Statement in Senate by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). Re: Intellectual Property and High Tech Agenda. Date: February 14, 2001. Source: Congressional Record, February 14, 2001, at pages S1377 - S1378.

With regard to that, Senator Leahy and I are releasing today our joint High Technology and Intellectual Property legislative agenda.

I would like to mention some of the items on that agenda and discuss some of them briefly.

In the Internet Age, many basic questions need to be asked anew about the relationships between the artists and the media companies that market and distribute their product; about the rights of consumers and fans to use works in new ways and the ability of technology companies and other mediators to assist them in those uses; and about the accessibility of works to scholars, students, or others for legitimate purposes. We need to continue to think about how the copyright system applies in the Internet world, where some of the assumptions underpinning traditional copyright law may not be relevant, or need to be applied by a proper analogy. Are there ways to clarify the rights and responsibilities of artists, owners, consumers, and users of copyrighted works? How can we foster the continued convergence of information, entertainment, and communication services on a variety of platforms and devices that will make life more enjoyable and convenient? We need to encourage an open and competitive environment in the production and distribution of content on the Internet.

As the Internet's new digital medium continues to grow, we must ensure that consumers are confident that personally identifiable information which they submit electronically are afforded adequate levels of privacy protection. As consumer confidence in the security of their personal and financial information is enhanced, Internet users will be more willing to go online, make purchases over the Internet and generally provide personal information required by businesses and organizations over the Internet. At the same time, we must ensure that any initiatives have the least regulatory effect on the growth of e-commerce and on commercial free speech rights protected by the Constitution. We expect to examine the adequacy of Internet privacy protection and will, where necessary, advance reforms aimed at ensuring greater privacy protection.

For example, the Committee expects to examine the following:

(1) How are privacy concerns impacting the growth of e-commerce, in the financial services industry, in the insurance industry, in online retailing, etc., and the deployment of new technologies that could further the growth of, and consumer access to, the Internet?

(2) Does Congress need to amend criminal or civil rights laws to address consumer electronic privacy concerns?

(3) Does U.S. encryption policy negatively affect the growth of e-commerce?

(4) What is the impact of the European Union's Internet Privacy Directive on U.S. industry and e-commerce?

(5) Can Federal law enforcement, particularly civil rights enforcers, play a larger role in safeguarding the privacy concerns of Internet users?

(6) To what extent can web-sites and Government agencies track the Internet activities of individual users and what should be done to ensure greater protection of personally identifiable or financially sensitive data?

We would like to work toward reforms that can more fully deploy the Internet to make educational opportunities more widely available to students in remote locations, to life-long learners, and to enhance the educational experience of all students.

The Internet can bring new experiences to remote locations. My own home state of Utah has been experimenting with ways to bring the best possible educational experience to learners all across our state, some of whom live in remote rural areas, using wired technology. We would like to see how we can further support efforts to harness the communicative power of the wired world on behalf of students across the country.

Science is advancing rapidly and the challenge to the patent system of genetics, biotechnology, and business method patents are daunting. Whole new subject matter areas are being exploited, from patents on business methods from financial services to e-commerce tools on the Internet. Both the complexity and the sheer volume of patent applications are expanding exponentially. Recent Supreme Court decisions have once again posed the question of state government responsibility to respect and protect intellectual property rights. And I believe we need to review the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 to ensure that its balanced goals continue to be met.

As many know, that act helped to create the modern generic drug industry. It has been estimated that it has largely saved consumers $10 billion every year since 1984. It is considered one of the most important consumer protection acts in the history of the country.

As the assignment of domain names transitions from a single company to a competitive, market-based system, we need to stay vigilant with regard to the significant antitrust and intellectual property ramifications this process holds for American businesses and consumers. We intend to build on our record of strengthening protection for online consumers by protecting the trademarks consumers rely on in cyberspace, while also encouraging the full range of positive interactions the Internet makes possible. I think the Internet can be a place of infinite variety while we continue to allow consumers to rely on brand names they know in the e-commerce context. The world-wide nature of the Internet also heightens the need for the United States to join international efforts to make worldwide intellectual property protection, including that of trademarks, more efficient and effective for Americans. In particular, I hope we can move ahead on the United States accession to the Madrid Protocol.

I have always maintained that proper and timely enforcement of federal antitrust laws can foster both competition and innovation, while minimizing the need for government regulation. This is an especially important paradigm for the Internet. We need to carefully think through the antitrust implications of Business-to-Business exchanges. We also need to consider carefully what remedies should be imposed in cases where antitrust violations do occur, notwithstanding the generally dynamic and competitive nature of Internet-related industries. We will also need to review the increasing legal tension in the high technology industry between intellectual property rights and antitrust laws. There has always been a tension here, but in the Internet world, we need to be careful that intellectual property or content power is not leveraged into distribution power, or otherwise used in anticompetitive ways. Furthermore, the Internet poses new questions about the competitive need to protect collections of data in a way that preserves incentives for the creation of databases without unduly hampering the free flow of information in anticompetitive ways.

Access to new "broadband" technologies is increasingly important for full deployment and enjoyment of the Internet. We will need to consider the countervailing rights and duties of local phone companies and cable companies, either of which may provide broadband services in a local area. Specifically, what rights of access to broadband lines should competitors have, and what right to content should competitive distribution services have?

The Internet is a radically new medium not just for commerce, but also for speech, broadcasting and advertising. As we analogize from traditional media such as broadcasting, we need to ask afresh what regulations make sense in this new medium, if any, and how do we cope with different media competing toward largely the same goal, but with differing rules?

In summary Madam President, this non-controversial technical corrections bill clears the way for an exciting agenda for the 107th Congress in the Judiciary Committee. I hope we can pass this bill today, and I look forward to working with my colleague from Vermont on this most interesting and ambitious agenda.

In fact, I enjoy working with him. We have worked together all these years, and I think maybe we can get more done this year than in the past. Hopefully, we can move these agendas forward in the best interest of all Americans.