The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and NAB support some of the Consumer Drone Safety Act introduced by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The legislation “strikes the right balance by imposing meaningful guidelines on recreational use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles,” an NAB spokesman said in a written statement Thursday. “UAVs hold great potential in improving newsgathering capabilities at local stations.” Though ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro generally commended the legislation, he said Friday that its anti-tampering proposed requirements go too far. “UAS as we know them today were created due to a culture of innovation, in which amateur inventors and model aircraft hobbyists built and improved upon the technology organically,” Castro said of unmanned aircraft systems. “This bill would prohibit consumers from ‘jailbreaking’ their drones and put the brakes on permission-less innovation.” Castro proposed steep penalties be imposed on those who violate Federal Aviation Administration safety rules. “The Consumer Drone Safety Act is a small, but important, step forward,” he said. “Congress and the FAA should continue to look for opportunities to enable commercial UAS usage that is risk-based and technology-neutral,” he said. “By modernizing its FAA safety rules, the United States can promote innovation and remain competitive in the rapidly growing global market for drone technology.” Some have said the chances of Congress passing any comprehensive drone privacy legislation are low (see 1506180020).

The EU wants to include the private sector in work on its digital single market (DSM) strategy, but “we're not going to be lectured by the private sector on what constitutes a free flow of data within the European Union,” said Andrea Glorioso, Delegation of the EU to the U.S. counselor-digital economy/cyber. “We're not going to be fooled by claims unless those claims are substantiated by hard data.” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and other backers of the EU's 16-point DSM strategy, unveiled in May (see 1505060038 and 1505070053), believe the strategy will promote e-commerce across the EU's 28 member nations by overhauling the EU's telecom rules and harmonizing members states' regulations in areas like copyright law.

The EU wants to include the private sector in work on its digital single market (DSM) strategy, but “we're not going to be lectured by the private sector on what constitutes a free flow of data within the European Union,” said Andrea Glorioso, Delegation of the EU to the U.S. counselor-digital economy/cyber. “We're not going to be fooled by claims unless those claims are substantiated by hard data.” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and other backers of the EU's 16-point DSM strategy, unveiled in May (see 1505060038 and 1505070053), believe the strategy will promote e-commerce across the EU's 28 member nations by overhauling the EU's telecom rules and harmonizing members states' regulations in areas like copyright law.

Following spying concerns that emerged after former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden “revealed extensive U.S. government surveillance,” the U.S. tech industry as a whole underperformed, resulting in an economic impact far greater than the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation's initial $35 billion estimate, ITIF said in a news release Tuesday. That affected the cloud computing sector and the industry as a whole, ITIF said. In a report released Tuesday, ITIF cataloged a “wide range of specific examples of the economic harm that has been done to U.S. businesses as a result of unreformed government surveillance practices,” and “proposes a series of reforms designed to improve security, protect transparency, and increase cooperation and accountability in the global technology ecosystem,” the release said. “The U.S. government’s failure to meaningfully reform its surveillance practices has taken a serious economic toll on the U.S. tech sector and the total cost continues to grow each day,” said ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro, who co-wrote the report. “Foreign customers are increasingly shunning U.S. companies, and governments around the world are using U.S. surveillance as an excuse to enact a new wave of protectionist policies,” which is bad for U.S. companies, workers and the economy as a whole, Castro said. “Now that Congress has passed the USA Freedom Act, it is imperative that it turn its attention to reforming the digital surveillance activities that continue to impact our nation’s competitiveness,” he said. In its report, ITIF recommended policymakers “level the playing field for the U.S. tech sector” by implementing reforms like transparency about surveillance practices, opposing government efforts to weaken encryption or place backdoors in software, strengthening mutual legal assistance treaties with other nations, and combating anti-competitive practices by other nations, the release said. “Congress must decide how many American jobs it is willing to sacrifice in pursuit of intelligence gathering and find a better balance between economic interests and national security interests,” Castro said.

Following spying concerns that emerged after former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden “revealed extensive U.S. government surveillance,” the U.S. tech industry as a whole underperformed, resulting in an economic impact far greater than the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation's initial $35 billion estimate, ITIF said in a news release Tuesday. That affected the cloud computing sector and the industry as a whole, ITIF said. In a report released Tuesday, ITIF cataloged a “wide range of specific examples of the economic harm that has been done to U.S. businesses as a result of unreformed government surveillance practices,” and “proposes a series of reforms designed to improve security, protect transparency, and increase cooperation and accountability in the global technology ecosystem,” the release said. “The U.S. government’s failure to meaningfully reform its surveillance practices has taken a serious economic toll on the U.S. tech sector and the total cost continues to grow each day,” said ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro, who co-wrote the report. “Foreign customers are increasingly shunning U.S. companies, and governments around the world are using U.S. surveillance as an excuse to enact a new wave of protectionist policies,” which is bad for U.S. companies, workers and the economy as a whole, Castro said. “Now that Congress has passed the USA Freedom Act, it is imperative that it turn its attention to reforming the digital surveillance activities that continue to impact our nation’s competitiveness,” he said. In its report, ITIF recommended policymakers “level the playing field for the U.S. tech sector” by implementing reforms like transparency about surveillance practices, opposing government efforts to weaken encryption or place backdoors in software, strengthening mutual legal assistance treaties with other nations, and combating anti-competitive practices by other nations, the release said. “Congress must decide how many American jobs it is willing to sacrifice in pursuit of intelligence gathering and find a better balance between economic interests and national security interests,” Castro said.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and the Technology Policy Institute recommended the FTC not bring action against Nomi Technologies, which provides in-store retail analytics (see 1504230036), in comments filed with the agency Tuesday. Technology Policy Institute President Thomas Lenard said in comments that although Nomi’s privacy policy once said a consumer could opt out of its analytics services at retail establishments, which was not accurate, an opt-out option was available on its website and Nomi “wasn’t legally required to offer either the global or the in-store opt-out.” ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro and Research Assistant Alan McQuinn said in comments that Nomi’s mistake in its privacy policy was “fairly insignificant” and there was “no evidence of consumer harm.” ITIF said the “FTC’s actions will ultimately do more harm than good.” The Application Developers Alliance agreed Nomi’s privacy policy was inaccurate, but said the “inaccuracy was de minimis and no consumer harm was alleged or apparent,” in comments to the FTC. ADA “believes that the penalty against Nomi is disproportionate and heavy-handed” and may “encourage companies to simplify their data practices and privacy policies to a degree that will always ensure their legality but will also transmit very little information to the consumer.” NetChoice Policy Counsel Carl Szabo said in comments to the FTC that the agency failed to show a violation of the FTC Act and could disincentivize businesses from giving consumers more control over their privacy. The Chamber of Commerce also submitted comments asking the agency to “vacate the proposed consent order and in its place formulate a policy to guide its decision to prosecute unfair and deceptive trade practices based on the spirit of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996 and the Commission’s own 1997 civil penalty leniency policy.” The commission voted 3-2 to issue the complaint and accept the proposed consent order, the FTC said in a news release announcing its proposed consent order with Nomi in April. Chairwoman Edith Ramirez and Commissioners Julie Brill and Terrell McSweeny issued a joint statement in favor of the order; Commissioners Maureen Ohlhausen and Joshua Wright issued separate dissenting statements. Ohlhausen noted in her dissent that Nomi is a “young company that attempted to go above and beyond its legal obligation to protect consumers but, in doing so, erred without benefiting itself,” a Nomi spokesman told us previously. “Commissioner Wright believes that Nomi did not violate the FTC Act,” the spokesman said. Nomi continually reviews its privacy policies to “ensure that they follow best practices and had already made the recommended changes in pursuit of that goal by updating our privacy policy over a year and a half ago, while we were still an early-stage startup that was less than a year old,” the spokesman said. FTC Consumer Protection Bureau Director Jessica Rich said it was “vital” for companies to “keep their privacy promises to consumers when working with emerging technologies, just as it is in any other context.” Rich said if consumers are told they have choices about their privacy, the company “should make sure all of those choices are actually available to them. Nomi’s tracking technology provided aggregated information on how many consumers passed by a store instead of going in, how long consumers stayed in the store, the types of devices used by consumers, how many repeat consumers a store had and whether the consumer had visited that store at another location, the FTC said. The FTC accepted comments until May 25 and said it would decide after the comment deadline whether to make the proposed consent order final.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation and the Technology Policy Institute recommended the FTC not bring action against Nomi Technologies, which provides in-store retail analytics (see 1504230036), in comments filed with the agency Tuesday. Technology Policy Institute President Thomas Lenard said in comments that although Nomi’s privacy policy once said a consumer could opt out of its analytics services at retail establishments, which was not accurate, an opt-out option was available on its website and Nomi “wasn’t legally required to offer either the global or the in-store opt-out.” ITIF Vice President Daniel Castro and Research Assistant Alan McQuinn said in comments that Nomi’s mistake in its privacy policy was “fairly insignificant” and there was “no evidence of consumer harm.” ITIF said the “FTC’s actions will ultimately do more harm than good.” The Application Developers Alliance agreed Nomi’s privacy policy was inaccurate, but said the “inaccuracy was de minimis and no consumer harm was alleged or apparent,” in comments to the FTC. ADA “believes that the penalty against Nomi is disproportionate and heavy-handed” and may “encourage companies to simplify their data practices and privacy policies to a degree that will always ensure their legality but will also transmit very little information to the consumer.” NetChoice Policy Counsel Carl Szabo said in comments to the FTC that the agency failed to show a violation of the FTC Act and could disincentivize businesses from giving consumers more control over their privacy. The Chamber of Commerce also submitted comments asking the agency to “vacate the proposed consent order and in its place formulate a policy to guide its decision to prosecute unfair and deceptive trade practices based on the spirit of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996 and the Commission’s own 1997 civil penalty leniency policy.” The commission voted 3-2 to issue the complaint and accept the proposed consent order, the FTC said in a news release announcing its proposed consent order with Nomi in April. Chairwoman Edith Ramirez and Commissioners Julie Brill and Terrell McSweeny issued a joint statement in favor of the order; Commissioners Maureen Ohlhausen and Joshua Wright issued separate dissenting statements. Ohlhausen noted in her dissent that Nomi is a “young company that attempted to go above and beyond its legal obligation to protect consumers but, in doing so, erred without benefiting itself,” a Nomi spokesman told us previously. “Commissioner Wright believes that Nomi did not violate the FTC Act,” the spokesman said. Nomi continually reviews its privacy policies to “ensure that they follow best practices and had already made the recommended changes in pursuit of that goal by updating our privacy policy over a year and a half ago, while we were still an early-stage startup that was less than a year old,” the spokesman said. FTC Consumer Protection Bureau Director Jessica Rich said it was “vital” for companies to “keep their privacy promises to consumers when working with emerging technologies, just as it is in any other context.” Rich said if consumers are told they have choices about their privacy, the company “should make sure all of those choices are actually available to them. Nomi’s tracking technology provided aggregated information on how many consumers passed by a store instead of going in, how long consumers stayed in the store, the types of devices used by consumers, how many repeat consumers a store had and whether the consumer had visited that store at another location, the FTC said. The FTC accepted comments until May 25 and said it would decide after the comment deadline whether to make the proposed consent order final.

Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas, said he's backing the newest iteration of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization (STR) Act to include provisions aimed at jump-starting new U.S. innovation in the use of information and communications technologies (ICT) in highway travel and other transportation systems. The House was set Tuesday to vote on a two-month extension (HR-2353) of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, the current authorization of federal highway and other surface transportation programs. The extension is meant to be a stop-gap while the House irons out details of a hoped-for bipartisan compromise on reauthorization, Farenthold said during an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation event. The House hadn't voted on the extension by our deadline.

Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Texas, said he's backing the newest iteration of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization (STR) Act to include provisions aimed at jump-starting new U.S. innovation in the use of information and communications technologies (ICT) in highway travel and other transportation systems. The House was set Tuesday to vote on a two-month extension (HR-2353) of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, the current authorization of federal highway and other surface transportation programs. The extension is meant to be a stop-gap while the House irons out details of a hoped-for bipartisan compromise on reauthorization, Farenthold said during an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation event. The House hadn't voted on the extension by our deadline.

The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation recommended Congress pass a federal law prohibiting strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs). A Monday ITIF report said that “there needs to be a nationwide baseline, not just a patchwork of state laws” to protect against “censorious lawsuits” targeting people who post critical reviews online about merchants or service providers. “By discouraging participation in matters of public interest, including government proceedings, SLAPPs can deter people from exercising free speech and the right to petition, both of which are protected under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” ITIF said. “SLAPPs also freeze out many of the wider economic and societal benefits that can result from the information-sharing they obstruct.” Twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia have anti-SLAPP laws, which aren’t uniform and are rendered less effective because so many states don’t have such laws, ITIF said. A federal anti-SLAPP law should include broad speech protections, along with an actual malice provision to protect against misuse of the law, ITIF said. Federal legislation should also include a provision allowing courts to award court and reasonable attorneys’ costs, a provision expediting hearings on motions to dismiss SLAPP lawsuits and a discovery stay provision, ITIF said.