The U.S. needs to do more work “to get our arms around the opportunities and challenges with federal spectrum,” Doug Brake, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation director-broadband and spectrum policy, told us (see 1903070061). “The fragmentation and inefficient use of federal spectrum represents a tremendous opportunity to unlock value through better governance structures.” Because of recent changes, the spectrum relocation fund (SRF) can be tapped earlier than in the past, Brake said. “But there are limits on how this money can be used for the very upfront planning,” he said. “Also the SRF is not an unlimited source of money. On top of there being no great source of funding for this work, you also have real principal-agent problems.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”

Social media users shouldn’t be paid for their data, and even if large shares of company profits were shared, they would be minimal, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said Tuesday. Some have suggested Facebook could pay its users about $15 per year for their data, the ITIF report said. Google and Facebook earned about $28 billion in combined profits in 2017 and have some 4.6 billion users globally, ITIF said: “If the payments to users were equal to half their profits, then each user would get just of $3 per year.”

Social media users shouldn’t be paid for their data, and even if large shares of company profits were shared, they would be minimal, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said Tuesday. Some have suggested Facebook could pay its users about $15 per year for their data, the ITIF report said. Google and Facebook earned about $28 billion in combined profits in 2017 and have some 4.6 billion users globally, ITIF said: “If the payments to users were equal to half their profits, then each user would get just of $3 per year.”

Congress should replace a patchwork of state and federal privacy laws with one “common set of protections,” the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation said Monday. That single federal data privacy law should pre-empt state laws and replace laws like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, said Vice President Daniel Castro and Senior Policy Analyst Alan McQuinn. They said the law should promote business and innovation, saying economies with strict privacy laws like the EU are falling behind: “Of the top 200 digital firms, only 8 are European.”

Congress should replace a patchwork of state and federal privacy laws with one “common set of protections,” the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation said Monday. That single federal data privacy law should pre-empt state laws and replace laws like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, said Vice President Daniel Castro and Senior Policy Analyst Alan McQuinn. They said the law should promote business and innovation, saying economies with strict privacy laws like the EU are falling behind: “Of the top 200 digital firms, only 8 are European.”

Congress should replace a patchwork of state and federal privacy laws with one “common set of protections,” the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation said Monday. That single federal data privacy law should pre-empt state laws and replace laws like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, said Vice President Daniel Castro and Senior Policy Analyst Alan McQuinn. They said the law should promote business and innovation, saying economies with strict privacy laws like the EU are falling behind: “Of the top 200 digital firms, only 8 are European.”

The Commerce Department shouldn’t support overly strict export controls on new technology like artificial intelligence that could harm tech innovation and bolster bad actors like China, industry groups commented. The Bureau of Industry and Security published an advance NPRM in November, seeking comment by Thursday on potentially tighter export controls in docket 2018-25221. The department is exploring technology for conventional weapons, intelligence collection and weapons of mass destruction, including AI and machine learning (ML), microprocessors, advanced computers, data analytics, quantum computing, robotics and advanced surveillance.