Legislation

Unhappy with the details released about a draft Asia-Pacific free trade deal, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., introduced legislation Wednesday that would require the Executive Branch to give members of Congress greater access to information about pending trade deals.

Wyden has been critical of the secrecy surrounding the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement being negotiated by the United States and eight other Asian-Pacific countries. Wyden and some public interest groups also have voiced concerns about the intellectual property-related provisions of the TPP.

In a floor speech announcing the introduction of his bill, Wyden complained that members of Congress were being given less information about the substance of the TPP talks than representatives from U.S companies. Wyden, who chairs the Finance International Trade Subcommittee, said despite obtaining the proper clearance, his staff has been denied access to materials needed to conduct oversight of TPP for his subcommittee.

Wyden's bill would clarify existing law related to who has access to details on draft trade deals by giving all members of Congress and their staff clearance to access such information. In addition, it would require the Executive Branch to provide lawmakers who have specific oversight over trade agreements with information on whether U.S. trading partners are living up to their trade commitments.

"This legislation would ensure that the representatives elected by the American people are afforded the same level of influence over our nation's policies as the paid representatives of PHRMA, Halliburton and the Motion Picture Association," Wyden said.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which is leading the TPP talks, has defended the process, saying the trade talks require some level of secrecy to ensure negotiators can have a frank exchange of ideas.

Two members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee offered legislation Thursday that would put pressure on the administration to do more than just talk about meeting President Obama's pledge to free up 500 megahertz of spectrum over the next decade.

The bill offered by Reps. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., and Doris Matsui, D-Calif., would require the administration to auction off a chunk of spectrum coveted by the wireless industry that is now used by federal agencies. The bill would require that the 1755-1780 megahertz block of spectrum be paired with the 2155-2180 band, which the Federal Communications Commission already has available, and be auctioned to wireless providers.

The wireless group CTIA sought but failed to get language in the spectrum bill enacted into law in February to push the federal government to give up the 1755 band of spectrum for auction. The language was opposed by the Defense Department and other agencies that use the spectrum now.

In a report released last month, the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration said while the 1755 band could be re-purposed for use by commercial providers, there are many obstacles that would have to be addressed first. As a result, the agency, which is in charge of managing the nation's spectrum inventory, suggested that both sides consider looking for ways to share the spectrum.

The Stearns-Matsui bill would give the Pentagon and other federal agencies five years to relocate from the 1755 band and authorize funding to pay for the costs associated with that move.

The wireless industry argues that while the spectrum legislation passed in February was a good first step, wireless providers will need even more spectrum to meet the nation's growing demand for new mobile tech gadgets.

"Today we take the next step forward in bringing the 1755-1780 band to auction for commercial wireless use. The rise of smartphones and tablets has dramatically increased demand for spectrum," Stearns, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, said in a statement.

Not surprisingly, wireless providers praised the legislation. "We hope that this and other bands currently occupied but often underutilized by federal users will be made available for commercial use as expeditiously as possible," CTIA Vice President for Government Affairs Jot Carpenter said in a statement. "Freeing spectrum like the 1755 to 1780 megahertz band is key to helping ensure that the U.S. remains the world's leader in the deployment of wireless broadband services."

The Energy and Commerce Communications and Technology Subcommittee launched a working group Wednesday to examine ways the federal government can more efficiently use its airwaves.

While noting she hasn't taken a position on the bill yet, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., the ranking member of the Communications Subcommittee, said at a tech industry event that she is glad the measure is examining "the whole issue of how much spectrum the federal government is holding, what is being used, is there a higher and better purpose, can there be swapping."

It's the victory lap that won't end.

The tech industry found another occasion Wednesday night to cheer its victory in defeating controversial online anti-piracy legislation at the Consumer Electronics Association's annual Digital Patriot's Dinner.

CEA's turn came a month after the Center for Democracy and Technology used its annual "tech prom" to applaud efforts to defeat the anti-piracy bills known as the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House and the Senate's Protect IP act.

Even though both bills enjoyed strong support from Washington heavyweights like the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, congressional leaders sidelined the measures in January after an unprecedented protest from tech firms, civil libertarians and Internet activists against the two bills. Opponents argued that the legislation, aimed at curbing piracy and counterfeiting on foreign websites, would stifle innovation and online free speech.

Following a similar honor by CDT, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who helped lead congressional efforts to oppose the anti-piracy bills, received CEA's Digital Patriot award. The group also honored Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who worked to defeat SOPA as a member of the House Judiciary Committee, and Carlyle Group Managing Director David Rubenstein. He was honored for his work on the Sony Betamax case -- described as the "tech Magna Carta" -- in the 1980s when the Supreme Court struck down efforts to outlaw the company's video recording device.

"This historic win in terms of the debate about [Protect IP] and SOPA was not primarily between overzealous rights holders and the protectors of the free and open Internet. It was also a proxy discussion for how were going to promote innovation in our country," Wyden said.

Too many tax-payer funded technologies are being taken by China or other countries, Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., says, and on Friday he reintroduced a bill to stop the flow.

In order to operate in China, for example, American companies are often forced to hand over their intellectual property and proprietary. Many of those technologies are developed using taxpayer money through grant, loans, or other incentives, Webb said in a statement.

"If taxpayers supported the development of the technology, they own a piece of it and it can't just be given away," Webb said. "Federal dollars that go toward R&D funding, loan guarantees, and public-private partnerships in order to help develop the next generation of technologies here are supposed to be making American businesses competitive and generate American jobs -- not to help develop other industries, such as those in China."

Webb's bill would prohibit companies from transferring technology to countries that require such transfers as a cost of doing business.

"The transfer of publicly supported proprietary technologies by American firms to China -- and potentially other countries -- clearly and unequivocally places the competitive advantage of the American economy at risk," Webb said.

The controversial advocacy group Demand Progress can't get enough of Lamar Smith.

After working to torpedo the Texas Republican's Stop Online Piracy Act, Demand Progress is taking aim at another of Smith's bills.

The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act (HR 1981), which cleared Smith's House Judiciary Committee 19-10 last year after a hotly contested markup, would require Internet service providers to keep some user information on file to help track pedophiles and child pornographers. The bill's supporters say it does not require the collection of content and most ISPs already retain the data.

Still, the measure drew attention from critics who see a potential to undermine privacy and civil liberties.

House aides say the bill is effectively dead for now, but that hasn't stopped opponents from reigniting the debate after SOPA and its Senate companion bill were shelved. The issue also resurfaced on the link-sharing website Reddit, where users organized opposition to SOPA.

Demand Progress, which claims a following of more than one million, is asking supporters to send letters to Congress opposing the bill.

"We taught Congress a lesson last month: We need to do to HR 1981 what we did to SOPA, and make it clear to Lamar Smith and the rest of Congress that they can't run roughshod over Internet freedom," the group's executive director, David Segal, said in a statement.

Smith's spokeswoman, Kim Hicks, said child pornography is one of the fastest growing crimes in the U.S. "The Internet can be a force for good or bad," she said. "But it should not be used to facilitate crimes against our children."

During the fight over anti-piracy legislation the U.S. Chamber of Commerce accused Demand Progress of using scare tactics to distort the issue.

Two key lawmakers are expected to release draft legislation on Thursday that offers an alternative to two controversial bills cracking down on piracy and counterfeiting on foreign websites.

The draft legislation from House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and a similar Senate draft measure from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., are aimed at countering a House bill known as the Stop Online Piracy Act, introduced last month by House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas., and a similar bill approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee in May known as the Protect IP Act.

House Judiciary is expected to mark up SOPA next week. Both SOPA and the Protect IP Act would cut off access to foreign websites deemed to be dedicated to piracy or counterfeiting. Those bills would allow the attorney general to ask a court to require a service provider to redirect U.S. users away from such sites and require advertisers and payment processors such as PayPal and credit card companies to stop doing business with them.

Both SOPA and Protect IP are strongly supported by a broad coalition of copyright and trademark owners, unions and others that say the rapid growth in infringement on foreign websites is hurting the U.S. economy.

But Issa, Wyden and other critics, including tech companies, venture capitalists and privacy advocates, argue that SOPA and Protect IP are too broad and could do more harm than good.

"Efforts to address online piracy aimed at specific behaviors or parts of the network could have unintended consequences elsewhere - consequences that may undermine the value that digital products and services creates for so many," seven tech groups, including the Information Technology Industry Council and TechAmerica, said in a letter to Smith on Wednesday. They urged the committee to hold off on marking up SOPA and continue to work with stakeholders on finding other ways to crack down infringement on foreign websites.

Issa's draft bill, known as the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act, employs a follow-the-money strategy and gives responsibility for implementing the bill to the International Trade Commission instead of the Justice Department.

Issa's draft, obtained by Tech Daily Dose, would allow copyright or trademark owners to file a complaint with the ITC against a foreign website that is infringing their intellectual property.

The draft calls for an expedited process for dealing with such complaints, quicker than the normal process the ITC uses for infringement cases. Under the draft bill, a commission finding could lead to a cease-and-desist order to the infringing website and an order to online advertisers and payment processors to stop doing business with those sites. The draft would authorize the ITC to require those who file complaints against foreign websites to pay a fee to pay for the costs of the process.

Issa is expected to launch a new website, www.keepthewebopen.com, Thursday that will allow users to offer changes to the bill, which will likely be introduced some time before the end of the year. Among those expected to sign on to Issa's bill include Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., who also has been an outspoken critic of SOPA and Protect IP.

Several leading Internet companies are voicing strong concerns with House and Senate legislation to curb online piracy, saying the measures would impose new burdens that could stifle their industry's innovation and growth.

AOL, eBay, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Mozilla, Twitter, Yahoo and Zynga Game Network wrote the top leaders of the House and Senate Judiciary committees on Tuesday about the bills introduced by the chairmen of both panels.

"We support the bill's stated goals - providing additional enforcement tools to combat foreign 'rogue' websites that are dedicated to copyright infringement or counterfeiting," the Internet firms wrote. "Unfortunately, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action and technology mandates that would require monitoring of websites."

The companies said they cannot support the bills as written and called on the lawmakers to focus on more targeted measures to crack down on online piracy and counterfeiting.

At a hearing earlier this year, a Google official urged a House Judiciary panel to target the money being earned by foreign websites that engage in piracy and counterfeiting.

But copyright and trademark holders say Google in particular has not done enough to block access to such sites through its search engine. They also say it has done too little to ensure that ads it provides to websites do not appear on "rogue" sites.

Critics and supporters of the legislation will likely get a chance to air their concerns on Wednesday at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the Stop Online Piracy Act, introduced late last month by Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas., and ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich.

The House passed legislation late Tuesday that would temporarily bar states and localities from imposing some new taxes on wireless services like smart phones.

The legislation, authored by Reps. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Trent Franks, R-Ariz., would impose a five-year moratorium on new state or local taxes on wireless services, unless they are already imposed on other goods and services.

The bill's supporters say states and localities are taxing wireless services, which includes service for mobile phones, iPads and other wireless devices, at rates as high as three times the average state sales tax of 7 percent.

"This bill would not affect any existing revenues. In fact, it wouldn't affect the ability [of states] to raise taxes on all goods," Lofgren said Tuesday during the House debate on the bill. "What it would do is keep [states and localities] from singling out wireless services for disproportionate taxation."

State and local officials worry the bill would limit their ability to raise revenues, so in July the House Judiciary Committee amended the bill to allow a state or city to impose a new wireless tax if it is approved by the affected voters.

Despite this, many groups remain opposed, including the National League of Cities and the National Governors Association, according to Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., who spoke out against the bill during the House debate.

"States need all the tools at their disposal to balance their budgets and preserve and create jobs and provide essential services," Chu said. "Yet this bill takes away one of those tools to protect the wireless industry at the expense of other" industries.

Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, have introduced a Senate version of the legislation, but the chamber has yet to act on the measure. The wireless tax legislation is similar to a law Wyden helped author more than a decade ago that would bar states and localities from imposing multiple taxes on Internet access.

"In light of the challenging economy, we hope the U.S. Senate moves swiftly to pass the companion bill," Steve Largent, president and CEO of the wireless industry group CTIA, said in a statement.

Broadcasters brought in a former United Nations ambassador on Tuesday to help make their case to policy makers that the future of broadcasting is bright, growing and should be preserved.

Former U.N. Ambassador, ex-Atlanta Mayor and civil rights leader Andrew Young was on hand as the National Association of Broadcasters launched their Future of Television coalition.Their case has grown more important as the industry grapples with calls for broadcasters to voluntarily give up some of their spectrum to help meet growing demand for wireless technologies.

Congress is weighing legislation to authorize incentive auctions, in which broadcasters would give up some of their airwaves and get cash from the proceeds. Broadcasters worry that television stations that opt out could be harmed if they are forced to move to a different place on the TV band in order to clear out a chunk of space that can be auctioned to wireless providers.

"We're trying to reassert ourselves in the debate with the Future of Television Coalition," NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith said during a news conference Tuesday. "It's enormously important for the American people to understand that while they have the blessing of taking broadcast television for granted, there are decisions that could be made that could take that away from them."

The coalition argues that broadcasting is far from a dying industry and that more Americans are dropping their subscription-based television services such as cable and satellite and returning to over-the-air broadcasting. At the same time, they note that the transition from analog to digital TV has allowed broadcasters to roll out mobile digital television and offer additional channels with even more free programming including content for minority communities, which tend to rely on over-the-air television more than other groups.

The coalition includes mobile television providers, digital antenna makers and new broadcast networks offering content for some of the digital channels being simulcast by TV stations, including Bounce TV co-founded by Young and others.

Talk about good timing. One day after legislation was proposed to crack down on infringement on foreign websites was introduced, more than a dozen venture capitalists came to Washington Thursday to complain that the measure could have drastic consequences for technology startups and innovation.

The venture capitalists were set to meet with key lawmakers and staff Thursday on Capitol Hill including GOP and Democratic House leadership and members of the House Judiciary Committee. The trip was organized by the Consumer Electronics Association, a fierce critic of the House bill and a similar Senate measure.

The House measure was introduced by House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, with bipartisan support. Among the many provisions in the House bill and a measure passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee in May that worries the venture capitalists as well as civil libertarians, Internet engineers and others is a provision that would require service providers to redirect users away from sites engaged in piracy and counterfeiting.

Brad Burnham with Union Square Ventures, which has invested in social media sites such as Foursquare and Twitter and game maker Zynga, told Tech Daily Dose that the language in the House bill is too broad and could force action by a wide range of Internet-related firms, including social media sites. He and others said they worry that the potential costs of having to comply with the law could prevent many tech startups from getting off the ground.

"It makes it infinitely harder to get startups going" in the United States, Josh Mendelsohn, a partner with a VC firm called Hattery, said. He added that if the bill passes, it may force some startups to move abroad.

The venture capitalists acknowledged that they have been slow to react to the legislation and to rally opposition. And despite their visit, they said they do not have the time or resources to match the lobbying campaign being waged by supporters of the legislation. Intellectual property owners, labor groups and other supporters of the bill have been lobbying for at least two years for measures they say are vital to protecting their products from being stolen by foreign infringers.

They argue that the current tools available to them such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which requires websites and others to take down infringing content after being notified of its existence on their sites, are of little use in targeting infringers who haves set up websites offshore.

Judiciary Intellectual Property Subcommittee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., one of the House bill's chief co-sponsors, told Tech Daily Dose Thursday that he and the bill's other authors are open to making additional changes but voiced frustration that many of the bill's critics have failed to offer alternative solutions to addressing a growing problem.