line. raises new questions that we in the industry need to address, but important questions for government. will the privacy rights for consumers be respected and protected in the clouds?

that it is a higher crime neighborhood than you thought it was. one of the challenges is that when you put a lot more information in the cloud, in the data center, it is easier to increase security, bill stronger doors, but they also become bigger targets. it means as an industry we have to keep doubling down our

investment to strengthen security. that is something we are doing at marcus of every day. it is also another area where we think congress and the government needs to act. there are some areas in the law were comes to computer security where the law needs to be modernized. we need enforcement agencies to do new things. congress is going to need to give them more resources. they will have to collaborate more closely to connect the dots. >> what would you see as far as the enforcement side? what kind of power do they have and who controls it? >> we are likely to see it reside where it is today. we have the fbi and the justice department. we have u.s. attorneys around the country. the work that the fbi does a decade from now or five years from now will have to be larger and more sophisticated than it is today.

not because it is not sophisticated today, but because the target keeps moving. as private companies, we are going to have to keep moving forward as well. we will need to continue to do new things to collaborate. we have a crimes unit at microsoft that investigates these things. return information over to the fbi or other government agencies. we have to work closely inappropriate ways to stay abreast of technology and new threats. >> this is "the communicators." also joining us -- >> the government is already doing some successful work in collaborating. there is a rapid access computing environment where people can sign up for 24 hours of computing time to develop new tools for the military in a

controlled, cloud based environment that has been up and running for about a year. gsa is also doing some work with its web site. we are seeing some early experimentation to test the water. the largest issue remains of when we go larger scale, how we address some of the security and some of the privacy concerns. it is a very sensitive issue, one that congress will be taking a close look at. you mentioned some transparency in other rules. how do you assure that the date set and privacy sensitivity is properly addressed if third- party hammers are dealing with that? >> it is a key issue. the government is very sophisticated in a number of these areas. fundamentally, from an individual perspective, i think individual should think about two things. what are their privacy rights as

far as companies that have their information, and what are the privacy rights with the government? we have a great, important tradition. privacy is one of the distinctly american values that goes back to the bill of rights. has long been protected, and has always been a challenging issue at least for the last century, as technology exchanging and the way personal information is used. the key thing is for congress to act to keep the law current with technology. it did a great job in the 1980's. it is something it now needs to come back and do again. the balance was set right for the types of communication people were focused on in the 1980's. it was around telephone

conversations and the early experience of email. the law has now become quite antiquated. it is an area where the u.s. has not been at the forefront of the law. europe has been at the forefront of the law. as americans, we would benefit both in our own country for the u.s. to stay abreast and expect and apply clear standards with respect to companies, and we would all benefit because the u.s. would play a stronger leadership role in the world in terms of coordinating with other governments. our government have more influence in discussions with european governments if it had a more current law to which the point. >> you raise an interesting issue there. as we move to global computing centers, we are going across borders, in which case the rights and restrictions on what can happen with the data in those centers takes on a more

global nature. how do you see that an -- evolving over the future, and will it be an impediment to the future of global computing centers? >> it is going to become an impediment if government does not start to act. if you are in the cloud computing business, it is a catch-22 waiting to happen. you may have one country that says you must keep all of your data records about people's searches for 12 months, because we want our police to be able to get access to it. another country may say, you had better destroy all that after six months, because we care about privacy. let's say we have a data center that is running in ireland, and the irish tell us to destroy the records after six months, but we have the records of italians in harlem, and the italians tell us to keep it for 12 this is where

we have a pressing need for governments to come together. there will come a day when we will seek an effective free trade agreement for data. unfortunately, that is a long ways off. the sooner the u.s. government can get started, the sooner it can get engaged in conversations with other governments. the sooner we will get to real solution on a global basis. >> if this is a congressional issue, who are you talking to? >> the judiciary committee's and commerce committees or the two committees that have traditionally passed laws in these areas. we are engaged in conversations there. the good news is, we are starting to have a broader conversation. our biggest point as a company has been to say we need a new,

national conversation. it ultimately leads to capitol hill and the white house, but it needs to start on main street and bring in businesses and consumer groups. that is what we are starting to do. i am very hopeful that out of that, we will see the kind of consensus emerge that will encourage congress to act. we think congress should consider enacting a cloud computing advancement act that would strengthen the privacy laws, filling the gaps in the security area, address some of these international areas, and put the country back where the lot is at the forefront of technology rather than where it was a quarter-century ago. >> this is a case where companies can self regulate themselves? it seems like that you coming and asking for more legislation seems counter to it.

>> by any stretch of the imagination, we need to be stepping forward and assuming responsibility as companies and as industry. we need to be proactive day after day. then you get to the question, what we need from government? there are two ways to think about that. we need government to fill in gaps around privacy and security. beyond that, there is an interesting question of whether the industry itself feels it would be better off if there was a lot at the federal level about the truth in cloud computing. usually people and industry say no thank you. in this case, there is reason to think a little bit more. if we do not get action at the federal level, we will get it at the state level. if we do not get action at the federal level, we will

definitely get action in other countries. if we want one lot in the u.s. budget one lot in the u.s., there is good reason to think harder about the possibility of people in the industry benefiting from federal action. >> one other aspect, we look at cloud competing on a couple of different levels. infrastructure, services, in terms of software and as a development platform. the cloud is made up of many different kinds of services. do you feel that an enhancement act would cover all the evolutions of clout computing services? >> i think it could do a lot of good if it is put at the right altitude, so to speak. if the government tries to

dictate particular technological approaches, it will enact a law that will work for about two years and fined that technology overtakes it. if it takes a broader view, if it recognizes what we are really talking about is moving information in some cases from your business or your desk to the clout and things about it in that way, if it focuses on processes like providing consumers with clearer information, i think it is possible to write a law that will do a lot of good and avoid the pitfalls one would confront if one tries to do too much. >> remember the story of the sidekick mobile phone? the computer would lose information. >> it was a device we have responsibility for. it was the other companies'

technology, but a problem that we had to solve. >> what is going on as far as making sure those things do not happen? >> there is a whole set of precautions that need to be built into the technology. you need to have strong protection for security so that other people are not able to hack their way in like the incident that google recently confronted. you need reliability so that your own systems are operating in a strong way. you need to be clear with your customers so they know exactly what they are getting. do you want them to keep another copy somewhere? these are questions one needs to work through as you enter a new technological era and deal with a new kind of computing infrastructure. >> is there a legal process it

you lose my information and i cannot get it back? >> it is another good example of the need for clarity. when you sign up for a service, you get an agreement that pops up, called your terms of use. that is worth reading. it is worth printout and reading on a piece of paper. that should tell you how those issues are addressed. this is the kind of thing where we would all benefit if there is a clear set of principles. the analogy is to automobiles. we do not want to see an air bag, but what to have the ability to compare whether different cars have air bags and how they work. as long as you get the information out in a transparent way, you can let consumer

reports go to work and informants -- inform consumers about how different companies are offering things and they can make an informed choice. >> microsoft is responsible in many ways for people having their own personal experience on computers and servers as well. one of the dilemmas is, people do not want to give that up. cloud computing represents taking that and putting their information and control in a new place. how do you envision getting past the cultural inertia of making cloud computing a reality? >> you have hit on a fundamental that we care deeply about. the personal computing revolution made competing personal. it let people decide what they want to use the computer for, how they want to use it, where to keep their information, when they want to share it and with whom. people should not have to give

that up. as an industry, we should do a good job of creating a cloud computing offerings that give people that continuing ability to personalize the computing experience. if we do not, consumers should say wait a second. we are not sure we want to follow you to this new country you are talking about. we admire her sock are focused on keeping the personalization that technology -- we at microsoft. it also means it is about smart clients and giving people the ability to make their own decisions. just because it is there as an option, does not mean everyone should take it. they should use it only if they want to. we should make it attractive for them to want to move with us. >> brad smith is senior counsel with microsoft corporation.

thank you for being on "the communicators." >> it is good to be with you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> coming up, a panel of law professors discuss fellow panelist barry friedman's new book, "the will of the people." >> also, a conference on the gay and lesbian communities political agenda. after that, a discussion of jobs and the economy. sunday on "washington journal," american action forum president on his role in launching a new think tank.