President Trump Designates Brendan Carr as New FCC Chairman

As noted in a statement released by the FCC, today, January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed an order designating Brendan Carr as the new Chairman of the Commission. Congratulations to Chairman Carr, and best wishes for success in steering the agency into new direction for federal communications policy. 

Chairman Carr has many times been a speaker at prior Free State Foundation Annual Conferences, including #FSF16 – FSF's 16th Annual Conference held in Washington, D.C. on March 12, 2024, where then-Commissioner Carr was part of the keynote conversation, "TMT with Mike O'Rielly."

Also, as widely reported on January 16, President Trump intends to nominate Olivia Trusty to fill the vacant position member position on the Commission. Thus, congratulations also are due to Ms. Trusty. Members of the Senate should promptly conduct a committee hearing on her nomination and bring her nomination to a vote.  

MEDIA ADVISORY: FSF's Randolph May Congratulates Brendan Carr as the Next FCC Chairman

Free State Foundation President Randolph May issued the following statement regarding President-elect Trump's intention to appoint Brendan Carr as FCC Chairman:

I congratulate Brendan Carr as President-elect Trump's choice to be the FCC's next chairman. Given his long experience at the FCC, first as a staffer and then as a commissioner, and his acknowledged expertise regarding communications law and policy, Commissioner Carr is very well-qualified to undertake his new responsibilities leading the agency come January 20.

 

There is much work that still needs to be done to reform communications policies so that they reflect digital age technological and marketplace realities. Enhancing consumer welfare and increasing consumer choice, along with closing remaining digital divides, can be accomplished in free market-oriented ways that minimize unnecessary costs, reduce regulatory burdens, and avoid wasteful spending. And restoring a culture of free speech consistent with the First Amendment is an important objective.

 

I look forward to Brendan Carr getting to work as FCC Chairman. 

IPEC's 2020 Report Highlights Federal Agencies' Pro-Copyright Initiatives

On January 7, the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) released its Annual Intellectual Report to Congress for 2021. The report summarizes the Trump Administration's IP enforcement strategy and policy initiatives across numerous federal agencies. 

The IP Report rightly extols the constitutional basis for copyrights as well as its vitality to American prosperity: 

Intellectual property is integral to our nation’s economic competitiveness and the growth of our innovative economy. For instance, copyrights are not only economically important, but a key part of our culture and society. A well-functioning copyright system is essential. The U.S. copyright system is grounded in our Constitution, and built on centuries of extensive jurisprudence, statutes and regulations. 

Among other things, the IP Report recounts the Trump Administration's elevation of the IPEC within the Executive Branch: 

[U]nder the leadership of President Trump and with the support of Congress, the White House Office of the U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) was established as a new component agency of the Executive Office of the President and part of the National Economic Council, ensuring that in the decades to come the IPEC will be there to advise the President, coordinate policy, and advocate for American interests abroad.

The IP Report also overviews the Trump Administration's efforts through foreign trade agreements such as USMCA and other diplomacy efforts to ensure Americans' copyrighted works and other IP are better protected overseas. And the report includes appendices describing IP protection and enforcement initiatives undertaken over the last few years by Executive Branch Departments, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, as well as the U.S. Copyright Office. The Justice Department's appendix, for instance, highlights notable criminal infringement prosecutions. And the Copyright Office's appendix discusses the Section 512 Study Report that was released in May 2020. 

 

The need for an overhaul of Section 512 is the subject of my January 12 Perspectives from FSF Scholars paper titled "Congress Should Hold Big Tech Accountable for Copyright Violations." This year, expect Free State Foundation scholars to have more to say about needed pro-IP policy actions. 

Trump Administration Releases its Joint Strategic Plan for IP Enforcement

On November 9, the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) released the 2020 to 2023 Joint Strategic Plan by coordinated federal agencies for promoting and protecting intellectual property (IP) rights. 

The IPEC-developed plan provides an overview of recent and ongoing strategic efforts by the Trump Administration in all areas of IP policy, including copyrights. And it addresses domestic IP policy issues as well as initiatives to ensure that Americans' IP rights receive protections internationally. Included in the Joint Strategic Plan are efforts to better secure copyrights from infringement – particularly online infringement:

The [U.S.-China] Phase One Agreement requires China to provide effective and expeditious action against infringement in the online environment, including by requiring expeditious takedowns and by ensuring the validity of notices and counter notices. It also requires China to take effective action against e-commerce platforms that fail to take necessary measures against infringement. The United States and China agreed to address additional intellectual property issues, including with regard to unauthorized camcording of motion pictures and copyright protection for sporting event broadcasts, in future negotiations... 

 

The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security will continue to aggressively investigate and prosecute individuals and corporations that engage in large-scale online copyright piracy (through illicit streaming services and anti-circumvention devices), which not only violates the rights of copyright holders but also often involves the commission of other serious crimes such as money laundering and tax evasion… In addition, the Justice Department, DHS, and other Federal agencies (as appropriate) will also continue to work with foreign law enforcement and other governmental offices to prosecute and otherwise prevent large-scale online copyright piracy, including the large-scale online pirates that are identified in USTR’s annual List of Notorious Markets... 

 

The Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)) will continue to modernize, update and expand the existing e-Recordation program, which provides right holders the opportunity to record their registered trademarks and copyrights to receive enhanced border enforcement of the IP. DHS will continue to provide education and outreach to the industry regarding the critical importance of obtaining trademark and copyright recordations in order to stem the flow of infringing goods into the United States. DHS will continue to educate personnel at all Ports of Entry on the importance of IP enforcement, and arm them with the necessary tools to detect and interdict infringing goods at the border...

 

The United States will continue to support and encourage the broader and more regularized adoption of voluntary "Trusted Notifier" agreements involving Internet domain registries. These agreements have proven effective in removing websites that engage in large-scale copyright piracy, as has been demonstrated in the implementation of the agreements that the MPAA (now, the MPA) entered into in 2016 with the Radix and Donut registries.

We will likely have more to say on the Joint Strategic Plan – particularly its call for further examination of the copyright "notice-and-takedown" system for removing expeditiously infringing content from Internet websites. Free State Foundation President Randolph May and I wrote about the need for reforms to the "notice-and-takedown" provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in our June 2020 Perspectives from FSF Scholars paper, "Copyright Office Report Should Spur Modernizing the DMCA."

Free Market Coalition Makes Strong Case Against Government-Run 5G

On October 7, a coalition of 43 free market-oriented organizations, think tanks, and policy experts – led by the Americans for Tax Reform – released a letter supporting private-sector deployment of 5G and opposing a federal government-run 5G network. The letter was addressed to Senator John Thune, thanking him and his Senate colleagues for their letter of September 30 reaffirming the free-market path 5G deployment.  

I agree on all fronts with the coalition's perceptive letter supporting private-sector deployment of 5G and opposing a federal government-operated 5G network. The Department of Defense (DoD) should not be spending taxpayer money to go into the broadband business and compete with private marketplace providers who are investing billions into 5G networks. In other actions, the Trump Administration has endorsed the market-enterprise approach to 5G. DoD should follow suit and discard the costly and counterproductive idea of nationalizing 5G communications. 

NTIA Seeks Input on National 5G Security Strategy

As I noted in an April 6 blog post, President Trump signed into law the Secure 5G and Beyond Act of 2020 on March 23. That Act directs the Administration to develop a 5G security implementation plan within 6 months of its enactment.

The White House initiated that process with the same-day release of the "National Strategy to Secure 5G," a framework document organized around four lines of effort:

• Facilitating the private-sector led rollout of 5G;
• Defining core security principles in response to potential risks;
• Addressing risks to economic and national security interests; and
• Working with like-minded countries to develop and deploy secure and reliable standards and infrastructure.

Late last month, NTIA solicited public input on that implementation plan. Its request for comment, which is organized around the same four lines of effort noted above, presents a number of specific questions. For example:

• With respect to facilitating the domestic rollout out of 5G, how can the U.S. Government further motivate the commercial ecosystem (equipment and chip manufacturers, software developers, cloud providers, system integrators, network providers, etc.) to increase R&D and testing? What specific goals should it prioritize?
• In assessing risks and identifying core security principles, what factors should the U.S. Government consider in evaluating potential security gaps?
• In addressing risks to economic and national security, what opportunities does 5G deployment create for U.S. companies?
• In promoting the responsible global development of 5G, how can the U.S. Government best encourage the domestic private sector to participate in standards development?

Comments are due on or before June 18.

IP Enforcement Coordinator's Report Spotlights Copyright Protection Progress

In late February, the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) released its Annual Intellectual Property Report to Congress. The Report provides "an overview of the Trump Administration's intellectual property enforcement strategy and policy efforts" across multiple agencies. IPEC's coordination and development of U.S. IP policy is intended "to promote innovation and creativity, and to ensure effective intellectual property protection and enforcement, domestically and abroad." 

Although the Trump Administration's enforcement policy "includes all areas of intellectual property and innovation policy," its policy activities regarding copyright protections merit attention. In 2018 progress was made in better securing copyrights. But there is plenty more that the Trump Administration and the 116th Congress can do to modernize and strengthen protections for Americans' creative works. 

One achievement touted in the Report is the passage of the Music Modernization Act of 2018. In an op-ed for The Hill and in several blog posts, Free State Foundation President Randolph May and I urged Congress to adopt reforms contained in that legislation. The Act (1) secured federal copyright protections for public performances via digital audio transmission of pre-1972 sound recordings; (2) established a streamlined process for producers, mixers, and sound engineers to directly receive royalty payments; and (3) facilitated more timely and accurate payment of songwriter "mechanical license" royalties and also provided blanket licenses for digital streaming services. As I explained in a February blog post, the widely endorsed MLC Coalition will be submitting to the U.S. Copyright Office a proposal for creating a collective entity to administer mechanical license royalties pursuant to the Act. 

An appendix in the IPEC Report highlighted the Copyright Office's expected release of its public study report on the "moral rights" of authors. Moral rights provisions in foreign nations typically restrict or prohibit sales or transfers of authors' rights to be acknowledged as creators of their works as well as their rights to control the integrity or future use of their works. In a Perspectives from FSF Scholars, Randolph May and I made the case that "current U.S. copyright law as well as contract law protect authors’ and creative artists’ rights to control whether they receive credit for their copyrightable works and whether their works are adapted into new media or transformed." We concluded: "Importing additional foreign-based moral rights restrictions into U.S. copyright law would create legal uncertainties, destabilize existing voluntary contract arrangements, reduce market freedom, and threaten the market value of copyrighted works."

The IPEC Report also referenced the Copyright Office's ongoing public study of Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA). Section 512 contains the so-called "notice-and-takedown" provision under which copyright holders are entitled to give notice to an online service provider when infringing content is posted on its network or website. A provider receives immunity if it “responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing.” 

Unfortunately, owners of copyrighted sound recordings, movies, and other creative works suffer steep financial losses from mass online infringement. They also experience difficulties navigating the DMCA's outdated legal processes. The DMCA was adopted before user-upload sites such as YouTube became prevalent. In a Perspectives paper, Randolph May and I called attention to the urgent need to update the law, and we highlighted ways that Congress can reduce notice-and-takedown compliance burdens for copyright holders and improve protections from online infringement. That same paper also called on Congress to adopt a voluntary small claims court for resolving disputes over alleged online infringement involving copyright owners of modest means. 

Additionally, the IPEC Report identifies ongoing criminal copyright investigations and prosecutions by federal law enforcement. A Report appendix noted that the U.S. Justice Department "continues to pursue significant, large-scale piracy and counterfeiting operations." It cited the March 2018 sentencing for criminal copyright infringement of the owner of Sharebeast.com, which "operat[ed] a massive file-sharing infrastructure that distributed approximately 1 billion copies of copyrighted musical works through Internet downloads." Indeed, the Report cited the Recording Industry Association of America's (RIAA) description of Sharebeast.com as "the largest online file-sharing website specializing in the reproduction and distribution of infringing copies of copyrighted music operating out of the United States." The RIAA estimated $6.3 billion in total loss to its members. Furthermore, according to the Report, the FBI had pending "23 investigations of copyright infringement related to software,""41 investigations of other copyright infringement," and "8 investigations of copyright infringement related to signal theft" of video programming at the end of fiscal year 2018. 

Randolph May and I published a Perspectives paper on how Congress ought to modernize criminal copyright law to combat online piracy. For starters, Congress should make online piracy via Internet streaming a felony. Prosecutions for criminal copyright infringement are not numerous, and they are limited to willful infringement of protected works. However, civil copyright enforcement is oftentimes inadequate for curbing large-scale online piracy operations like Sharebeast.com. In another Perspectives from FSF Scholars, we emphasized the need to modernize international agreements by requiring foreign nations to step up criminal copyright enforcement against large-scale online piracy. 

The IPEC Report is valuable in spotlighting key achievements and ongoing initiatives by the Trump Administration to strengthen protections for IP, including copyrighted works. In 2019, the Trump Administration and the 116th Congress ought to commit to building on that progress to better secure Americans IP rights and to advance our economy in the Digital Age. 

IP Commission Recommends Steps to Protect America From International IP Theft

On February 21, 2019, the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property issued a report highlighting "policy developments in the last 18 months related to strengthening the United States' ability to protect IP." The IP Commission's 2019 Review focused on U.S.-China relations, offering recommendations for more effectively preventing forced technology transfers, economic espionage, and intellectual property (IP) theft. 

According to the IP Commission's 2017 report, "the annual cost of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets to the U.S. economyis between $225 billion and $600 billion," and China is "the world's principal IP infringer." In fiscal year 2017, 87% of counterfeit goods seized coming into the U.S. originated from China and Hong Kong.

The IP Commission's 2019 Review applauded American policymakers' responses to Chinese IP wrongful practices:

The Trump Administration has elevated the elimination of China’s theft of American IP, whether through cyber-theft, forced technology transfers, stolen trade secrets, counterfeiting of products, or other means, to one of the leading foreign policy priorities and a top goal of the U.S.-China economic negotiations. 

The IP Commission acknowledged the Section 301 investigative report findings of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) regarding Chinese IP policies and practices. The USTR concluded that China "unfairly target[s] critical U.S. technology with the goal of achieving dominance in strategic sectors" and that its practices are harmful to American innovation and competitiveness. Additionally, the IP Commission's 2019 Review acknowledged the USTR's placement of China on the "Priority Watch List" over concerns that include "trade secret theft, online piracy and counterfeiting, a high volume of manufacturing and exporting counterfeit goods, technology transfer requirements, mandatory application of adverse terms to foreign IP licensors, localization requirements, and weak enforcement." 

Finally, the IP Commission made several recommendations for strengthening American IP protections from foreign theft, including: (1) construction of an"independent international database for scoring of entities from foreign countries that pose IP risk;" (2) a streamlined process for reporting and responding to IP theft; (3) requiring the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to determine whether companies' use of stolen IP ought to be publicly reported; (4) meaningful sanctions by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against foreign companies using stolen IP; and (5) use of "multilateral institutions to harmonize national and international legal and regulatory frameworks."

Previously, FSF President Randolph May and I have addressed the pressing need to strengthen protections for Americans' IP internationally – particularly for copyrighted movies and music. In our Perspectives from FSF Scholars paper, "Modernizing International Copyright Agreements to Combat Copyright Infringement," we explain that several foreign countries insufficiently protect Americans' copyrighted works from digital piracy and online infringement taking place through cyberlocker websites and stream-ripping websites. As we urged there: "The Trump Administration should ensure that stronger protections for Americans' creative works are included in new treaties and trade agreements that are attuned to the Digital Age."

In particular, the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) would strengthen copyright protections and enforcement by securing Americans' full enjoyment of exclusive rights in sound recordings, ensuring longer protection terms, and providing stronger civil remedies and criminal penalties for copyright infringement. However, international agreements such as USMCA should not include outdated online infringement provisions that are similar to Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Section 512 is ineffective in protecting copyrighted movies and music from massive online infringement via user-upload websites. We identify problems with Section 512 and call for reforms to strengthen online copyright protections in our Perspectives paper, "Modernizing Civil Copyright Enforcement for the Digital Age Economy: The Need for Notice-and-Takedown Reforms and Small Claims Relief."

In sum, in the interest of securing greater protection for Americans' intellectual property, it's worth paying close attention to the IP Commission's most recent report. 

Signing of USMCA Spotlights International Copyright Protections

On November 30, President Trump and leaders from Canada and Mexico officially signed the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USCMA). Completion of the trade agreement's negotiation was announced in October. If approved by Congress, USMCA will replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). 

USMCA contains several provisions to better secure Americans' copyright protections. FSF President Randolph J. May and I address many of those provisions in our Perspectives from FSF Scholars paper, "Modernizing International Copyright Agreements to Combat Copyright Infringement." Among its pro-copyright provisions, USMCA would help American owners of sound recordings the full scope of public performance rights. Additionally, USMCA provides for stepped up enforcement through increased civil and criminal penalties for infringing activities such as "stream-ripping" and "camcording." 

However, USMCA incorporates language similar to the Section 512 "notice-and-takedown" provision contained in current U.S. copyright law. Section 512 is outdated and ineffective in protecting digital music and video content from mass infringement on popular user-upload websites. Future trade agreements and treaties should avoid that language. Congress and the Trump Administration should work to reform and update the notice-and-takedown system. We discuss these aspects of Section 512 in further detail our Perspectives paper, "Modernizing Civil Copyright Enforcement for the Digital Age Economy: The Need for Notice-and-Takedown Reforms and Small Claims Relief."

We Agree with Open Letter Addressing Importance of Strong IP Rights

This week, the Property Rights Alliance, along with Americans for Tax Reform and Digital Liberty, sent an open letter to the Trump Administration and the 115th Congress addressing the fundamentals of intellectual property (IP) rights, the positive impact that strong protections of IP rights have on the American economy, and the need to strengthen U.S. protections of IP rights even further. The letter was signed by more than 70 think tanks, advocacy groups, and individuals. While as a matter of policy, we at the Free State Foundation, except in rare instances, do not generally sign group letters, we certainly agree with the thrust of the letter and are happy to spread the word.

Here are some of the important points articulated in the letter:

• IP Rights Are Grounded in the Constitution: The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of IP in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” 

• IP Rights Promote Free Speech and Expression: Strong IP rights go hand-in-hand with free speech as creators vigorously defend their ability to create works of their choosing, free from censorship. By affording innovators and creators the ability to support themselves, IP rights promote free expression unencumbered by government.

• IP Rights are Vital to Job Growth & Economic Competitiveness: The most recent report on IP-related jobs in the U.S., by the Department of Commerce and the Patent and Trademark Office, found that in 2014, direct employment in the most IP intensive industries accounted for 27.9 million jobs. Indirect activities associated with those industries provided an additional 17.1 million jobs, for a total of 45 million jobs, or 30% of all jobs in the economy. 

• IP Rights Must Be Protected Internationally Through Effective IP Provisions in Trade Agreements: Far too many foreign governments look the other way when it comes to the theft of IP. State-sanctioned IP theft from other countries costs the U.S. economy more than $320 billion annually. The lure of access to the U.S. market should be used as an incentive to convince trading partners that they should increase their protection of IP rights. Therefore, strong IP protections are integral to all trade agreement negotiations. 

• IP Rights Are Integral to Consumer Protection and National Security: IP rights protect consumers by enabling them to make educated choices about the safety, reliability, and effectiveness of their purchases. In 2014, consumer electronics and parts represented 24% of total counterfeit goods seized, presenting a dangerous risk to American consumers if those products malfunction. 

• IP Rights Must Be Respected and Protected on the Internet: The Internet is an incredible platform for innovation, creativity and commerce enabling widespread distribution of ideas and information. However, IP theft online is a persistent and growing problem. For example, between 2001 and 2015, U.S. recorded music revenues fell from $14 billion to $7 billion—losses largely attributed to online theft.

Congress and the Trump Administration should use this letter as a guide over the next several years to ensure that the United States’ robust protections of IP rights grow even stronger. Moreover, Seth Cooper and I stated in a February 2017 blog that U.S. policymakers also should use Global IP Center’s International IP Index as a tool to understand the ways in which our country can strengthen its protections.

Strong protections of IP rights help artists and entrepreneurs earn a return on their labor, encouraging more investment, innovation, and growth throughout the U.S. economy.