Copy of Media Library (65)

Online Speech and AI

by Policy

Written by: Suher Adi

As discussed in the OMB AI Draft Memo, there are uses of AI that may have an impact on individuals rights and safety. In our previous blog post, we discussed ways OMB can and should limit the scope to be targeted in the application of assessments for high risk AI. AI can impact people’s fundamental rights, and SIIA agrees that those specific impacts should  be covered under a different risk assessment model and trigger the minimum requirements review. 

However, the discussion of online speech is not new to technology companies and is a topic that is largely debated in the courts. It is important to note the various ways OMB can refine the use cases of “rights-impacting AI” to maximize the impact for appropriate instances. Sec.230 of the Communications and Decency Act passed in 1996 has enshrined the ability for technology companies to utilize their own discretion to ensure content is moderated online. Content moderation is increasingly important to ensuring that inappropriate and illegal content is not shared online. Tools used for content moderation could be assisted by integrating AI, leading to less biased decisions and decreasing the cost of moderation strategies. 

When OMB mentions issues in the AI Draft Memo regarding “blocking, removing, hiding or limiting the reach of protected speech,” it must be noted that this can be done with existing online content moderation strategies. These online content moderation strategies for years have relied on a combination of human and machine learning processes to make determinations about user-generated content that comports with content policies. While the First Amendment provides robust protection for these practices in the private sector, the First Amendment limits the federal government’s discretion to block, remove, hide, or limit the reach of protected speech. The inclusion of this use case should specifically reference government-run websites and platforms and acknowledge the history of content moderation for online companies to date.

With the Supreme Court deciding on a variety of cases, including cases related to content moderation, it must be maintained that technology companies will continue, within their rights, to moderate harmful content online, regardless of whether they develop AI or not. 

Copy of Media Library (64)

SIIA Statement on European Commission Intention to Block Amazon iRobot Acquisition

by Policy

The following statement can be attributed to Morten Skroejer, Senior Director, Technology Competition Policy, Software & Information Industry Association.

Last night, the Wall Street Journal reported that the European Commission intends to block Amazon’s acquisition of iRobot, the maker of the Roomba vacuum. According to the report, the Commission is concerned that the merger “could restrict competition in the market for robot vacuum cleaners.”

If the reporting is accurate, the Commission’s decision continues the regrettable trend of competition authorities in Europe and the United States blocking, or attempting to block, pro-competition and pro-consumer deals.

We are deeply concerned by the way that the Commission is applying its competition principles, which has implications well beyond the context of this particular case. Here, Amazon does not own a competing brand of robot vacuum cleaners. Rather, the point of the deal was to provide iRobot a much needed capital infusion to allow it to better compete with its closest competitors. This rubric could be applied to block almost any kind of productive activity across the business of information.

The Commission’s decision to block the merger is bad for innovation, small businesses, and, ultimately, consumers, who will have fewer products and services to choose from.

Copy of Media Library (63)

SIIA’s Comments on BIS Interim Final Rule AC/S IFR

by Policy

The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) has submitted comments in response to the Bureau of Industry and Security’s (BIS) request for comment on interim final rule AC/S IFR. SIIA appreciates BIS’s goals of protecting U.S. national security while maintaining a calibrated approach to avoid undermining U.S. technology leadership and commercial trade.

SIIA raises concerns about the potential duplication of regulations and the impact on the global standing of U.S. Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) providers. It emphasizes the importance of consistent and realistic requirements for IaaS providers, citing potential conflicts with existing regulations and executive orders.

We highlights the role of IaaS providers in national security objectives related to artificial intelligence (AI) and recommends that any controls on IaaS providers consider existing regulations. SIIA suggests that enforcement should be targeted, with a comprehensive list of entities subject to controls to maintain the U.S. IaaS industry’s leadership position.

Regarding deemed exports and reexports of advanced computing and semiconductor (AC/S), SIIA argues against imposing licensing requirements, emphasizing the importance of attracting foreign talent for AI development. It suggests that additional licensure requirements may hinder innovation, disrupt ongoing activities, and drive top talent to countries without similar restrictions.

We addresses concerns about the definition of “headquartered companies” and recommends a clear definition to avoid ambiguity and facilitate compliance. It suggests limiting the definition to majority ownership by a company headquartered in a designated nation and providing guidance on the treatment of ownership by holding companies.

Full Letter Here
Copy of Media Library (62)

SIIA Raises Constitutional Concerns Regarding Maine LD 1977 Draft

by Policy

The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) has expressed constitutional concerns regarding the current draft of Maine’s LD 1977. The association argues that this exemption may be unworkable and potentially unconstitutional, deviating from best practices in state privacy laws.

Key Concerns:

  1. First Amendment Impact: SIIA argues that the draft infringes on First Amendment rights by subjecting inferences from public data to consumer rights, violating the protection of information creation and dissemination.
  2. Protection of Public Domain: SIIA emphasizes that the First Amendment protects opinions formed from public information, and fears of collecting public data do not justify regulation.
  3. Combination of Public and Private Information: SIIA expresses concerns that the draft may be unconstitutional by restricting the distribution of public record information when combined with private data.
Read Full Letter Here
Copy of Media Library (61)

SIIA Launches Data Policy Advisory Council to Advance Thought Leadership on Information and Data Policy Cutting Edge Issues

by Policy

Washington, D.C., January 16, 2024 – The Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA), the principal trade association for the business of information, today announces the creation of a Data Policy Advisory Council (DPAC) to bring together thought leaders to discuss cutting edge issues in data policy. The Council is composed of academics, civil society and policy advocates, business leaders and legal professionals serving in a volunteer capacity. These thought leaders are dedicated to studying the ecosystem in which personal information is published and exploring policy ideas to maintain its health while promoting shared consumer privacy aims.

“SIIA has created the DPAC to gather a broad range of insights to broaden the conversation on data policy and educate policymakers and the public on data policy in holistic, nonpartisan and nuanced ways that reflect important tradeoffs for society and individuals,” said Chris Mohr, President, SIIA. “Regulating commercial information is an extraordinarily complex topic and comes with difficult inherent tradeoffs. The complexity of commercially available information is exploding. Important activities ranging from know-your-customer rules in the financial services industry to preventing fraud in ordinary e-commerce transactions are largely taken for granted. There is a clear need to synthesize insights from different perspectives to help shape good public policy.”

Through the Council, SIIA members will have the opportunity to discuss aspects of their businesses with academics and legal thought leaders.  Academics will have an opportunity to learn about current business practices and how SIIA members strive to share consumer data in a way that both recognizes the need for consumers’ privacy and respects the policy and constitutional benefits of the public domain.

The Council will also examine the national security benefits and risks of partnership with government entities and accompanying maintenance or analysis of secured data. These discussions will assist SIIA in offering specific policy recommendations for regulation in a way that preserves societal benefits while limiting risks to privacy and security.

“We are excited about the Advisory Council’s launch and look forward to engaging with its members to better inform SIIA’s approach to the regulation of commercial publishing and data policy more generally,” said Steven Emmert, Senior Director of Government & Industry Affairs, RELX Inc. “With legislative proposals gaining steam at both the federal and state levels, we earnestly hope to add nuance and expand the conversation around the benefits and risks of data use and a productive framework for its regulation.”

Law professor Jane Bambauer, a member of the Council, added: “The DPAC is a forum that can help explore ways to protect consumers from realistic risks and needless intrusions without engaging in privacy absolutism. Many policymakers use grand, rights-based language to give consumers the illusion that they are in full control of what happens to personal data. But because many parts of the digital economy cannot function that way, the real substance of privacy law is riddled with exceptions and tedious consenting rituals. Discussions solely focused on ‘rights’ and ‘control’ obscure the fact that data processing is an activity that often helps not just companies, but consumers as well.”

At its first meeting the group had a wide ranging discussion covering data ownership, how private and governmental entities use data, how law and regulation protect rights, the nature of informational injury, and mechanisms to address harms associated with data use.

Inaugural members of the SIIA Data Policy Advisory Council (organizations for identification only):

  • Jane Bambauer (Brechner Eminent Scholar and Professor of Law, University of Florida Levin College of Law)
  • Daniel Castro (Vice President, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation)
  • Glenn Gerstell (Senior Adviser, International Security Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies)
  • Alex Joel (Senior Project Director and Adjunct Professor, American University Washington College of Law)
  • Ashley Johnson (Senior Policy Analyst, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation)
  • Michael Lamb (former Global Chief Privacy Officer, RELX; currently External Advisor to the Centre for Information Policy Leadership and private consultant)
  • Orly Lobel (Warren Distinguished Professor of Law and Director, Center for Employment and Labor Policy, University of San Diego School of Law)

About SIIA

SIIA is an umbrella association representing more than 380 technology, data and media companies and associations globally. Industry leaders work through SIIA’s divisions to address issues and challenges that impact their industry segments with the goal of driving innovation and growth for the industry and each member company. This is accomplished through in-person and online business development opportunities, peer networking, corporate education, intellectual property protection and government relations. For more information, visit siia.net.