Home   News   2001 Speech Service  Senate Committee Sets Sights On Technology Issues

National Communications System
Volume IV, Number 3

Senate Committee Sets Sights On Technology Issues

Statement of Senator Orrin G. Hatch on the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2001, Washington, D.C., February 14, 2001.

Mr. President, I rise today to discuss S. 320 [Senate Bill 320], the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act, which I have worked on with my distinguished colleague, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator [Patrick] Leahy. We have had a very productive relationship in the Judiciary Committee in the area of high technology and intellectual property. Our bipartisan cooperation has resulted in much good legislation that has helped American consumers and businesses and which has encouraged American innovation and creativity, including greater deployment of the Internet.

Some recent examples of our work include the following items:

• The Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act, which authorized the carriage of local television stations by satellite carriers, has brought local television to thousands across the country who might not have been able to get it before, and has brought competition in subscription television services to many others who before could only choose the local cable company. The passage last year of a loan guarantee program will help make the benefits of this law more widely available.
• The Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act helps guard against fraudulent or pornographic websites that confuse, offend, or defraud unwitting online consumers who go to sites with famous business names only to find that someone else is using that trademarked name in bad faith under false pretenses. This law also helps protect the goodwill of American businesses that could be hurt by the bad faith misuse of their trademarked business name in ways that tarnish their name or undermine consumer confidence in their brands.
• The American Inventor Protection Act is helping to further serve American innovators with more streamlined procedures at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and better organizing the Office so that it will better serve its customers, American inventors. There are also protections for inventors from unscrupulous businesses that prey on small inventors who are not familiar with the procedures of obtaining a patent.
• The Digital Millennium Copyright Act updated copyright law for the Internet, while striking a balance necessary to foster technological development and full deployment of the Internet. This law has set the groundwork for entertainment convergence on a single interactive platform where the consumer is king and can set his or her own schedule for news, information, entertainment, communication, and so on.

Well, Mr. President, this is just a sampling of what we have achieved together. And it is a prelude to what we can do in the future.

Today, we are here to discuss S. 320, the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act. S. 320 is a technical corrections bill to clean up some scrivener’s errors that have crept into the U.S. Code in the patent, trademark, and copyright laws. We, the sponsors, believe it is to the benefit of smooth functioning of the law to clean up the Code to make it easier to use, and to more accurately reflect Congressional intent.

Specifically, the bill corrects typographical errors such as misspellings, dropped or erroneous cross-references or punctuation errors. It also makes consistent the titles of the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office [USPTO] and its officers. It also clarifies some unclear drafting in the Code on some procedural matters at the USPTO, such as making it clear that if foreign trademark applicants fail to designate a U.S. agent, the USPTO Commissioner is deemed to be that agent for delivery of documents regarding that application; and ensuring that no prior art effect will be given to foreign patents or patent applications unless they are published in English.

It makes it easier for small inventors to sit on the USPTO Advisory Committee. These pro-American inventor policies are codified now in the law, but not clearly drafted. This bill makes them clearer.

All of these changes make the intellectual property laws of our country easier to use and understand for our constituents who invent, create, innovate and so serve our other citizens. It also makes the law clearer for those who use the inventions and creations of others. I believe there is no controversy about the provisions of this bill, and it clears the way for further Congressional action to foster the growth of our most innovative sector, our intellectual property sector.

With regard to that, Senator Leahy and I are releasing today our joint High Technology and Intellectual Property legislative agenda. I would like to mention some of the items on that agenda and discuss some of them briefly.

Copyright and Fair Use - Consumers and Creators in the Digital Age: In the Internet Age, many basic questions need to be asked anew about the relationships between the artists and the media companies that market and distribute their product; about the rights of consumers and fans to use works in new ways and the ability of technology companies and other mediators to assist them in those uses; and about the accessibility of works to scholars, students, or others for legitimate purposes.

We need to continue to think about how the copyright system applies in the Internet world, where some of the assumptions underpinning traditional copyright law may not be relevant, or need to be applied by a proper analogy. Are there ways to clarify the rights and responsibilities of artists, owners, consumers, and users of copyrighted works? How can we foster the continued convergence of information, entertainment, and communication services on a variety of platforms and devices that will make life more enjoyable and convenient? We need to encourage an open and competitive environment in the production and distribution of content on the Internet.

Internet Privacy Protection: As the Internet’s new digital medium continues to grow, we must ensure that consumers are confident that personally identifiable information which they submit electronically are afforded adequate levels of privacy protection. As consumer confidence in the security of their personal and financial information is enhanced, Internet users will be more willing to go online, make purchases over the Internet and generally provide personal information required by businesses and organizations over the Internet.

At the same time, we must ensure that any initiatives have the least regulatory effect on the growth of e-commerce and on commercial free speech rights protected by the Constitution. We expect to examine the adequacy of Internet privacy protection and will, where necessary, advance reforms aimed at ensuring greater privacy protection.

For example, the Committee expects to examine the following:

How are privacy concerns impacting the growth of e-Commerce (in the financial services industry, in the insurance industry, in online retailing, etc.) and the deployment of new technologies that could further the growth of, and consumer access to, the Internet?

• Does Congress need to amend criminal or civil rights laws to address consumer electronic privacy concerns?
• Does U.S. encryption policy negatively affect the growth of e-Commerce?
• What is the impact of the European Union’s Internet Privacy Directive on U.S. industry and e-Commerce?
• Can Federal law enforcement, particularly civil rights enforcers, play a larger role in safeguarding the privacy concerns of Internet users?
• To what extent can web-sites and Government agencies track the Internet activities of individual users and what should be done to ensure greater protection of personally identifiable or financially sensitive data?

Internet and Education Reform: We would like to work toward reforms that can more fully deploy the Internet to make educational opportunities more widely available to students in remote locations, to life-long learners, and to enhance the educational experience of all students. The Internet can bring new experiences to remote locations.

My own home state of Utah has been experimenting with ways to bring the best possible educational experience to learners all across our state, some of whom live in remote rural areas, using wired technology. We would like to see how we can further support efforts to harness the communicative power of the wired world on behalf of students across the country.

The Patent System in an Age of Innovation: Science is advancing rapidly and the challenge to the patent system of genetics, biotechnology, and business method patents are daunting. Whole new subject matter areas are being exploited, from patents on business methods from financial services to e-commerce tools on the Internet. Both the complexity and the sheer volume of patent applications are expanding exponentially.

Recent Supreme Court decisions have once again posed the question of State Government responsibility to respect and protect intellectual property rights. And I believe we need to review the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 to ensure that its balanced goals continue to be met.

Trademarks and Internet Domain Names: As the assignment of domain names transitions from a single company to a competitive, market-based system, we need to stay vigilant with regard to the significant antitrust and intellectual property ramifications this process holds for American businesses and consumers. We intend to build on our record of strengthening protection for online consumers by protecting the trademarks consumers rely on in cyberspace, while also encouraging the full range of positive interactions the Internet makes possible.

I think the Internet can be a place of infinite variety while we continue to allow consumers to rely on brand names they know in the e-commerce context. The worldwide nature of the Internet also heightens the need for the United States to join international efforts to make worldwide intellectual property protection, including that of trademarks, more efficient and effective for Americans. In particular, I hope we can move ahead on the United States accession to the Madrid Protocol.

Competition and Innovation in the Digital Age: I have always maintained that proper and timely enforcement of Federal antitrust laws can foster both competition and innovation, while minimizing the need for Government regulation. This is an especially important paradigm for the Internet. We need to carefully think through the antitrust implications of Business-to-Business exchanges.

We also need to consider carefully what remedies should be imposed in cases where antitrust violations do occur, notwithstanding the generally dynamic and competitive nature of Internet-related industries. We will also need to review the increasing legal tension in the high technology industry between intellectual property rights and antitrust laws. There has always been a tension here, but in the Internet world, we need to be careful that intellectual property or content power is not leveraged into distribution power, or otherwise used in anticompetitive ways.

Furthermore, the Internet poses new questions about the competitive need to protect collections of data in a way that preserves incentives for the creation of databases without unduly hampering the free flow of information in anticompetitive ways.

Broadband: Access to new "broadband" technologies is increasingly important for full deployment and enjoyment of the Internet. We will need to consider the countervailing rights and duties of local phone companies and cable companies, either of which may provide broadband services in a local area. Specifically, what rights of access to broadband lines should competitors have, and what right to content should competitive distribution services have?

First Amendment and Speech in the Digital Age: The Internet is a radically new medium not just for commerce, but also for speech, broadcasting and advertising. As we analogize from traditional media such as broadcasting, we need to ask afresh what regulations make sense in this new medium, if any, and how do we cope with different media competing toward largely the same goal, but with differing rules?

In summary Mr. President, this non-controversial technical corrections bill clears the way for an exciting agenda for the 107th Congress in the Judiciary Committee. I hope we can pass this bill today, and I look forward to working with my colleague from Vermont [Leahy] on this most interesting and ambitious agenda.

(Courtesy of the U.S. Senate.)

Published for internal information use by the National Communications System. Parenthetical entries are speaker/author notes; bracketed entries are editorial notes. This material is in the public domain and may be reprinted without permission.

Privacy Policy