U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer shouldn’t include certain copyright infringement liability protections for online platforms in trade deals, the Free State Foundation blogged Thursday. FSF cited the “ineffective” Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act covering a notice and takedown process for when online service providers receive limited liability protection for hosting infringing content and activity. “Congress needs to reexamine Section 512 as a matter of modernizing U.S. domestic law to reduce illegal copyright infringement,” before including it in trade deals, wrote FSF. It cited a similar request for Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act from the House Commerce Committee (see 1908060064).
Section 230
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer shouldn’t include Section 230-like protections in trade deals, given ongoing policy discussions about the tech industry's liability shield, House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and ranking member Greg Walden, R-Ore., wrote Tuesday.
Weakening Silicon Valley’s content liability protections potentially discourages platform moderation and emboldens extremists on unfiltered websites like 8chan, said progressive and libertarian tech observers Monday. Public Knowledge CEO Chris Lewis and TechFreedom President Berin Szoka warned government against intervening in speech moderation, discussing 8chan's role in the weekend’s mass shootings.
House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle, D-Pa., again (see 1905150061) criticized the C-Band Alliance's proposal for clearing spectrum in 3.7-4.2 GHz, saying during a Thursday House Commerce Committee hearing it could disrupt the opportunity for using proceeds from sales of the spectrum to pay for rural broadband deployment. Several tech and telecom policy topics came up during Thursday's hearing on the policy priorities of lawmakers who aren't its members. Rep. Ed Case, D-Hawaii, urged House Commerce to probe the tech sector's Communications Decency Act Section 230 liability shield and make further CDA changes.
A Senate Judiciary Committee task force led by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., discussed privacy with Salesforce, Snap, Mozilla and Match representatives, a Blackburn aide confirmed Thursday. Blackburn will co-chair the task force with ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the aide said. There’s no end date for the group’s efforts, given ongoing issues for the tech industry, and members hope to meet again before the August recess, the aide said. Blackburn, Feinstein, Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., and Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., attended Thursday’s gathering with about 50 people, said the aide. Discussing the need for a new federal privacy law is “a good spot to start,” Blackburn told us, noting the task force is open to all committee members. Blackburn said on the Senate floor that the group will also explore antitrust, competition and any other issues that arise. She urged backing for her Browser Act (see 1904110052). Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told us his office is interested in participating. “I’m glad there is increasing interest,” he said. “I hope we will be moving toward some actual legislation.” Speaking on the Senate floor, Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., reaffirmed his commitment to reaching bipartisan, federal privacy legislation that sets one standard across the U.S. Hawley noted there have been public calls to re-examine the tech industry’s content liability shield from Blumenthal and Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii; and Ted Cruz, R-Texas, since he introduced legislation aimed at Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
It’s not legitimate to claim Silicon Valley is biased against conservatives, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said in an interview on C-SPAN's The Communicators set to have been televised this weekend. President Donald Trump offered anecdotal evidence of social media’s anti-conservative bias at a White House summit Thursday (see 1907110066).
President Donald Trump offered anecdotal evidence of social media bias and alleged throttling of his followers and activity on Twitter. Speaking Thursday to hundreds of invitees at his Presidential Social Media Summit (see 1907100040), he cited dramatic fluctuations of follower counts and Twitter interaction. “It would be like a rocket ship when I put out a beauty,” he said, claiming nowadays it takes him 10 times as long to gain 100,000 followers.
It’s vital to continue holding online content creators responsible for their work and shielding websites from liability for that content, said more than 75 academics, experts and civil society organizations Thursday. They warned Congress against altering Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (see 1907090062) and potential harms to free speech and exchange of ideas. The group cited seven principles for guiding Section 230 amendments. Americans for Prosperity, the Center for Democracy & Technology, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, New America's Open Technology Institute, R Street Institute and TechFreedom were among those signing. Content creators bear primary responsibility for their speech and actions, and hosts shouldn’t be forced to remove constitutionally protected speech, the group argued. Content moderation shouldn’t be discouraged, and Section 230 doesn’t and shouldn’t require political neutrality, it argued.
Tech companies should be required to follow industry-written best business practices for protecting children’s online safety to “earn” Section 230 liability protections, said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. That portion of the Communications Decency Act gives websites immunity from liability for the third-party content they host. Congress has chipped away at that immunity, including with anti-sex trafficking legislation passed in 2018 (see 1806290044).
Government should verify whether platforms are moderating content fairly, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said Thursday in defense of a bill that would dramatically alter the tech industry’s Section 230 immunity (see 1906190047). “Government’s not policing speech [under the new bill],” he told reporters in response to comments from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. “These companies themselves aren’t speaking. They are moderating others’ content, so they are moderating others’ speech.”