Posts Tagged: "Congress"

This week in Washington IP news, the House Science Committee hosts hearings discussing improving R&D activities in the bioenergy sector and increasing U.S. leadership in contributions to technical standards, while the House Communications Subcommittee explores the world of mobile networking innovations beyond 5G. Over in the Senate, the Small Business Committee debates the U.S. Small Business Administration’s role in facilitating franchising opportunities for small business owners. Elsewhere, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation hosts an event to discuss ways to reconcile the House and Senate versions of major innovation and competition legislation, while the Brookings Institution urges caution on proposals to limit Section 230 protections to liability for user-created content in light of the negative impacts of recent curbs to those limited liability provisions under the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act.

Last week, the U.S. Copyright Office issued a pair of final rules to establish various procedures governing proceedings at the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), a small copyright claims tribunal within the Copyright Office. The CCB was implemented as part of the Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement (CASE) Act enacted under a larger omnibus bill on COVID-19 issues in December 2020. The rules establish procedures for designating service agents for receiving notices of initiated proceedings at the CCB, as well as opt-out procedures for libraries, archives and any claimants who are notified of class action litigation filed in U.S. district court covering their own copyright claim.

A bipartisan group of five U.S. senators have introduced a bill to amend Chapter 28 of Title 35 of the U.S. Code to include language that would “combat corrupt Chinese Courts from issuing ‘anti-suit injunctions,’” according to a joint press release issued by the senators today. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC), Chris Coons (D-DE), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), and Rick Scott (R-FL) introduced the bill on March 8. An anti-suit injunction is an injunction issued by a foreign court to limit the rights of parties to pursue litigation in U.S. courts.

The Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge (I-MAK) has responded to a letter it received from Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) in January asking the organization to address claims that its data on the effects of pharmaceutical patents on drug pricing is faulty. In the letter, I-MAK defended its underlying patent data and, in reference to the question of why the data differs significantly from public sources like the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Orange Book and court filings, explained that “relying on public sources and court filings is not an accurate methodology for identifying all patents on a drug.” I-MAK’s view is that the U.S. patent system creates patent monopolies that lead to the practice of “evergreening”, in which innovator pharmaceutical companies extend their rights beyond the original patent terms, preventing competition from generics, which in turn causes drug prices to remain high. As part of its mission, I-MAK has developed a database of patents covering key drugs. Its reports are often cited by academics, including in law journals, policymakers and in congressional hearings. As a result, I-MAK has become one of the most authoritative sources for information on patents in this space.

This week in Washington IP news, the House of Representatives will host committee meetings to consider the reauthorization of the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs managed by the U.S. Small Business Administration, as well as ways that Congress can encourage more domestic manufacturing of the next generation of electric vehicles. In the Senate, the Judiciary Committee discusses several judicial nominees by the Biden Administration, including a few that would serve in U.S. district courts important to IP law. Elsewhere, The Brookings Institute hosts a conversation with Columbia University Professor Joseph Stiglitz on the potential impacts of AI innovation on social welfare, while the Hudson Institute explores ways that Japan and the U.S. can further collaborate on our 5G mobile networking future.

This week in Washington IP news, the House Consumer Protection Subcommittee hosts a hearing to debate several bills aimed at regulating the consumer data privacy practices of Big Tech, while the House Space Subcommittee reviews the current status of NASA’s Artemis program. Over in the Senate, the Judiciary Committee discusses several judicial nominees to sit on the bench of a pair of U.S. district courts very important to the world of intellectual property, while the Senate Commerce Committee will hold a long-awaited vote on the nomination of Gigi Sohn to serve as an FCC Commissioner. Elsewhere, New America brings an expert panel together to debate NIST’s recent IoT cybersecurity labeling guidelines and how those can be translated into physical labels to inform consumers about IoT device security 

Last summer, I lamented how the Department of Justice – Antitrust Division (DOJ), without Senate confirmed leadership, was hastily pushing through policies that augmented the already-enormous power of Big Tech and benefitted China’s interests. Similarly, I uncovered how the App Association, a Big Tech-funded advocacy organization masquerading as a group of small app developers, was able to trick the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) into inviting it to speak at its July 2021 Commission meeting alongside legitimate small businesses. This is the same association that supported Apple in its litigation against (real) app developers, issued a June 2021 press release against the House bills aimed at regulating Big Tech, and misses no opportunity to support Big Tech interests.

Publishers scored a win yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland when the court granted their request for a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the Maryland Act, which essentially calls for compulsory licensing of electronic literary works to libraries on “reasonable terms”. The law went into effect on January 1, 2022. The lawsuit was brought by the Association of American Publishers (AAP) against the state of Maryland and charged that the Maryland Act was preempted by the U.S. Copyright Act. The Maryland Act requires publishers to 1) offer to license copyrighted electronic literary products, such as eBooks and digital audiobooks, to public libraries, and (2) to ensure the terms of such licenses are fair. The goal was to avoid up-charging and stringent licensing restrictions on libraries.

Earlier this month, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) sent a letter to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), expressing concern about policymaking on drug patents and drug prices being driven by a narrative rooted more in policy goals than in actual data. He sent another letter to a policy organization, Initiative for Medicines, Access, and Knowledge (I-MAK), which has held itself out as go-to source for data on the number of patents covering drugs. I-MAK has become very popular; its drug patent numbers are invoked as fact by congresspersons, academics, congressional witnesses, and policy activists. Senator Tillis is to be commended for expressing serious concerns about the unreliability of drug patent numbers repeatedly invoked in the policy debates over drug prices in Washington, D.C. His letter to the USPTO and FDA requests that the agencies engage in an “independent assessment and analysis of the sources and data that are being relied upon by those advocating for patent-based solutions to drug pricing.”

This week in Washington IP news, the Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing to discuss last November’s report on stablecoins by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets. Over in the House of Representatives, the Communications Subcommittee will conduct an oversight hearing of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), while the Energy Subcommittee debates a proposed bill that would create a series of climate research centers across the United States. Elsewhere, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee discusses its efforts to increase accessibility at the PTAB, while New America hosts an event to discuss the possibility that nuclear energy could be better adopted into national energy systems in order to meet climate goals.

North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis has raised the possibility of a combined patent, trademark and copyright office so as to improve the federal government’s approach to all aspects of intellectual property. On January 26, the Senator sent a letter to the Chairman and Counsel for the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) to undertake a study into whether there should be a unified, independent Intellectual Property Office. The Administrative Conference is an independent agency that makes procedural recommendations to the federal government. Tillis’ request is premised upon his view that currently there is a fractured approach to intellectual property in our federal government, with multiple IP functions spread across different agencies, leading to conflicting policy agendas and unnecessary bureaucracy. Tillis is the Ranking Member of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on Intellectual Property.

Judge Leonard Philip Stark was confirmed by the U.S. Senate yesterday to be the next judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, replacing Judge Kathleen O’Malley. O’Malley announced in July of last year that she will officially retire on March 11, 2022. Stark was confirmed by a vote of 61-35, which is reportedly one of the most bipartisan votes so far during President Joe Biden’s administration.

On February 4, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a major piece of legislation known as the America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing, Pre-Eminence in Technology, and Economic Strength (COMPETES) Act of 2022, which is the House’s counterpart to the U.S. Senate’s United States Innovation and Competition Act of 2021. While both bills are designed to improve America’s competitiveness in several key technology areas over foreign economic rivals, especially China, some IP advocates are pointing out that the bill provides little more than lip service on protecting American IP rights against Chinese infringers.

This week in Washington IP news, committees in the House of Representatives will host a string of hearings focused on improving data innovation and R&D to stop human trafficking, recommendations for regulating stablecoins as they become a larger part of the universe of currencies accepted in the U.S., and efforts to establish an advanced research project for healthcare in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the Senate, the Agriculture Committee will host a hearing on regulating digital assets like NFTs, while the Energy Committee will examine the possibilities for incorporating clean hydrogen technologies into various U.S. industry sectors. Elsewhere, The Hudson Institute debates concerns over Chinese companies heavily subsidized by that foreign government to acquire U.S. firms that are involved in sensitive areas of tech R&D.