Tech Policy Summit blog

This Blog Has Moved to TechPolicyCentral.com

Effective immediately, all of the content on this blog (including the complete archives) can now be found at our Tech Policy Central site.

We will no longer be updating this blog, so please be sure to visit TechPolicyCentral.com and update your bookmarks and RSS feeds accordingly to continue receiving the latest news and info.

Tech Policy Central is also the new home of Tech Policy Summit and our latest conference, the Regional Broadband Innovation Summit & Expo. The site also features job listings, research reports, a directory of 'Who's Who' in tech policy and podcasts and videos -- a one-stop shop for all things tech policy.

Qualcomm and Nokia Call Truce In Patent Battle

Wireless communications leaders Qualcomm and Nokia have announced that they're burying the hatchet in their long-standing, trans-Atlantic patent dispute. The companies have signed a 15-year licensing deal that, according to a Qualcomm news release, will "result in settlement of all litigation between the companies, including the withdrawal by Nokia of its complaint to the European Commission."

Specific financial terms remain confidential, but Nokia received a license enabling it to use all of Qualcomm's patents in its mobile devices and infrastructure equipment. In turn, Nokia agreed to allow Qualcomm to use Nokia's technology in its chipsets.

Businessweek columnist Steve Wildstrom, emcee for Tech Policy Summit '08, interviewed Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs at the 2008 Summit earlier this year and his opening question for Dr. Jacobs was about the company's patent litigation. You can hear a podcast of that interview in the Media Vault. 

TPS '08 Follow-up: PolyFuel Readies Prototype

If you attended Tech Policy Summit '08 in Hollywood earlier this year, hopefully you had a chance to hear PolyFuel CEO Jim Balcom discuss his company's portable fuel cell membrane technology. We invited Mr. Balcom to participate in the program because of his firsthand experience as an entrepreneur working with the federal government to advance innovation in an emerging market -- in this case the quest for better alternative energy sources.

As he recounted during his Tech Policy Summit talk, PolyFuel had sought assistance from the Department of Energy in order to fund his startup's R&D work on a prototype of a fuel-cell-based laptop power module. Despite the red tape and challenges associated with such funding, he made a compelling case for why federal funding is sometimes necessary to advance certain technologies.

So we were excited to learn today that PolyFuel has developed a functioning prototype laptop that it plans to demonstrate to manufacturers in the next several weeks. According to News.com, the prototype relies on a direct methanol fuel cell to convert methanol to electricity in order to power the computer without relying on lithium-ion batteries.

For more info, check out News.com. You can also listen to a complete podcast of Mr. Balcom's talk at Tech Policy Summit in the Media Vault.

Speaking at Tech Policy Summit

While we haven't officially announced the dates and venue for the next Tech Policy Summit, we've received a number of inquiries about speaking opportunities at the conference. So we thought we'd post a quick update to explain how you, or someone you know, can become a Tech Policy Summit speaker.

Although in ninety percent of the cases we already know whom we want to invite for a particular speaking spot and we invite him or her directly, we are always happy to review proposals that are sent to us via email (info at techpolicysummit dot com) or the online contact form at the Tech Policy Summit site. In fact, each year, we've added a few experts to the speaking program as a result of these submissions.

Whether you receive an invitation directly, or you contact us asking about speaking opportunities, one of the key criteria is a willingness to participate in the Q & A format that is at the heart of the Summit. With the exception of a handful of 'traditional' keynotes, the sessions are either unscripted roundtable discussions or one-on-one interviews. And even the keynote speakers are required to take questions from the other participants after their talk.

There are no prepared presentations allowed. Instead, we look for outspoken and knowledgable speakers who are comfortable fielding questions from people who both agree and disagree with them. It's a nonpartisan forum where different personalities and opinions get to mix it up, in the spirit of 'collaborating to drive technology innovation and adoption.'

So, if you're passionate about technology policy issues and want to throw your hat into the ring for consideration as a speaker or session host, we look forward to hearing from you. Just send us a brief bio and an overview of the policy topic(s) you're interested in addressing. Even if you don't want to speak yourself, feel free to send us your recommendations for speakers and topics you think will add value to the 2009 Summit. 

Previous speakers include Qualcomm CEO Paul Jacobs, BitTorrent president Ashwin Navin, digg CEO Jay Adelson, Verizon CTO Dick Lynch, craigslist founder Craig Newmark, YouTube chief counsel Zahavah Levine, EFF senior staff attorney Fred von Lohmann, Congressman Howard Berman, USPTO Director Jon Dudas, FCC commissioner Robert McDowell, M2Z Networks founder Milo Medin, former FTC chairman Deborah Platt Majoras and MySpace chief security officer Hemanshu Nigam -- to name a few.

More information on the previous two Summits are available on the Tech Policy Summit site, and we'll announce details of the next conference here soon.

Collaboration? Anyone? Anyone?

Last week, 463 Communications' Sean Garrett wrote about a tech policy "leadership gap" in Silicon Valley. He pointed out what others, including us, agree is a need for more involvement by up-and-coming tech execs and innovators. It's an issue that has been top of mind for us since we founded the Tech Policy Summit conference in early 2006, and it's a challenge that we're actively working on today.

In fact, we'll be announcing a new project later this summer that is designed to help bring more upstart Silicon Valley entrepreneurs into the fold. After all, why should the big players like Microsoft, IBM, Google and Intel have all of the fun?

I believe there's another missing ingredient though, and a series of recent occurrences reminds me just how critical it is: Collaboration, with a capital C.

It's no accident that Tech Policy Summit's tagline is Collaborating to Drive Technology Innovation and Adoption. From the outset, our goal has been to create an open forum where key stakeholders from the various 'us vs. them' camps can come together on neutral ground to share their perspectives and to find new ways to work together. We launched TechPolicyCentral.com last October to extend that vision to the Internet, and hopefully to more people.

Of course, we know better than to harbor Pollyannish beliefs that a single conference or Web site is enough to bridge the chasms that still divide D.C. and Silicon Valley, or Hollywood and just about everyone else. The cold, hard truth is that there are different interests with different goals that don't always align.

But what about the dozens of tech policy-related organizations vying for the attention of techies and politicos that do share similar goals? Our experience has been that some (not all) would rather go it alone -- even if that means reaching fewer people or having less of an impact.

Wouldn't it be more effective for advocacy work in D.C., and less confusing to individuals on the sidelines in Silicon Valley, if those who carry the mantle of advancing tech policy figured out how to work with each other instead of competing with one another? To be clear, there are some organizations that get this and are 110% committed to collaborating in order to effect change.

It is the others that I find baffling.

News From Who's Who

In the Who's Who section of Tech Policy Central, we do our best to keep tabs on the many organizations that make the tech policy world go round. So far, Who's Who includes almost 100 profiles of think tanks, coalitions and industry associations, and the list continues to grow.

To get a glimpse at what's new, check out these recent press releases from some of the orgs we're watching:

• Free Press has elected Columbia University professor Tim Wu, credited with coining the term 'net neutrality,' as chairman of its board of directors. Professor Wu replaces Robert W. McChesney.
• The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) released a new report Friday titled "The Perils of Mandatory Controls and Restrictive Defaults." PFF senior fellow Adam Thierer, who spoke about Internet safety at last month's Tech Policy Summit, is the paper's author.
• The Business Software Alliance (BSA) announced today that it settled a software piracy claim against a California manufacturing company accused of using unauthorized copies of Adobe, Autodesk and Microsoft software. The firm, Acorn Engineering Company, has agreeed to pay BSA $250,000 as part of the settlement.
• The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) published a study on The Benefits and Costs of I-File, a proposed government-run electronic tax preparation system. The report commissioned by CCIA and written by Robert Litan, Jeffrey Eisenach and Kevin Caves concludes the IRS should not invest in the system.

FCC's Stanford Hearing: Is This Just A Beginning?

In advance of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) next hearing on broadband network management practices, which will be held Thursday on the Stanford campus, professor/blogger Susan Crawford has written a post called "Retrograde Inversion" in which she contends that the FCC is asking the wrong question.

She writes:

"What is reasonable network management" isn't the question we should be asking. Instead, we should be asking ourselves "Why do the dominant network operators always win?" We don't need retrospective fault-allocation - instead, we need a prospective legislative/structural plan for digging ourselves out of the hole we're in...

So even if the Commission says something sharp to Comcast about what practices amount to reasonable network management, that will not be a victory. It will just be a beginning. We need a thoroughly revamped approach to communications law: a revised statute that treats internet access as the general communications network it was supposed to be (as the framers of communications law thought telephone networks should be); a revised approach to judicial review, embedded in that statute, that revitalizes the role of the courts in telecommunications law; and far better information about what network operators are actually doing. The entire post is available here.

In a twist of tech policy fate, Professor Crawford and Comcast exec Joe Waz recently participated in a roundtable discussion together at Tech Policy Summit about broadband innovation in the U.S. (along with M2Z Networks' founder Milo Medin and Ambassador Richard Russell of President's Office of Science and Technology Policy). You can listen to the podcast of that and other TPS '08 sessions.

Note: While Professor Crawford was on the advisory board for the 2008 Tech Policy Summit, she has no involvement in TechPolicyCentral.com and her opinions/writings are just that: her opinions/writings.

Tech Policy Summit '08 Podcasts Available

We're happy to report that the podcasts from the 2008 Tech Policy Summit, which took place at the Renaissance hotel in Hollywood last month, are now available for your listening pleasure. You can find audio of all 24 sessions in the Media Vault, along with photos from our conference photographer Terry.

They're posted in chronological order, so be sure to click through to the second page for more podcasts, including the March 27th keynote by FCC commissioner Robert McDowell and the one-on-one interviews with craigslist founder Craig Newmark and BitTorrent president Ashwin Navin.

Even if you were at this year's Summit, you'll find something new in the podcasts since there were six concurrent breakout sessions on the opening afternoon that are definitely worth checking out. 

Those topics include:

• Using Social Media as a Policy Tool
• The Role of Privacy and Trust in the Innovation Economy
• Building a More Effective Public Policy Organization
• Copyright in a Converged World
• Maintaining a Competitive Edge: [How] Can the U.S. Tech Workforce Stay on Top in a Flat World?
• The Future of Wide-Area Public Broadband

Enjoy!

Who Will Get H-1B Visas for FY 2009?

Yesterday was the last day to submit H-1B visa applications for FY 2009 to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), ending a five-day application window that is expected to set a new record.

Even though more time was alloted for applying this year, the debate continues over the number of visas available to companies. Under current law, the annual cap allows for 65,000 H-1B visas and an additional 20,000 for students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Tech industry associations that favor increasing the cap have been pushing for legislation to change that limit, with two new proposals surfacing in Congress in the last several weeks.

The first, known as the Innovation Employment Act, was introduced on March 13th by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and calls for doubling the H-1B visas to 130,000 per year. The following day, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) upped the ante with a proposed a bill called the Strengthening United States Technology and Innovation Now , or SUSTAIN, Act that would triple the number of H-1Bs this year to 195,000.

Courts Reach Different Conclusions in P2P Cases

"Same day, two federal courts, two different rulings on 'making available.'"

That's how Fred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), described a pair of contradictory court decisions last week in cases involving copyrighted music and peer-to-peer file sharing.

In one case, Elektra v. Barker, a New York judge ruled that an individual could be found liable for copyright infringement just by making a file available for sharing -- even if no one actually downloads it. Nearby in a Boston court room, a federal judge reached the opposite conclusion in the London-Sire v. Doe case; EFF filed an amicus brief in the latter case.

As Mr. von Lohmann writes, it's likely that the issue will be the subject of more court cases given the disagreement between the two rulings. Check out his post for more details.

Incidentally, Mr. von Lohmann recently participated in a breakout session at this year's Tech Policy Summit titled Copyright in a Converged World with UCLA professor Doug Lichtman, Copyright Alliance executive director Patrick Ross and TiVo general counsel Matt Zinn. Lawyer/blogger Denise Howell recounted their discussion at ZDNet.