PKThinks

Learn more and download the report here. 

Public Knowledge is excited to announce “Diversity in Early-Career Tech Policy Roles: Challenges and Opportunities,” a new report from Tsion Tesfaye, Communications Justice Fellow at Public Knowledge and diversity and technology equity advocate.

Early-career opportunities offer people a pathway to build careers in tech policy. This is why Public Knowledge conducted research into the challenges tech policy organizations face in reaching people of color interested in the field. This report explores racial and ethnic diversity in early-career roles in technology policy, offers ideas for increasing diversity in such roles, and outlines the impacts of technology policy on people of color. The report grows the body of knowledge about diversity in public interest groups while raising awareness of the most promising practices groups can implement to attract — and retain — diverse advocates.

This report includes a survey of technology policy organizations and found that:

Job opportunities are circulated primarily within the tech policy groups and their networks, therefore making access to these networks crucial for entering the field.

Job description content can influence the applicant pool, decreasing or increasing the pool of diverse applicants.

Download “Mind Your Own Business: Protecting Proprietary Third-Party Information From Digital Platform” here.

Vendors must expose proprietary information, such as sales data or logistic information, to digital platforms like Amazon or Facebook in order to reach customers on those platforms. This gives digital platforms the ability to use vendor proprietary information to create, price, and market rival products, enabling platforms to unfairly benefit from the work, business acumen, and risks taken by third-party vendors. Although accusations against Amazon have received the most press coverage, the problem goes well beyond Amazon and undermines competition broadly.

This paper proposes a solution modeled on Section 222 of the Communications Act (47 U.S.C. §222), which imposes requirements on telecommunications carriers to protect “customer proprietary network information,” or “CPNI.” The paper proposes a new draft statute to create a “platform CPNI” rule that would:

For the first time, define “digital platform” in statutory language;

Limit the use -- not the collection -- of vendor proprietary information by digital platforms to the purpose stated, absolutely prohibiting platforms from using this information for marketing or strategy related to rival products; and,

Download “Tending the Garden: How to Ensure That App Stores Put Users First” here.

This paper explores the challenge of balancing the significant gatekeeper control that dominant platforms like Apple and Google have over both their operating systems and app stores, with the benefits that app stores create for both developers and users. The paper argues that competition between platforms for users and developers cannot alone ensure that app stores and their associated software platforms will be operated in a way that promotes consumer rights, the public interest, and broader economic benefits. The paper also suggests specific measures that should be implemented by dominant app stores to promote these interests. This paper recommends:

That platforms only apply in-app purchase rules to genuine app functionality that could otherwise have been a single up-front purchase;

That platforms allow users to “sideload” apps but only from recognized developers (under a code-signing system that recognizes multiple certificate authorities);

That platforms follow certain guardrails to ensure the ability of independent app and hardware developers to compete on an even playing field;

That platforms allow archiving, emulation, and transfer of apps and digital content; and

Download “Making Sense of the Termination Right: How the System Fails Artists and How to Fix It Read” here.

Hidden inside Title 17 of the United States Code of Laws sits an unassuming but powerful right that Congress gave to artists and creators: the termination right. Unlike many statutory rights, this right is inalienable – it cannot be given away, not even through contract. Many artists enter into deals with companies that help fund, develop, resource, promote, and distribute their creative output. Typically, such deals involve artists granting or licensing the copyright in their work to these business partners for lengthy periods of time; sometimes these transfers are legally binding in perpetuity. The termination right allows authors of creative works to cut short, or terminate, existing grants or licenses of their work after at least 35 years have passed, regardless of their contract terms.

Congress justified the creation of the termination right on both economic and moral grounds. The right – codified at Sections 203 and 304 of the Copyright Act – was enacted to protect authors and their heirs against agreements that were unprofitable or inequitable by giving them an opportunity to share in the later economic success of their works. In crafting the right, Congress also recognized that unequal power dynamics left artists at a disadvantage when negotiating against more established licensees – particularly given that artists typically enter into their first business contracts early in their careers when they lack both bargaining power and negotiating expertise. Artists of color in particular were often subject to exploitative contracts. In short, the termination right offered artists and their heirs a fair shot at ending unfair contracts by reclaiming their rights.

Some artists may choose to exercise their termination right and reclaim ownership of their work. Other artists may use it as leverage to negotiate (or renegotiate) a better deal. Whichever path they choose, the termination right is a part of copyright law that can empower artists and creators to control their financial and artistic futures. Ensuring that creators can effectively exercise this right – and thus fully participate in the social, cultural, and economic life of the country – is a core social justice issue.

The report recommends six policy actions to help restore fairness and functionality to termination of transfer rights:

Revise the Copyright Act so that the termination right vests automatically;

Revise the Copyright Act so that the termination right vests sooner than 35 years after a grant of rights under Section 203 or 56 years after the copyright is first obtained under Section 304;

Eliminate or revise the “work made for hire” exception or statutory definition;

Mitigate the need for artists to litigate ownership disputes prior to exercising their termination right by revising the statute of limitations or clarifying that the mere act of registering an adverse claim with the Copyright Office is not an effective repudiation of an ownership claim;

Address derivative works issues through statutory clarification; and

You can download “Security Shield: A Label to Support Sustainable Cybersecurity” here.

You can download the paper here. 

For more than 100 years, the United States has used a variety of policy tools to encourage and ensure ubiquitous, affordable basic communications service. Universal and accessible communications services have been the foundation upon which our economy, personal communications, and civic participation depend. The laws and rules used to achieve universal service, however, have evolved with new technologies and markets and now, as the network is in the midst of several new technology transitions, the question of how to achieve and measure universal service arises again.

This article examines the basic question of what the “basic service” is in today’s world. For decades basic voice service provider offer the traditional copper network has been treated as the basic universal service. Voice service certainly continues to be critical to business, personal, and emergency communications, but the time has now come to also acknowledge that broadband Internet access service is itself a basic service. The days of treating broadband access as a luxury are gone, and our policies should reflect that. With that in mind, this article considers a variety of metrics by which policymakers should evaluate broadband and voice services, to determine whether new services being offered are a true step forward for everyone in the technology transitions.

Additionally, this article reviews potential tools that policymakers could use to achieve universal, affordable broadband and voice service. In the past, Congress and the FCC have used tools like carrier of last resort policies, Universal Service Fund programs, and voluntary efforts by companies to increase network build-out and access. At this early stage policymakers should seriously consider all available options to determine what approaches work best for new technologies.

PK Thinks:

The patent system is an important motivator for new technology. But in its present state, the patent system has problems and loopholes that allow for abuse and exploitation, harming rather than promoting innovation.

In this white paper, we look at how to fix those problems in patent law, by identifying areas that are currently abused and that require reform. Those five areas are:

Accounting for all inventors. The standards for patenting must account for all types of inventors, large and small, and especially those who work outside the patent system.

Clarity of patents. Patents are intended to disseminate knowledge about new inventions and technologies. Thus, patent documents must be made clear and understandable, so that they serve that function.

Targeting the right parties. Threats of complex patent litigation, levied against consumers, small companies, and non-technology businesses, stifle innovation without any corresponding benefit to inventors.

Avoiding gamesmanship in litigation. Licensing and enforcement of patents should be about the merits of the patents, not about a party’s ability to run its opponents into the ground with litigation costs.

Maintaining competition in the innovation economy. Patent owners ought to use their patents in ways consistent with long-standing principles favoring a competitive marketplace.

PK Thinks:

1. The copyright reclamation right gives artists the ability to tear up their copyright transfers or licenses after 35 years. This right has the potential to transform the recorded music business.

2. For decades, some record labels have used their copyright holdings as leverage to become industry gatekeepers against artists and consumers alike, and to burden the development of new distribution platforms that threaten to make them obsolete.

3. Artists' right to terminate transfers, which first took effect in 2013, empowers artists to reclaim control over their own life's works or negotiate better deals with their current business partners. This can have some unique impacts on the recorded music industry, which has traditionally been plagued by the imbalance of power between the major record labels and artists.

4. The termination right is still relatively new, so Congress, musicians, and music fans alike must be vigilant to make sure unanticipated pitfalls don't prevent artists from exercising their reclamation rights.

PK Thinks

1. The phone network is transitioning to new technologies. This creates opportunities for better services, but does not change the fundamental needs served by our nation's communications system.

2. The phone network transition is inevitable, but the policy implications of the transition are not.

3. Our nation's communications policy should be set by referring to the basic fundamental values that made our phone network the envy of the world.

4. The nation's telecommunications policies must continue to ensure:

Service to all Americans

Competition & Interconnection

Consumer Protection

Network Reliability

Public Safety

A PDF version of this paper can be found here.

PK Thinks

1. Consumers who legally own copies of works have personal property rights in those copies, just like they have property rights over other goods.     

2. Those rights need to be balanced against the rights of the author or copyright holder in the work.     

3. The first sale doctrine plays an important part in maintaining that balance, but is currently written for physical copies, not digital works.    

4. Works sold as digital downloads are hard to distribute without making copies—something that the first sale doctrine doesn’t clearly allow today.    

5. Other aspects of digital media make consumers’ rights over their property more tenuous than before.

A PDF version of this paper can be found here.