 15 A Yes, I do. Not only at W-3C, but at other companies, 16 also, have contributed heavily to PICs. 17 Q And Timothy Burners Lee (ph) runs the team that does all 18 the technical work, correct? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q You don't consider yourself one of the technical experts 21 on the minute details of PICs, correct? 22 A That is true. 23 Q And you don't purport to having designed any of the exact 24 structures, of labels or exact structures of the syntax for 25 servers that's used on PICs, correct? 153 1 A That is correct. 2 Q And you don't claim that you could -- you could design 3 these structures, correct? 4 A I don't claim that I -- I have better staff that can do 5 it better than I. I use them to do that. 6 Q In fact, you haven't designed any software related to 7 PICs, that's not your function, correct? 8 A That is not my function. 9 Q And you haven't designed or constructed any software for 10 the purpose of labeling documents on the Worldwide WEB or the 11 Internet, apart from the PICs project, correct? 12 A Say that again, I'm sorry. 13 Q You haven't designed or constructed any software for the 14 purpose of labeling documents on the Worldwide WEB or the 15 Internet, apart from the PICs project? 16 A That is correct. 17 Q Out of all the documents that appear on the WEB site for 18 PICs, involving technical specifications, you have authored 19 only some "presentations", correct? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Would Defendants' Exhibit 174 be an example of one of 22 these presentations. If you turn to that? 23 A Let me clarify that. This presentation, the graphics was 24 done by someone at Netscape. I crafted most of the language 25 that went with it, with some help from the technical staff. 154 1 Q You had some input into this? 2 A Had a lot of input into it. 3 Q Now, you informed me at your deposition that the idea for 4 PICs came up at an early advisory committee meeting of the W- 5 3 Consortium around December 14, 1994, correct? 6 A That is correct. 7 Q And the idea was broached at that meeting about a rating 8 system like the movie rating system, correct? 9 A That is correct. 10 Q And thereafter, in July of 1995, there was an article 11 about pornography on the Internet and many of the W-3C 12 members started calling up and inquiring about the idea of 13 putting labels on content, correct? 14 A That's correct, but we were working on it before that, 15 because we had a different idea about labeling. I mean, the 16 PICs labeling scheme is a general scheme. 17 Q You told me that, "we've had it in the hopper as some 18 activity", that was the statement you made at the time, 19 correct? 20 A That's correct. 21 Q And there was a workshop in August, '95 where members of 22 the W-3C set out in earnest to work out on developing the PIC 23 standard platform for labeling content? 24 A Slight correction to that. There were members of the W- 25 3C team there, but there were also a number of 155 1 representatives from companies who were not members. And the 2 reason they were there was because we felt that they were a 3 necessary ingredient in this activity. That is, the content 4 -- many of the content providers. 5 Q And it's your testimony, Mr. Vezza, is it not, that the 6 issue of pornography on the Internet was and I quote, "one of 7 the major reasons for going forward", with the PICs project, 8 correct? 9 A It was one of the major reasons why our companies thought 10 we should go forward with it, not the reasons why we thought 11 we should go forward with it. 12 Q And you were going forward with it whether or not the 13 July, '95 article came out, correct? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q But the article had the effect of speeding up the time 16 frame, correct, for going forward? 17 A That's true. 18 Q The July article gave you a strong reason for 19 accelerating PICs development, correct? 20 A It gave us a strong reason for -- it gave the companies a 21 strong reason for asking us to accelerate. 22 Q Given the article, W-3C member companies that it would be 23 a good idea for the industry to come together with a labeling 24 scheme, correct? 25 A I would say that's a fair statement. 156 1 Q I'd like to turn to Page 56 of your deposition, which 2 I've given you. Let me read a statement from your deposition 3 about what PICs is and ask you whether you agree with it. 4 It's Page 56, Line 6. I will read the text in the six lines. 5 "PICs is a set of protocols which" -- this is your testimony. 6 "PICs is a set of protocols which allow a label -- a service 7 to describe its labeling system -- that's one aspect of it -- 8 to a client or to the recipient of a communication. It is a 9 method by which, if all of the vendors adhere to the PIC 10 standard, then all of the browsers that they develop will be 11 able to understand a labeling system or rating system, if you 12 will." Was that your testimony? 13 A It goes on further, but I believe that that's the intent 14 of it. 15 Q But that statement is accurate? 16 A Mm-hmm. 17 Q And if you turn to Page 58, Line 9, you were talking 18 about the mission of PICs in your deposition and let me quote 19 a statement and see if you agree with it. You said, "If 20 you're going to label something and you want a piece of 21 software to take action on that label, the software has to 22 understand what the label means. And that's the mission of 23 PICs. Is it to allow the software at either a proxy server, 24 an on line server, Internet access provider or the actual 25 home computer to understand the label and take the actions 157 1 whether or not to allow the content to be viewed by the 2 viewer or to block it." Do you agree with that statement? 3 A Yes, but let me read the first part of it. 4 Q All right. 5 A I think that the sentence before it begins -- is also 6 important -- a couple sentences. I used the term browser 7 understanding and I used it in generic form. By that, I mean 8 not only the browser, but all the software beneath it that 9 accesses the Internet. 10 Q And why is that important? 11 A Well, because the -- the blocking may occur either in the 12 browser itself or in some software underneath the browser 13 that's the actual access port to the Internet. 14 Q If you could turn to Exhibit 174, this is the 15 presentation I referred to earlier. It is not my intention 16 to have you walk through the presentation this afternoon, Mr. 17 Vezza, I just have a couple of questions about it. If you 18 would turn to the page that says, ideally, at the top. 19 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Ideally? 20 MR. BARON: "Ideally, children use the Internet with 21 their parents." It's six pages in. 22 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: What exhibit are we on? 23 MR. BARON: 174. Six pages into the exhibit. 24 JUDGE DALZELL: Defendants' Exhibit 174. 25 JUDGE SLOVITER: Yes. I'm just commenting that we 158 1 didn't have this before. This is new to us, right, these 2 exhibits? 3 MR. BARON: That is correct, your Honor. 4 JUDGE DALZELL: Yes, we haven't referred to this 5 before? 6 MR. BARON: That is correct, your Honor. 7 JUDGE SLOVITER: We just got it? 8 MR. BARON: Yes. 9 JUDGE SLOVITER: Okay, so we haven't been through 10 it? 11 MR. BARON: That's right, but this is impeachment 12 exhibits for purpose of cross-examination. 13 JUDGE SLOVITER: I understand that. It's just that 14 -- 15 MR. BARON: We do intend to submit this particular 16 exhibit with other exhibits in our case. 17 JUDGE SLOVITER: I'm not questioning the exhibit, 18 I'm just saying that I don't know about my colleagues, but 19 we're looking at it fresh and therefore, don't have -- I 20 don't have anything intelligent to ask or question, but that 21 may not matter. It may not be even if I had it. 22 MR. BARON: Well, if the Court desired at the end of 23 the question, we could certainly walk through the exhibit or 24 any other exhibits. 25 THE COURT: Well, that's why -- that's the only 159 1 reason I asked. But, go ahead, you conduct your examination. 2 MR. BARON: All right, okay. 3 BY MR. BARON: 4 Q Could you explain to the Court what this page, which says 5 "Ideally, children use the Internet with their parents" and 6 the next page were purporting to represent? 7 A Purports to represent a child sitting with a parent 8 making -- having access to the Internet. And the next page 9 says but parents may not always be present and children may 10 run into an inappropriate material. 11 Q You told me at your deposition that with respect to the 12 second page, we show -- well, with respect to these two 13 pages, we show a child using the Internet -- this is Page 89, 14 Line 7 of the deposition -- "We show a child using the 15 Internet with a parent supervising and that's an ideal 16 situation. Unfortunately, that ideal situation is not always 17 the case, very often a child is using the Internet without a 18 parent's supervision." Do you agree with that statement? 19 A Where is that? 20 Q You made it in your deposition at Page 89, Line 7. 21 A Line 7. Yes. 22 Q Could you turn to a couple of pages after this in Exhibit 23 174. There is a scenario, one -- 24 A Where? 25 Q It's three -- three pages after the last page we referred 160 1 to. 2 A Yes. 3 Q Could you tell the Court briefly what this scenario is 4 getting at? 5 A The scenario is getting at a parent using a system of 6 Netscape and create -- or Microsoft Explore and creating a 7 profile for the child, so that the child can only access 8 materials that the parent deemed is appropriate for the child 9 to see. 10 Q If you look at the next page, could you explain what the 11 box that's checked block unrated sites means in the context 12 of this page? 13 A In the context of this page, the parent has decided that 14 this ten year old child is not -- does not have the 15 sophistication or the maturity to handle material that is -- 16 might have some sexual connotation, but that has not been 17 rated yet and therefore, has checked block unrated sites, so 18 that the only material a child will be able to have access to 19 is that material which is specifically rated. 20 Q In a PICs -- 21 A According to the child's criteria. 22 Q -- in a PICs compatible format? 23 A In a PICs compatible format. 24 Q And that's one way PICs works. And PICs also works -- 25 that's correct, right? One way it block all -- 161 1 A That's one way -- 2 Q -- unrated sites? 3 A -- right. And another way would be not to check that and 4 if you look further on in this presentation for the 16 year 5 old child, the parent has chosen not to check block unrated 6 sites, because the parent has a feeling that the child is 7 mature enough to know the family's values and how to avoid 8 that material. 9 Q Okay, that's all I'm going to have with that exhibit. 10 Now, PICs allows a content provider to place a label on the 11 content of a document, correct? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q And it also allows a third party to rate content, 14 correct? 15 A A third party may rate content. He may give it to the 16 content provider or he may put it in a bureau. 17 Q When a content provider is rating his or her own content 18 on the Internet, that's referred to as self-rating, correct? 19 A That is correct. 20 Q Now, it's your view that where a PICs label is put in a 21 document is immaterial, correct? 22 A No, I went back and checked the specs after my deposition 23 and it appears in two places if it's put in the document. 24 It's either put in the HTTP header or it's put into MediTech, 25 you're right, Mr. Baron. 162 1 Q Let's look at Page 62 of your deposition, Line 7 and 2 through 16. And I understand that what you've stated just 3 now -- let me give you a chance to read -- 4 A Line? 5 Q -- that passage - from Line 7 to 16. Let me read it for 6 the Court. "Answer" -- well, a question, "Could you describe 7 the technical steps of where a label would be put?" "Answer: 8 Where a label is put is immaterial. All that has to happen 9 is that when a client reaches for a particular activity, a 10 particular URL and says, give me that content, that the label 11 arrive at the client before the content or that the -- that's 12 not even necessary, depending upon how the folks who build 13 browsers decide to do it. All that's required is that the 14 label arrive at the Browser and the Browser examined the 15 label and determined whether to show that URL -- the contents 16 of that URL." Now, aside from the tag or where it's put in 17 the header and that is the rest of that passage, correct? 18 A Well, the issue here is whether or not it's attached to 19 the document that's coming or whether there's a label bureau 20 that supplies the label by itself. In other words, you reach 21 for the document and you say, well, wait a minute, go off the 22 Label Bureau, get the labels for that document and bring him 23 back. And then get the document if the label is okay.' So, 24 that's what I was trying to drive at when I made those 25 comments. 163 1 Q Okay. Now, with respect to is there content creators in 2 the first way, the self-writing method. The method of 3 labeling may vary from place to place. For example, Company 4 A might automatically prompt you to label a page when you 5 start creating it and place the label somewhere, is that 6 correct, that's one methodology? 7 A Say that -- I'm sorry, I'm missing -- 8 Q Well, you -- you testified that there were different 9 methods of labeling for PICs compatible labels. And one 10 method, that is in your deposition, one would be where you 11 might automatically be prompted to label a page when you 12 start creating it and in a different methodology, a different 13 institution might require the labeling based on a set of HTML 14 creating tools, is that correct? 15 A Are we talking about -- I'm missing something here -- are 16 we talking about creating labels when you're creating a 17 document or are we talking about when labels come down to be 18 read by a browser or the client software, to be interpreted 19 as to whether or not to show that software? I don't 20 understand the question. 21 Q Why don't you look at Page 63, Lines 16 through 23 of 22 your deposition? Tell the Court what you were getting at 23 there? 24 A What I was getting at there, in this instance here, the 25 question was "How" -- let's look at the question. I -- the 164 1 way I understood the question was how would labels be 2 created? And what I responded to here is that it's up to the 3 people who create the software, who allow you to create 4 documents for the Worldwide WEB or the Internet, as to how 5 they will prompt you to create the label. 6 Q Okay. 7 A And that's all I'm saying. And it could happen, I mean - 8 - 9 Q In a variety of way? 10 A -- in a variety of ways. 11 Q Right. 12 A And that each of the designs would be fine. 13 Q Okay. PICs compatible self-labeling is not in widespread 14 use today, correct? 15 A That is correct. 16 Q In fact, you don't personally know of anyone who has 17 actually self-labeled their own site with PICs, as of today, 18 correct? 19 A That is correct. 20 Q How many different ratings systems are possible in PICs? 21 A Many rating systems are possible, but I don't think that 22 that will happen in the market place. 23 Q PICs doesn't rate sites on a single number or value, 24 correct? 25 A That is correct. In PICs, you are able to distinguish 165 1 between literature which might have some explicit content in 2 it or just pornography. In fact, PICs is general enough so 3 that you could use the Dewey Decimal System, you could use 4 the Library of Congress system. You can use any kind of 5 system you'd like to provide a label. And that's its 6 flexibility and its power. 7 Q There are innumerable numbers or values possible under 8 PICs, correct? 9 A That is correct. 10 Q The categories in PICs can be quite complex, correct? 11 A The categories in PICs are meant to differentiate 12 subtleties in all of the material that's on line. 13 Q Can you look at Defendants' Exhibit 175. It's a document 14 that has a title, Rating Services and Rating Systems and 15 their machine readable descriptions. 16 A Yes. 17 Q Do you recall my showing you this exhibit at your 18 deposition? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And you had seen earlier versions of this document, 21 correct? 22 A I have seen earlier versions of this document, that's 23 correct. 24 Q Can you turn to Appendices -- well, look at A, B and C, 25 but start with A? It's -- 166 1 JUDGE DALZELL: Appendix A to Exhibit 175? 2 MR. BARON: Yes, it's Page 7 of 12, at the lower 3 left-hand corner. 4 BY MR. BARON: 5 Q This is a hypothetical rating service called Good Clean 6 Fun, correct? 7 A That is correct. 8 Q It is presented to be in PICs compatible format, correct? 9 A That's correct. 10 Q And the document says this is, "one of the simplest 11 possible rating systems, using a single-category, minimum 12 recommended age, we present the machine description for a 13 fictional service that uses this rating system." Do you see 14 where it says that? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And that would be one of the simplest possible rating 17 systems, correct? 18 A It's a simple rating system, that's correct. 19 Q You told me at your deposition that with respect to 20 Appendix B, that you had a passing acquaintance with the RSAC 21 rating service? 22 A Yes, I've talked to the folks there about it. I talked 23 to our own staff about it. 24 Q Could you explain for the Court what -- how this rating 25 service works in terms of being in the PICs compatible 167 1 format? 2 A That the example here is in PICs compatible format, okay. 3 Now, I'm -- 4 Q The number of categories. 5 A -- do you want me to go through line by line? 6 Q No, but there are a number of categories here described 7 as values that you didn't put in PICs, right? 8 A Oh, sure. There's -- well, let's look down, there's a 9 lot of -- one of the labels is the amount of violence. 10 Q Well, why don't we go down to the bottom of the page 11 where there is nudity and sex? 12 A Okay. 13 Q And there are label descriptions in categories, none or 14 values 0, 1, 2, 3, correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q And 4 on the next page? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q And they're -- different standards apply to the labels? 19 A And the different standards apply. 20 Q Okay. 21 A None is zero, revealing attire is number one. Partial 22 nudity is number two. Frontal nudity is number three. 23 Provocative frontal nudity is number four. 24 Q And you told me that with respect to Appendix C, the same 25 self-writing system you weren't familiar with that one? 168 1 A I'm not as familiar with it, no, I'm not. 2 Q But looking at it, it does look like it's more detailed 3 than Appendix B and A, correct? In terms of the number of 4 values assigned to the labels? 5 A Yes, in terms of the number of values, that's true. 6 Q With respect to -- that's all I'm going to do with that 7 exhibit. With respect to all of these ratings, PICs will 8 allow a content rater or a third party rater to rate a whole 9 site, correct? 10 A That is correct. 11 Q Or individual pages within a site, correct. 12 Q Or files. 13 A Or files. 14 A You can ave -- 15 JUDGE SLOVITER: What was that word? 16 MR. BARON: Granularity. 17 MR. BARON: Maybe you can explain it to Judge 18 Sloviter. 19 JUDGE SLOVITER: Nobody else can -- everybody else 20 can stop listening. 21 MR. BARON: And to the rest of us? 22 THE WITNESS: We talk about granularity when we say 23 if you're going to rate a site or a generic label for the 24 whole site, then you should apply the label to that site, 25 which is the most conservative label for the whole site. If 169 1 you want to then go down deeper and label pieces of that 2 site, we say that's more granular labeling and you can label 3 a variety of pieces of that site. In fact, you can label all 4 -- every place where you can have an entry point you can 5 label. 6 JUDGE DALZELL: I mean, you could ultimately label 7 every single word, so says Dr. Olsen. 8 THE WITNESS: No, when we say label, what we mean is 9 label where you can get at it by a URL or some entry point. 10 MR. BARON: Only a select number of third party 11 rating systems -- 12 JUDGE SLOVITER: Judge Sloviter thanks you. 13 MR. BARON: Thank you, your Honor. 14 BY MR. BARON: 15 Q Only a select number of third party rating systems out 16 there -- there are only a select number at present, correct? 17 A Yes, there are, you know, half a dozen or thereabouts 18 that I'm aware of, there may be more. 19 Q That you're personally aware of? 20 A That I'm personally aware of. 21 Q And you don't know how many sites have been rated out on 22 the Internet, correct? 23 A I do not know at this time how many sites have been rated 24 on the Internet. 25 Q It isn't very realistic that third party rating systems 170 1 can rate all of the sites on the Internet, correct? 2 A Depends upon really the business model the third party 3 rating service is going to employ. Some rating services, I 4 anticipate, will employ people who will go out and do 5 ratings. And they will probably be interested in a certain 6 segment of the Internet which they will rate very carefully. 7 There will be other parties who will make contracts with 8 people and say, I will let you -- here is my criteria for 9 rating, rate yourself. And we'll sign a contract with you 10 and we'll do spot checks and if you -- if the -- if you break 11 my contract, I'll yank my rating from you. Or I may even 12 take you into court and sue you. There may be some penalties 13 associated with that. If you take that kind of a business 14 model, many sites can be rated. Those that -- by a third 15 party rating service. And there are many business models 16 that one could employ. And I don't know which ones are going 17 to flourish and which ones are going to be good. But 18 certainly, a lot of sites can be rated fairly rapidly under 19 certain business models. 20 Q At your deposition last Friday, I asked you a question, 21 "How realistic is the statement" -- this is at Page 128, Line 22 16 -- "How realistic is the statement that, for example, the 23 hypothetical rating service, Good Clean Fun, rates all the 24 material on the Internet, how realistic is that?" "Answer: 25 Not realistic." 171 1 A That's Good Clean Fun. That's a specific rating system. 2 We didn't talk anything about a business model. Somewhere in 3 this deposition I also pointed out to you that how many sites 4 could be rated would depend upon a business model that a 5 third party rating service would employ. 6 Q You agree with Mr. Bradner, who has previously testified 7 in this action, that the Internet is doubling every nine 8 months, correct? 9 A I believe I stated that it's possible, but that I 10 couldn't -- I couldn't verify it. 11 Q And that the Worldwide WEB is experiencing phenomenal 12 growth? 13 A That's correct. 14 Q The W-3 Consortium doesn't keep track of how many sites 15 are being rated by third parties, correct? 16 A At the current time, we do not. 17 Q I asked you at your deposition, if you have 22 million 18 URLs on the Internet covered by Alta Vista today and a rating 19 service has rated 5,000 sites and you turned the blocking 20 mechanism to the toggle where it's blocking all unrated 21 sites, then you have effectively shut down 99 percent of the 22 Internet, do you recall that question? 23 A I recall that question. 24 Q And you answered, "That's the user's choice though, 25 that's me as the user, my choice to do that for my children 172 1 or my choice to let them see it." 2 A That is correct. The parent can decide for the child 3 whether or not he wants to block unrated sites. The other 4 aspect of that is that many of the sites that children would 5 be interested in, would likely be rated very quickly. The 6 third aspect of it is there's lots of stuff out there that 7 children don't care about. I have tons of stuff on the WEB 8 site at my laboratory at M.I.T. that would be of zero 9 interest to children under the age of about 14 or 15. 10 Furthermore, I could go to any of the ratings services and 11 say, give me a label, this is what's on it. They'd probably 12 give me a label for the site and we'd be done with it. I 13 don't think it's a big problem. I mean, I think this is a 14 start-up problem. 15 Q And you understand -- 16 A It's not the -- it's a start up problem, it's not a 17 problem in the long run. 18 Q Well, you don't dispute the notion that if there are 19 5,000 sites rated today and they are 22 million URLs and 20 you're blocking all unrelated sites in that option, you're 21 blocking 99 percent of the Internet, correct? 22 A I don't dispute that. 23 Q Okay, let's talk about self-rating schemes. Put aside 24 PICs for the moment. You would agree that it could be 25 arranged to have a tag or a label put on a variety of 173 1 Internet applications, correct? 2 A Yes. 3 Q There's some generic tag that's possible for UseNet, 4 correct? 5 A PICs is one of those? 6 Q The same for UseNet postings? 7 A Yes. 8 A And a standard tag for browsers to pick up for documents 9 on the WEB could be created, correct? 10 A PICs is one of those tags. 11 Q And there are other tagging schemes that are possible? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q And the same for FTP, correct? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q Could be arranged? 16 A Yes. 17 Q And same for IRCs, correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Q In fact, if the attacking scheme was a simple four 20 character set consisting of a label or a tag. For the 21 Worldwide WEB, let's stay on that. The Microsofts and 22 NetScapes of the world could reconfigure their browsers to 23 pick up the four character tag in short order, correct? 24 A Not -- from my perspective, that's not a rational 25 solution, it gives you -- 174 1 Q I didn't ask that. 2 A Okay. 3 Q I asked whether they could, as a technical matter -- 4 A Was a technical matter. 5 Q -- was pick up the tag in short order. 6 A Yes. 7 Q And your answer is? 8 A Yes. 9 Q In some cases, it could be hours or days, correct. 10 A Well, I don't know. It would be depend upon where and 11 how they would have to modify their browser and making the 12 change is usually the simplest part. Testing it is usually - 13 - takes all the time. 14 Q I just have a few more questions, Mr. Vezza. If I didn't 15 know the address or the URL for a platform for Internet 16 contents selections home page, would you agree that one way 17 to search for the PICs home page would be to type in the word 18 PICs? 19 A That's one way of doing it. 20 Q And you could use any search engine to that? 21 A You could use a variety of search engines to do that. 22 Q You've used various search engines like Yahoo and Alta 23 Vista in the past, correct? 24 A I've used mainly Alta Vista, but I've used Yahoo,yes. 25 Q You also told me at your deposition you've used WEB 175 1 Crawler once or twice, correct? 2 A I did not. I am not familiar with it. 3 Q Well, you -- you -- 4 A Where is that? 5 Q At Page -- 6 A I said I know what a WEB Crawler is, I have not used that 7 particular -- 8 Q I think the -- it's Page 212, Line 14 -- Line 13, I 9 asked, "Question: You're familiar with WEB Crawler, though?" 10 Your answer: "Not particularly, no, I may have used it once 11 or twice, but I use hundreds of things." Do you see where I 12 said that? 13 A Where is that? 14 Q Page 212, Line 13, 14, 15. 15 A Line 12 says not that one. 16 Q Well, I -- 17 A Not the one I use, I use Alta Vista. 18 Q Line 13, "Question: You're familiar with WEB Crawler 19 though? 20 A I said not particularly, no. 21 Q No. And then, I may have used it once or twice, but I 22 use hundreds of things? 23 A Well, I may have. I honestly don't know whether I have 24 or not. 25 Q Would you turn to Exhibit 179? 176 1 A Yes. 2 Q Do you recall my showing you this exhibit at your 3 deposition? 4 A I sure do. 5 Q Do you see the Line 48 or where it's numbered 048 down -- 6 this -- my representation to the Court is that this was a 7 down loaded page, using WEB Crawler under a search-PICs. Do 8 you see where Platform for Internet Content selection is 9 listed? 10 A Yes, I do. 11 Q And there are a number of other listings on this page? 12 A There are a number of other listings on this page. 13 Q That's all I'll say on that. Last question, Mr. Vezza. 14 At that time I deposed you last Friday, you did not recognize 15 the name Donna Hoffman, correct? 16 A That is correct. 17 Q Or Scott Bradner, correct? 18 A That is correct. 19 Q You asked me, could you tell me who they are, correct? 20 A Yes. 21 MR. BARON: That's it, that's all my questions. 22 MR. MORRIS: Just a few questions, your Honor. 23 JUDGE SLOVITER: Thank you. 24 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 25 BY MR. MORRIS: 177 1 Q Mr. Vezza, on the question of your expertise, you're very 2 familiar with the PICs specification, is that correct? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And to use Mr. Baron's terms, there perhaps are some 5 minute details that you may not be familiar with, is that 6 correct? 7 A That is correct. 8 Q But, with the specification documents, both the labeling 9 specification documents and the rating service specification 10 document, you are very familiar with those? 11 A I'm -- I'm familiar with the -- very familiar with those. 12 I've been through them the last few days. 13 Q Let me go back. Mr. Bradner -- I mean, Mr. Baron asked 14 you about a four character string and you indicated that that 15 was not a rational approach. Was there something that you 16 had wanted to add? 17 A Yes, the problem with that is there is very little 18 granularity to be -- for someone to express the fact of what 19 this material is. I'll give you the example and which was 20 raised by the jurists here, that of showing something to do 21 with AIDS and an erect penis. You could, in fact, in PICs 22 say this is educational. Okay. This is educational, this is 23 what the educational activity is. And a parent may be able 24 to set up or would be able to set up a browser to discern 25 that, so that in fact, a 15 year old would be able to down 178 1 load that information because it would specifically say this 2 is educational. Or in the case of the National Geographic, 3 all of those things. I was struck by the fact that you kept 4 asking the previous witness, what would you tell your parent 5 -- what would you tell those people how to deal with it? 6 Well, I mean if we have to -- if everybody has to go to an 7 authority to try and get a decision about how to deal with 8 material they want to put on the Net, we're going to have a 9 lot of authorities making decisions like that. Why don't we 10 let other folks bring in a whole group of people that can 11 help make those decisions. And that's what the PICs labeling 12 system is about. It is to allow a lot of granularity and 13 allow people who know how to do that to actually create the 14 labels appropriately. 15 Q And the PICs specifications aren't limited to just 16 labeling sexually oriented material, is that correct? 17 A That's correct. The PICs specification are a general 18 labeling scheme. We looked at it and we said what we need is 19 something that will deal with the Dewey Decimal System, deal 20 with the Library of Congress. Or deal with any other kinds 21 of labeling schemes that we might think of in the future. 22 And that's what it's all about. It's going to be used for a 23 variety of reasons. Whether or not it's used for rating or 24 not, it's got a life of its own already. 25 Q And so, if you hypothesize that there might be a desire 179 1 to label content by its sexual -- sexual levels. And then 2 there might also be a desire to label content -- a different 3 content according to whether I dealt with racial issues or 4 Nazism or things like that, PICs would be able to label -- to 5 be used in all those situations. 6 A PICs would be able to be used in all those situations. 7 We have -- we have behind us the Internet community that the 8 industry that's putting software out there to use PICs, we 9 have evangelized this around the world. I just came back 10 from the Far East. Jim Miller just came back from Europe. 11 We;re talking to all of those folks, they're all interested 12 in the idea of labeling. They are all interested in using 13 this system. 14 It has another advantage in that a rating system 15 here in the United States could rate foreign sites according 16 to the U.S. values. And foreign sites could rate U.S. sites 17 according to their values. If you -- if you go to some 18 European countries, they think that our violence is 19 abhorrent. Okay, they just --they say how can you have so 20 much violence in your pictures and what not. So, I think a 21 value is local and that has to be taken into account and PICs 22 allows for that value to be local. Q Now, Mr. Baron asked 23 you a number of questions about the block unrated sites 24 option that the PICs specifications allow. Would this option 25 interfere with an adult's ability -- 180 1 JUDGE SLOVITER: I would suggest you might get a 2 little closer or talk a little louder. Not too close, 3 because it's -- 4 MR. MORRIS: Thank you, your Honor. 5 BY MR. MORRIS: 6 Q Would this option, the block unrated sites option within 7 the PICs specification, would it interfere with an adult's 8 ability to access content on the Internet? 9 A No, I mean, the adult could change it to not to block 10 unrated sites and so they could access anything they wanted. 11 Q So, an adult would have access to the full range of 12 content on the Internet? 13 A That's correct. 14 Q And would the block unrated sites option mean that minors 15 could never, ever get access to unrated sites? 16 A No, in fact, if you go through the scenario, one of the - 17 - one of the things in the scenario, the child says I need -- 18 gets to an unrated site, the child says I need this for my 19 homework. The mother comes back and gives the child 20 permission. So, in fact, with the child's -- with the 21 parent's supervision, a child could get at it. 22 Q And under the block unrated sites option, would a parent 23 be able to sit down with her children and access the Internet 24 together? 25 A Yes. 181 1 Q And in that method, they'd be able to -- 2 A To control the situation. 3 Q And get access to the whole range of content on the 4 Internet? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q Now, but with the -- if you -- if a parent were to turn 7 the block unrated sites option on to activate that option and 8 to block unrated sites, would the parent be able to protect 9 their children from indecent or patently offensive sites that 10 didn't have a label? 11 A That's correct, that's exactly what that option is for. 12 Q And this protection would protect United States citizens 13 from foreign sites. 14 A That's correct. 15 Q Foreign content. 16 Q And that's under the PICs standard, a child could be 17 protected form indecency and patently offensive material 18 without any requirement that labeling be done mandatorily 19 across the Internet? 20 A That is correct. 21 MR. MORRIS: No further questions, your Honor. 22 MR. BARON: No further questions at this time. 23 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Here is a question. You said 24 PICs are tabs? 25 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry? 182 1 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Are PICs -- 2 THE WITNESS: Are PICs tabs? 3 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: No, are PICs tags, I'm sorry. 4 THE WITNESS: Oh, no. PICs are -- PIC stands for 5 Platform for Internet Content Selection. 6 THE COURT: Right. 7 THE WITNESS: It's a standard by which a rating 8 service can express how they will rate things. And it's also 9 a standard for how labels should appear. 10 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Yes. 11 THE WITNESS: Okay. 12 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: And what are tags, then? 13 THE WITNESS: Oh -- 14 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: I thought you said -- 15 THE WITNESS: -- that was a detail that Mr. Baron 16 asked me about in my deposition as to whether or not a PICs 17 label could appear in a Meta tag of an HTML document. And I, 18 it was late and I didn't remember and I didn't know and I 19 said, no, I don't think so. But in fact, he was right. 20 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Okay. All right, I -- 21 THE WITNESS: That it can appear there. 22 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: -- I didn't quite get that 23 exchange and I wanted to be sure I understood it. The other 24 thing you mentioned was about PICs will be, you said words to 25 the effect, successful if all vendors adhere. What's the 183 1 chance of that happening? 2 THE WITNESS: Extremely high. 3 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Mm-hmm, okay. 4 THE WITNESS: Netscape is going to have PICs. 5 Microsoft has already announced that they are releasing PICs 6 compatible explorer in June. I can't believe that Netscape 7 would be far behind. In fact, Netscape may even beat them to 8 the punch. Certainly Spyglass will. Spyglass -- both 9 Netscape, Microsoft and Spyglass helped us with these 10 specifications. Most of the ratings services that I know 11 that are out there, area already, Surfwatch, are changing to 12 a PICs compatible spec rating scheme. So, I think the 13 chances are very high that -- 14 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Okay. 15 THE WITNESS: -- it will all happen. 16 JUDGE BUCKWALTER: Thank you. 17 JUDGE DALZELL: I mean, the reason is because there 18 are enormously powerful market forces that are driving that, 19 are there not? 20 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 21 JUDGE DALZELL: And you know that from your meetings 22 of the W-3C, right? 23 THE WITNESS: I know that from the meetings of the 24 W-3C and I know that from the meetings of the people who keep 25 urging us to quickly get PICs out and get it into the net. 184 1 JUDGE DALZELL: So, that they can say to parents 2 like me, for example, who have small children, don't worry. 3 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 4 JUDGE DALZELL: Come on line with us, your kids 5 won't see what's in Mr. Coppolino's book. 6 THE WITNESS: We hope so. I mean, AOL is there, 7 Prodigy is there. 8 JUDGE SLOVITER: We'll be forever now on this. 9 THE WITNESS: They're all there. 10 JUDGE DALZELL: Well, looking at Defendants' Exhibit 11 167 and the members of the W-3 Consortium, am I correct that 12 there is no Government member of that? That is to say, no 13 United States Government member? 14 THE WITNESS: That's correct. They have a lot of 15 input into the process, but there's not really -- they're not 16 really members. And I have to tell you the reason. The 17 reason is because we give everything away. In our contracts 18 with our members talks about how we deal with the 19 intellectual property that we developed. And the Government 20 doesn't know how to deal with the way we want to give stuff 21 away. And when you have several members that want to be. We 22 have several Government agencies, can we be a member. I said 23 if you can sign the standard contract, you can be a member. 24 But they don't want to sign the standard contract, they want 25 to give us a bunch of FARs (ph), which those FARs countermand 185 1 the standard contract intellectual property clauses. 2 JUDGE DALZELL: FARs? 3 THE WITNESS: Federal Acquisition Regulations. 4 JUDGE DALZELL: Okay. So, I am correct then and I 5 asked Mr. Bradner about this when he was here. You now know 6 who Mr. Bradner is? 7 THE WITNESS: I know that he testified. 8 JUDGE DALZELL: Okay, good. That in fact, the 9 Worldwide WEB is a creature completely divorced in its 10 creation from any government, isn't that right? 11 THE WITNESS: Almost true. Almost true. The fact 12 of the matter is Tim Burners Lee did it when he was a staff 13 member at Cerne (ph), which is a particle physics laboratory 14 in Geneva, which is funded by the European Governments. 15 JUDGE DALZELL: By the European governments? 16 THE WITNESS: European governments, that's correct. 17 JUDGE DALZELL: But Cerne is funded by it, but it's 18 not an agency of any government? 19 THE WITNESS: It's not an agency of a government. 20 In fact, there's a lot of United States participation in 21 Cerne activities. One of our faculty members from M.I.T. is 22 a big player in the Cerne activity. 23 JUDGE DALZELL: All right, so -- 24 THE WITNESS: And spends a lot of time there. 25 JUDGE DALZELL: So, in truth, it would not be fair 186 1 to say that with respect to the Worldwide Web that 2 Government has "nurtured it". 3 THE WITNESS: I think -- 4 JUDGE DALZELL: As in the sense of a mother 5 nurturing a child. 6 THE WITNESS: That is true of the Worldwide WEB. 7 JUDGE DALZELL: OKay. Now, we have been told with 8 respect to IP address blocking, okay. That address blocking 9 requires that the user's computer have stored on it's hard 10 disc a list of all IP addresses which should be blocked. And 11 then it goes on to say that the more you have on there, the 12 more space you're using on the disk. Ergo, the user will 13 soon run out of disk space to block, true or false? 14 THE WITNESS: I don't know what was being said by IP 15 blocking. Certainly PICs does not work that way. 16 JUDGE DALZELL: So, PICs would not use up all the 17 disk space? 18 THE WITNESS: It certainly wouldn't. 19 JUDGE DALZELL: Why not? 20 THE WITNESS: Because the label could come with the 21 document or it could be down loaded from a service. It may 22 be stored on a disk. I mean, we admit that that can happen, 23 but it's not necessary that happened that way. 24 JUDGE DALZELL: When do you estimate, as practical 25 matter, the market will adopt PICs in a ubiquitous way. 187 1 THE WITNESS: I think that when Microsoft announces 2 in June or they've already announced, but when they release 3 in June, they will release an Explorer III with PICs 4 compatible blocking software. I think Netscape will be 5 shortly behind that. And at that point, it's been adopted. 6 JUDGE DALZELL: All right. 7 JUDGE SLOVITER: I'd like to understand how it works 8 from the -- again -- or mae more specifically, when you say - 9 - when you say that the parent can say block all unrated 10 sites. And then in the colloquy that took place, the 11 analysis was that all patently indecent sites would -- 12 patently offensive and indecent sites would be blocked. But 13 they would be blocked, would they not, along with everything 14 else. And is there any way -- I mean, I'm not sure how one 15 would pick out from the rating, sites that are patently 16 offensive. Is that what you suggested? 17 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't suggest that. 18 JUDGE SLOVITER: I mean, is that what you were? 19 THE WITNESS: The question went to what happens if 20 you check block unrated sites? What would happen then is you 21 would block sites that did not come with a label or did not 22 have a label to associate with him. YOu would only allow 23 information into computers that had a label. 24 JUDGE SLOVITER: Okay, but all I'm suggesting is 25 there is no way in which that you know of or through PICS,m 188 1 in which you can identify marginal material? 2 THE WITNESS: Marginal material is always in the eye 3 of the beholder. And it's the person who's doing the rating 4 that's going to decide what kind of a rating they're going to 5 place on that material. 6 JUDGE SLOVITER: All I'm saying is when you block 7 unrated material, you block it all? 8 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 9 JUDGE SLOVITER: That's what I wasn't clear on. 10 THE WITNESS: Block all material that's unrated. 11 JUDGE SLOVITER: That's right. All unrated 12 material. Whether it is for children or -- 13 THE WITNESS: It could be pictures of ducks. 14 JUDGE SLOVITER: That's right. 15 THE WITNESS: You would be blocking them, too. 16 JUDGE SLOVITER: No, that was my point. That's just 17 the point, there was in the colloquy some possible ambiguity 18 that what you would be blocking was only material that was 19 unrated that could be considered questionable? 20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 21 JUDGE SLOVITER: And I gather that that's not what 22 you're testifying. 23 THE WITNESS: That's not what I'm testifying. 24 JUDGE SLOVITER: It's everything, no matter how 25 innocuous, would be unavailable to -- once that button or 189 1 once that tag was pushed. 2 THE WITNESS: That's correct. However, if it were a 3 child and the child wanted to see that material, he could ask 4 his parent. 5 JUDGE SLOVITER: Oh, no. I understand that. 6 THE WITNESS: Okay. 7 JUDGE SLOVITER: That's not the -- it was the 8 technicality of what was being asked. Okay. Does counsel 9 have anymore? 10 MR. BARON: Just a couple questions, your Honor? 11 JUDGE SLOVITER: Sure. 12 RECROSS-EXAMINATION 13 BY MR. BARON: 14 Q Mr. Vezza, Judge Dalzell referred to enormously powerful 15 market forces that are driving adoption of PICs. If all the 16 browsers in the world support PICs, then self-labeling with 17 Pics would work, will it not? 18 A That's a complicated question and requires a complex 19 answer if you'll allow me. Self labeling, everybody labeling 20 their own way is going to be chaos and I think everybody will 21 recognize that. But self-labeling, according to some, a few, 22 half a dozen, dozen rating mechanisms will work. 23 Q And just to be clear, you were talking about how there is 24 this drive towards adoption of PICS and PICs compatible 25 architecture. That adoption of PICS compatible architecture, 190 1 in terms of the market place, is a different issue and poses 2 different problems than the actual rating of sites using PICs 3 compatible architecture, correct? 4 A Repeat that? 5 Q First there's the adoption of the architecture. 6 A Right. 7 Q But the question of rating sites on the Internet, on the 8 Worldwide WEB, that's a different issue? 9 A That's a different issue and it's going on and it will -- 10 the minute there are browsers out there, there will be lots 11 of folks that will be getting into the game. And they're 12 different business models will cause sites to be rated. Some 13 sites will be rated slowly by one business model, but more 14 carefully. Other sites will be rated very rapidly, but 15 perhaps no as carefully. 16 MR. BARON: That's all I have. 17 JUDGE SLOVITER: This is a relatively unique and 18 novel experiment in information, isn't it? 19 THE WITNESS: Yes. 20 JUDGE SLOVITER: And with the exception of the movie 21 rating system which has -- 22 THE WITNESS: It's a one rating system. 23 JUDGE SLOVITER: -- which doesn't do anything at all 24 like this because so simple in the sense to this. There's 25 really nothing out there, is there, that you can use as an 191 1 analog. 2 THE WITNESS: That's correct. In fact, we looked at 3 the moving rating system carefully and said, gee, it will not 4 capture the kinds of material that we'd like to have ratings 5 posted to. It will not capture the essence of literature. 6 It will not capture the essence of art, it will not capture 7 the essence of education. It just won't capture those things 8 and this is one of the reasons why we have come up with a 9 relatively sophisticated system. 10 JUDGE SLOVITER: But to work, isn't it so that there 11 has to be a commitment to continue this indefinitely because 12 there is material that will be coming on to the Internet and 13 Worldwide WEB indefinitely. 14 THE WITNESS: That's true, but we only have -- I 15 don't know any other way around it. 16 JUDGE DALZELL: And your point, I think, well, to me 17 or Judge Sloviter was in a lot of sites, this issue is simply 18 beside the point? 19 THE WITNESS: That's correct. 20 JUDGE DALZELL: If you're in the area of 21 microbiology, I mean, if you were to raise this subject, I 22 assume they'd look at you as though you're speaking Ordu or 23 Sanskrit? 24 THE WITNESS: Right, that's correct. 25 JUDGE DALZELL: It's totally irrelevant to them? 192 1 THE WITNESS: It's irrelevant. I mean, you know, 2 you could -- I deal in microbiology. I have, you know, 500 3 gigabytes of microbiology information here and you'll 4 probably get a label that says microbiology and everybody 5 will forget about it. 6 JUDGE DALZELL: And much of those 22 million sites 7 are of that nature? 8 THE WITNESS: Is that kind of information, that's 9 correct. That's exactly -- that's exactly correct. I mean, 10 I have tons of stuff at M.I.T. under my control that nobody 11 would care about. I mean, it's just not -- it's not relevant 12 -- it's a rating and you just slap a label on it and it says 13 this is what this is and be done with it. 14 JUDGE SLOVITER: Well, really maybe all material 15 coming out of the science labs at the University of 16 Pennsylvania, for example? 17 JUDGE DALZELL: So, that would have a label that 18 would just be say academic. 19 THE WITNESS: Well, you have to be a little careful 20 about that. You noticed there were some EDU sites. 21 JUDGE DALZELL: I sure did. 22 THE WITNESS: Okay, so I'm not going to -- I'm not 23 going to bite on that one that easily. 24 JUDGE SLOVITER: What you're saying is that for 25 practical purposes was the exception of possibilities that 193 1 specific material may begin to draw and get closer to the 2 line, that the -- well, you're, I guess answering my question 3 is, that the amount of material that needs the kind of 4 attention that would be required to be satisfactory is more 5 limited than all of the material on it, but nonetheless, 6 there would have to be some care. 7 THE WITNESS: There is some gradation that has to 8 take place in terms of that marginal material from -- not 9 marginal to marginal to patently offensive. 10 JUDGE SLOVITER: Okay, thank you. Anymore? 11 JUDGE DALZELL: Anymore questions based on our 12 questions? 13 JUDGE SLOVITER: No, thank you. 14 (Witness excused.) 15 JUDGE SLOVITER: Do you want to break now? 16 JUDGE DALZELL: Yes, it's a good time to take a 17 break. 18 JUDGE SLOVITER: All right, we will break now before 19 the next witness. And I think counsel should be prepared to 20 stay late. If those -- some of you have trains, I don't know 21 how long the next witness will be. But if some of you -- oh, 22 do you want to talk to them? 23 JUDGE DALZELL: Yes, may I just see counsel briefly? 24 (Court in recess at 3:05 o'clock p.m.)