Many, if not of all, of the old rules of business no longer apply, or they apply in different ways. For example, the old maxim that the three most important business considerations are "location, location, location" is largely irrelevant in the new e.conomy, since people can visit a Web site by turning on their computers rather than their cars.

The new e.conomy is also forcing us to rethink a number of issues that were relatively settled in the non-e. world. If a person creates a Web site supporting a political candidate, does that count as a political contribution? If a doctor provides medical services through the Internet, must he or she be licensed to practice in the state where the patient resides or the physician resides, or both? Is a parody Web site that deceives browsers into thinking it is the real thing a form of free speech or identity theft?

As policymakers begin to consider and address the issues facing the e.conomy, they may be tempted to impose laws and regulations that they would not impose on the non-e. world — in part, because of the freedoms guaranteed and protected by the Constitution.

These freedoms should be extended to the cyber-world and business, as laid out in this "Declaration of e-freedoms."

1. Freedom from New Taxation

E-commerce is growing at a phenomenal rate. According to the University of Texas' Center for Research in Electronic Commerce, the Internet economy — i.e., commerce directly and indirectly a result of the Internet — created $301.4 billion in 1998 and was responsible for 1.2 million jobs nationwide. About a third of that amount, $102 billion, was a direct result of Internet commerce. The center estimates online retail sales to reach $176 billion in 1999.

This growth has politicians and bureaucrats at the federal, state and local levels considering new ways to tax Internet commerce. For example, there are proposals to:

• Tax e-commerce by imposing a sales tax;
• Impose Internet "access taxes," as 10 states, Washington D.C. and several local governments have already done, which tax people's monthly access charge from their Internet service providers (ISPs) such as America Online.
• Impose indirect taxes such as a modem tax, a use tax or bit and bandwidth taxes — i.e., taxing data that goes over the Internet or the ability to send data over the Internet.
• Require delivery services such as railroad, airline or trucking firms to collect a tax for their services, thereby indirectly taxing Internet sales.

While it is unclear what ability state and local governments will have to tax e-commerce in the future — in part because federal legislation may permanently override any future attempts to tax the Internet, as it has already done on a temporary basis — what is clear is that government should refrain from burdening this emerging medium with new forms of taxation, either direct or indirect. Internet sales make up only a fraction of all retail sales — with estimates ranging from 0.3% to 1% — and the evidence suggests that state sales tax collections are going up, not down. If states are losing money from Internet sales, it is hard to tell it from their budget surpluses.

In addition, many of the most dynamic and well-known Internet businesses, such as Amazon.com, have yet to turn a profit.

Although federal, state and local governments have the right to collect taxes, they should be wary of becoming greedy and avoid imposing new taxes that would weaken or destroy the new industry and kill the goose that's laying the golden e.gg.

2. Freedom of Speech

The Internet has become the international soapbox, where people can express their ideas freely and openly, and others have the choice to listen or switch to another Web site. That freedom of speech deserves First Amendment protection on the Internet, just as it is protected in other forms of communication.

But just as freedom of speech is not absolute in the press or society, it shouldn't be absolute on the Internet. People breaking laws should not expect to hide behind the First Amendment in the virtual world anymore than they can in the real world. For example, local laws that protect children against the sale of child pornography should still apply to someone who is trying to sell child pornography over the Internet.

The principle to establish here is that of "existing practice." If the authorities believe that someone is trading in child pornography, they obtain a warrant, wait for an opportune time and move in on the suspect. That approach should still be applicable to those trafficking their wares over the Internet.

3. Freedom to Buy, Sell and Trade

The new e.conomy will create new types of commerce largely unimagined in the non-e. world. And there will be tremendous pressure from special interest groups — unions, trade associations and competitors — to try and limit innovative new approaches. In fact, their ability to impose limitations and restraints on e-commerce represents one of the most serious threats to the emerging industry.

Critics will find a number of reasons to claim that e-commerce has an unfair advantage, such as Internet sales avoid the sales taxes imposed on "brick and mortar" businesses or that consumers will be harmed or confused by unregulated vendors. However, the real issue is not fairness, but competition. Many businesses, unions and trade associations operating in the non.e world fear the competition created by young, aggressive and innovative dot-coms, and many will do their best to wound their competitors from the outset.

In response, we must assert that new competition is always a boon to consumers, providing them with more and better products and services at lower prices. Competition is never a threat to thriving businesses, only to the least competitive. Many traditional brick-and-mortar businesses are already responding by creating their own Web sites, both to garner sales and to bring customers into the store. Others are finding niche markets to provide goods or services not available on the Internet, and still others are looking to recast themselves in a different image.

The Internet originated and has thrived because of its almost completely unfettered competition. The message to those concerned about discriminatory taxes imposed on brick-and-mortar businesses is to persuade politicians to lower those taxes, not impose others on e-commerce. The message to those concerned about the threat of increased competition is to look for ways to become more competitive, not try to kill the competition that already exists.

4. Freedom from Government Interference

Government agencies will see the new e.conomy as a playground for bureaucrats. Just consider where the following agencies are likely to try and get — or already have gotten — involved.

• The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will want to have a say on privacy issues and encryption.
• The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) will want to regulate trade over the Internet.
• The Federal Elections Commission (FEC) will want to regulate and control campaign contributions through the Internet, campaign Web sites and perhaps the ability of candidate-support groups to donate advertising and promotion apart from current federal guidelines.
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) is already trying to get involved in Internet gun sales.
• The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will try to play a role in regulating speech and content over the Internet.
• The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will have to get involved if federal, state or local governments are allowed to raise revenue by imposing taxes on the Internet, such as Internet sales.

The guiding principle with regard to the new e.conomy is that Congress and state legislators, not federal or state agencies, must be the primary source of any type of Internet oversight, regulation and taxation.

5. Freedom from Invasion of Privacy

The Internet has opened up vast new opportunities for immediate communication that are helping workers to become more efficient and productive and bringing people closer together. It has also opened up vast new opportunities for surveillance and invasion of privacy.

Employers who might never even consider tapping an employee's phone line may have little reservation about monitoring their e-mails. And the federal government wants access to encryption codes in order to monitor the e-mails of people suspected of being involved in criminal activity.

Monitoring e-mail should be at least as difficult as monitoring phone lines or federal mail. Mail carriers can't open people's mail; we don't want employers or the government having the right to do what the mail carrier can't.

As for encryption, the federal government should not have access to encryption codes. However, for the purposes of national security, encryption manufactures could provide a compliance officer who would oversee translation of encoded messages without releasing those codes to the government.

6. Freedom to Protect Personal and Intellectual Property

While the Internet must be kept as free from government taxation, oversight and regulation as possible, that freedom can also lead to an erosion of personal and intellectual property rights. The technology is either already available or soon will be available to permit people to "give away" any book, music or video.

While we want the Internet to be open to freedom of speech, that freedom does not include robing others of their personal and intellectual property and profiting from it. A free and open Internet is not incompatible with provisions that protect the right of people to create intellectual property and profit from it.