The technology platform promises that the incoming administration “will work to ensure the full and free exchange of information through an open Internet and use technology to create a more transparent and connected democracy” and “will encourage the deployment of modern communications infrastructure to improve America’s competitiveness and employ technology to solve our nation’s most pressing problems — including improving clean energy, healthcare costs, and public safety.”  These are pretty lofty goals.  But there are a few specific issues in the platform that are worth mentioning.

First, in unequivocal terms, the incoming administration states its support for net neutrality.  This is a topic we’ve written about before (here and here).  The net neutrality issue may also become a higher profile issue on Capitol Hill when the next Congress convenes.  Senator Byron Dorgan, who introduced the Internet Freedom Preservation Act in 2007 (a bill which went nowhere), has indicated that he will introduce the legislation again, in the hopes that support from the White House may give the bill needed momentum.

The second issue worth noting in the platform is a pledge to appoint the nation’s first CTO.  This position appears to be different from the position of IP enforcement “czar” that was created by the IP-PRO Act (discussed here).  While there has been speculation as to who will be appointed (some familiar names have been tossed out and at least one (Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google) has already said he’s not interested), the more critical issue is what the CTO will be able to accomplish.  According to the technology agenda, the CTO’s role will be “to ensure the safety of our networks and lead an interagency effort, working with chief technology and chief information officers of each of the federal agencies, to ensure that they use best-in-class technologies and share best practices.”  Again, lofty goals and perhaps the makings of a major bureaucratic turf war.  But it appears that the incoming administration wants its CTO’s primary focus to be on transparency to ensure that the government operates in an open and accessible environment.

Lastly, even though the long presidential campaign is over, the Obama administration will continue to use the Web as a primary means for communicating to and involving people in its policy decision-making and implementation process. The centerpiece of that effort will be www.change.gov, the website established the day after the election, which, along with news, videos, information on the transition and detailed policy papers, enables visitors to register on-line to receive e-mail updates directly from the administration.  Whether or not this will make for more effective governance is a judgment that will have to wait.  But we appear to be on the verge of the first Web 2.0 presidency.

The Act is actually not a new stand-alone law, but amends several existing intellectual property laws in an effort enhance current enforcement and remedy provisions.  For example, the Act authorizes the government, in connection with a criminal copyright proceeding, to seize any article that may be used to commit or facilitate copyright infringement.   The Act also amends the Lanham (Trademark) Act by doubling statutory damages for counterfeiting to a minimum of $1,000 and a maximum of $200,000 per counterfeit mark, with the willful damage figure doubled to $2,000,000 per mark.  In addition, the Act amends the Computer Crime Enforcement Act to allow expand the scope of grants made by the federal government for computer crimes to also be used for training, prevention, enforcement and prosecution of IP theft and infringement crimes.  

Perhaps the most groundbreaking element of the Act was the creation of new, cabinet-level position, the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.  This IP Czar is charged with heading an interagency intellectual property enforcement advisory committee (also newly-created by the Act) and coordinating the development and implementation of a “Joint Strategic Plan” against counterfeiting and piracy, which will focus on, among other things, reducing counterfeit and infringing goods in the domestic and international supply chain and disrupting and eliminating domestic and international counterfeiting networks.  The first IP Czar will likely not be appointed until the next administration takes office in January 2009, thus it is too early to determine precisely how he/she might implement the newly created enforcement role and what shape the Joint Strategic Plan might take. 

The Pro-IP Act is certainly a victory for the many groups that lobbied for its passage, including the entertainment/film industry, the recording industry, and major media companies fighting against the pervasiveness of digital piracy.    However, some public advocacy groups opposed the new law, stating that its penalties are far too harsh and that it does not balance consumers’ rights and concerns over those of major media and software companies. In addition, critics of the Pro-IP Act have argued that the bill risks punishing people who have not committed copyright infringement, citing provisions in the Act that authorize the seizure of all computers and compatible devices from a home if a single, pirated MP3 was discovered on just one of the devices.
Ultimately, the passage of this bill sends the U.S. and the world a message that intellectual property infringement and piracy is at the forefront of the U.S. federal government’s focus and will be heavily scrutinized going forward.  And while the focus of the Act was enhancing IP criminal law enforcement and crime prevention, it is clear that content owners and other stakeholders in the digital media industry will be closely eyeing the government’s initiatives in order to ensure that their own efforts to protect and secure their digital assets are done in a manner to best leverage the newly-expanded protections provided in the Act.