The Big Story: As broadband subsidy program ramps up, lawmakers eye next steps. The need for universal broadband was back in the spotlight this week as lawmakers discussed the impacts of the digital divide, especially during the pandemic. At a hearing Tuesday, the House Appropriations subcommittee on financial services and general government examined the impact a lack of affordable, reliable broadband has, especially on rural communities and communities of color.
Anne Kim—Co-Founder and CEO of Secure AI Labs (SAIL)—is a researcher at heart. While working through her graduate studies, Kim discovered a significant obstacle to her research in her efforts to obtain patient data from hospitals. This led her to the concept of SAIL, a data management platform that focuses on the need for accessible yet secure medical data. We sat down with Kim to hear what brought her to develop the platform, her thoughts on how startups and policymakers can be more forward thinking about privacy policy, and how she thinks the government can provide startups a boost as a partner and customer.
Today, Engine, along with the Charles Koch Institute and Startup Genome, issued a report looking at the overall health of the startup ecosystem. We hope this report can serve as a resource for policymakers considering a wide range of policy issues that impact early-stage companies across the country.
It may sound like a cliched talking point, but it’s true—small businesses are the lifeblood of the U.S. economy. And that includes the small businesses of the technology sector, the thousands of innovative, tech-enabled, high-growth companies across the country that make up the U.S. startup ecosystem.
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to cripple economic growth across the globe, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) and policymakers need to be prepared for trading partners seeking to recoup lost revenues through new international taxation measures. Specifically, more nations are considering implementing or have implemented digital services tax (DST) frameworks that would largely discriminatorily target U.S. tech companies to help cover budgetary shortfalls.
TLDR: A key House panel is holding a hearing this Thursday with the CEOs of Facebook, Google, and Twitter to examine the spread of extremism and misinformation online. It’s critical that policymakers concerned about the proliferation of harmful content across the Internet understand how potential legislative remedies would impact startups and other Internet companies’ ability to moderate user-generated content.
TLDR: Across the country, state legislators are pushing bills that would make it harder for Internet companies to moderate content on their sites and services. In addition to raising constitutional and legal problems, the state-level push to limit moderation would disproportionately harm small and emerging companies that are attempting to compete in the Internet ecosystem.
The Big Story: States pushing social media laws based on unfounded bias claims. Republican state policymakers across the country are pushing for laws that would stop social media companies from engaging in content moderation, amplifying GOP politicians’ long-standing complaints about anti-conservative bias, which were refuted in a recent report. But while Republicans have directed their ire at large Internet companies and Section 230—a bedrock Internet law that allows companies of all sizes to host and moderate user content without being held liable for the content they moderate or for what their users post—their state-level efforts to ban moderation are legally problematic and would hurt small and new companies attempting to compete in the Internet ecosystem.
In a new Medium post, Engine announced the launch of our Startup Agenda 2021, which outlines the policy priorities of the U.S. startup community. The Startup Agenda 2021 covers a range of policy issues that include capital access, connectivity, intellectual property, privacy, and more. As we explain in our post below, there are startups in every state and congressional district across the country, and their perspective is especially critical if policymakers hope to craft rules and regulations that boost innovation and competition.
TLDR: As President Joe Biden’s transition team continues to vet and identify key federal officials, agencies that contribute to technology and small business policy—such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)—will likely see new leaders in the coming months. As the Biden team picks new federal officials, however, it should be guided by a commitment to supporting and enabling the nation’s innovation ecosystem.
The Big Story: After attack on U.S. Capitol, Internet companies move to block Trump. Content moderation efforts at the world’s largest Internet companies were under the microscope this week as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube took action against content shared by outgoing President Donald Trump that led to a violent riot at the Capitol that left five dead, including a U.S. Capitol Police officer.
This year has been difficult for every individual and company in the country. During a global pandemic, which has caused widespread economic damage and uncertainty, startups are struggling—struggling to find funding, struggling to navigate existing government relief programs, and struggling to maintain jobs and operations (let alone sustain growth). And across the country, people are looking to Washington for support and guidance.
The White House’s executive order on “preventing online censorship” is a dangerous move that will encourage bad faith lawsuits, and dismantle the fundamental and commonsense legal framework that startups depend on to compete in today’s Internet ecosystem and keep their platforms free of objectionable content.
The Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (or EARN IT) Act from Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) addresses a critical issue—stopping online child exploitation, which is a goal that startups share. But, as currently drafted, the bill threatens to unnecessarily disrupt the regulatory framework that has helped the Internet flourish and potentially ban the use of strong encryption technologies that protect user safety.
When the United States negotiates trade agreements, it has the chance to give startups a similar legal framework abroad that they rely on domestically. This is critically important for smaller companies looking to effectively compete in an increasingly global ecosystem. While Congress still has the ability to update that digital legal framework as it sees fit, the inclusion of digital trade protections in trade agreements gives startups the certainty they need to compete globally.
In this report, and through a series of events in Washington, D.C. in the summer of 2019, Engine and the Charles Koch Institute sought to unpack the nuts and bolts of content moderation. We examined what everyday content moderation looks like for Internet platforms and the legal framework that makes that moderation possible, debunked myths about content moderation, and asked attendees to put themselves in the shoes of content moderators.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act has been privy to the ire of politicians at both ends of the political spectrum in recent weeks. That misplaced bipartisan disdain isn’t limited to the 1996 law, however. As the USMCA approaches formal consideration in Congress, attacks on the agreement’s Article 19.17, which mirrors the language of Section 230, have ramped up as well.
In a Ways and Means Committee hearing on trade policy earlier this month, Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.) showed clear animus towards the article in a terse exchange with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. Running over her time, the congresswoman asked why the U.S. intermediary liability rules were included in the agreement, saying she had “significant concerns regarding the USTR’s stance on CDA 230.” Ambassador Lighthizer defended the CDA 230-like language, saying “it’s U.S. law” and that the digital trade chapter is “a way for small internet companies to grow and use their advantages.”
The Ambassador is right. Article 19.17—and the digital trade chapter of the USMCA—will lead to greater innovation domestically and among our trading partners. As Santa Clara Law School professor and leading Section 230 scholar Eric Goldman points out in a letter signed by Engine, Article 19.17 is critical to this end because it lowers barriers, strengthens markets, and advances liberty.
Immunity for content generated by third parties on their platforms allows startups can get off the ground without exposure to potentially crippling lawsuits. It facilitates consumer trust by enabling third-party reviews, a hallmark of Internet commerce that would not exist without such protections. Finally, Article 19.17 expands free speech opportunities through increased access to platforms.
Unfortunately, Rep. Sánchez isn't alone in her criticism of the liability rules. Her Republican colleagues, Reps. Paul Gosar (Ariz.) and Matt Gaetz (Fla.), also oppose Article 19.17, attacking the U.S. liability rules that have fostered the internet we know today.
The House Democrats’ nine-member working group is focused on reconciling their issues with the USMCA in four areas: drug pricing, enforcement, labor, and the environment. While it appears unlikely that agreement will come to a vote with just 12 work days left before Congress enters its six-week recess, that list of issues need not be expanded. Going forward, the USMCA doesn't need another roadblock. Especially not one that needlessly picks apart the novel and innovation-advancing digital trade chapter.
Current legal frameworks have allowed us to build creative online communities that have enabled musicians, writers, artists, developers, designers, and filmmakers throughout Europe to access a global online market. We are concerned that proposed changes to the European Copyright Directive, specifically Article 13, will threaten the existence of these vibrant online communities.
Your privacy is important to us. To better protect your privacy we provide this notice explaining our online information practices and the choices you can make about the way your information is collected and used.
