Combatting America's "Brain Drain"

“America no longer has a monopoly on knowledge”.

So said Vivek Wadhwa; tech entrepreneur, academic and one of the panelists at an information summit we went to today for the Entrepreneurs in Residence (EIR) program. EIR is a Department of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) led initiative to get entrepreneurs, experts, and USCIS staff together to discuss the problems and possible innovations around immigrant investors, entrepreneurs, and highly skilled workers, and today was the initiative’s official launch.

The initiative aims to combat “brain drain” -- the idea of highly-skilled workers leaving the US after getting their education here to start businesses in their homelands --by moving on skilled immigration, an issue that’s ostensibly nonpartisan and noncontroversial. A brain drain is what America will experience if we’re unable to attract and retain the best, smartest workers and entrepreneurs -- these people will move overseas and innovate and create businesses there, harming U.S. competitiveness in the global arena.

Studies show that foreign-born entrepreneurs are responsible for creating thousands of American jobs and generating billions of dollars in revenue. Michael Moritz, panelist and partner at Sequoia Capital, said that the number one problem facing the economy today is the need to bring to America these entrepreneurs who want to start companies -- but it’s not just getting them here, it’s keeping them here. Solutions on the table include removing per-country caps on skilled worker visas via H.R.3012, a bill that’s already working its way (slowly) through the legislative process, “stapling” a green card to graduate level students’ STEM degrees, and a startup visa.

In practice, in an election year, and with the Congress that we have, moving on anything is tricky. But, as President Obama noted in his State of the Union address, making some tweaks to skilled immigration has a much better chance of success than comprehensive immigration reform. However, there’s plenty in the pipeline for this issue. California 16th District Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren spoke today about her IDEA Act of 2011 as part of the answer to these problems. And we’re also following the Startup Act, a legislative agenda for startups that includes skilled immigration reform as part of a package of fixes to make it easier for entrepreneurs to start businesses that will create jobs and bolster the economy.

In the end, we’re hopeful the EIR process bears fruitful results and finds new pathways to success on the immigration front. If today’s event was any indication, they seem well on their way, and it’s time to step up pressure on Congress and the White House to act on these issues with innovative solutions.

Hey. No SOPA. Remember?

We’ve got our eyes on this one: Form building startup Jotform.com, which hosts it’s domain on GoDaddy, was suspended two days ago by a U.S. government agency in the course of an investigation into content posted on Jotform’s site.

Jotform founder Aytekin Tank posted on their corporate blog defending Jotform and also directing users to move their forms to JotForm.net while the investigation is cleared up. Tank defended his site’s policing methods and results, saying, “This can happen to any site that allows public to post content. SOPA may not have passed, but what happened shows that it is already being practiced.” [emphasis added]

Tank also wrote an agitated post on Hacker News detailing his impatience at the U.S. Secret Service’s lethargy in responding to the case. He said; “I told them we are a web service with hundreds of thousands of users, so this is a matter of urgency, and we are ready to cooperate fully”.

We’re watching to see how this plays out. While there’s not a lot of information at present, it seems as if GoDaddy or the government or both may be dangerously close to the kinds of enforcement rules that were rejected with the shelving of SOPA and PIPA.

Public Parks for the Airwaves

H.R.3630 just cleared House-Senate negotiations, and a consensus has been reached regarding the spectrum related provisions of the jobs bill. The bill contains provisions to take away the FCC’s ability to set eligibility rules for the auctions, and to re-allocate unused TV frequencies -- these so-called “white spaces” -- as unlicensed spectrum. The deal that’s been made retains some of the FCC’s ability to preserve unlicensed spectrum, although not as much as we might have hoped.

All of this legislative language revolves around spectrum auctions, which are part of H.R.3630 in order to offset the cost of the extension of unemployment benefits. Spectrum auctions also have the keen attention of telecom companies and of tech companies, both of which are fearing the effects of a looming “spectrum crunch”. The white spaces between licensed TV frequencies are considered especially valuable “beachfront” spectrum, because of their ability to penetrate buildings, carry data traffic, and extend to rural areas. They are hotly contested; telecom companies want them for their mobile broadband services, but supporters of innovation want them to remain unlicensed so that new technologies can be developed over them as has been done in the past with services like WiFi and Bluetooth.

Let’s break this down.

The problem is, we have a limited amount of airwaves through which to conduct many different and competing services. Mobile broadband operators need to have spectrum licenses to use with an ever-growing demand for data use associated with smartphones -- Apple’s Siri alone causes the iPhone 4S to require unprecedented amounts of data , even compared to other data intensive smartphones. And consumer demand for mobile broadband services isn’t likely to wane -- according to AT&T, mobile data use on their network has risen by 5,000 percent in the last few years . Then there are  more traditional uses of spectrum, like cable TV networks, radio, text messaging, and cell phone lines. Then on top of that, there’s unlicensed spectrum -- the “public” areas of our airwaves where innovations like  Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and baby monitors operate. The unused TV frequencies, or white spaces, come under this unlicensed spectrum umbrella.

It might not come as a surprise that AT&T is for provisions that would take away the FCC’s ability to set limits on who can participate in spectrum auctions, at least on the surface. They are one of the largest carriers and stand to lose the most if they are blocked out or limited in the auctions. Smaller mobile carriers, including Sprint and T-Mobile, sent a letter to Congress voicing their opposition to the provision, which they said would limit the FCC’s ability to promote competition. AT&T immediately hit back with a statement saying the smaller carriers want the FCC to “stack the deck in its favor” and that the auction should be “fair and open”. Several commentators have noted that AT&T’s vehemence on the issue is slightly puzzling, given they have managed to do pretty well under the FCC’s rules so far.

Far more pressing to us, though, is what happens to those innovation-friendly white space frequencies. The unused television frequencies are more than just empty white spaces. They are the public parks of spectrum. What happens in these “public parks” is vital to innovation and long term economic growth -- not to mention that everyone benefits from these spaces, including companies like AT&T that regularly use unlicensed spectrum to ease the burden on their own spectrum.

A group of 42 members of Congress, led by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), drafted and sent a l etter urging the preservation of unlicensed spectrum , arguing that “ exploring the use of beachfront spectrum, specifically in the television band, is vital given its ability to penetrate buildings, enhance rural coverage, and carry more data traffic than traditional Wi-Fi”.  The letter also noted that in the band best suited for mobile broadband, there is currently 5 times more licensed than unlicensed spectrum. Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS), a major proponent for innovation policy and who along with Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) co-authored the Startup Act , signed the letter and reiterated the sentiment at a Wireless Innovation Alliance and White Space Alliance event , saying “ America would miss an incredible opportunity to enable innovation on unlicensed bands.”

Negotiations, then, have until now been stalled by a lot of competing interests.  It looks as if Congress is opting for a middle of the road approach that hopes to satisfy all sides of the debate.  We’ll be watching to see what the the actual allocations of unlicensed spectrum will be and how this plays out for the innovation agenda.

Honeywell, Nest, and the Next Wave of IP Protection

Intellectual property is vitally important to innovation, but there comes a point where patents are so broad that they stifle new products and technologies.  So seems the case when large, long running companies can quash younger innovators with costly, time-consuming patent lawsuits.

There’s been quite a little buzz over startup company Nest’s Learning Thermostat. Designed by former Apple engineers, it features sleek, minimalist styling with a track wheel control, like the original iPod. It operates a self-programming system based on an interview-style interface, and learns your habits in order to predict when to change the temperature and save you up to 30% on your energy bill. It can also be remotely controlled from your computer or smartphone. It’s been receiving accolades as a nifty, attractive and innovative design and has been sold out since early November.

Thermostat giant Honeywell has taken a rather sour grapes attitude to all of this and has filed a patent infringement lawsuit accusing Nest of seven separate instances of infringement.  

These alleged infringements cover the sleek, minimalist styling, or at least the rotatable ring control. The interview style interface. The energy saving features. And the feature to control remotely via the Internet. Honeywell claims that the core design and functionality of Nest’s thermostat are the direct result of years of research and development carried out by Honeywell. The 2008 Honeywell thermostat, the Prestige, does appear to offer many of the features Nest’s does.

But can you really patent the shape of a device?  Or something as ubiquitous as WiFi connectivity now is?  And if you can, should you?

Honeywell’s crusade to “protect its intellectual property” is, for the moment at least, exclusively targeted towards Nest (and Best Buy, who is selling Nest’s products) -- which seems to suggest Honeywell is more interested in keeping innovative startup competitors from entering the market than IP.  But Nest’s thermostat is not the only competitive device on the market right now.  General Electric also offers the ability to manage a “GE smart thermostat” via the internet.  When asked to comment on GE’s system, Honeywell told  All Things D: “I don’t know. I’m not familiar with that product.” Honeywell also told GigaOm last week that it had shelved plans for a “learning” thermostat 20 years ago because they “found that consumers prefer to control the thermostat, rather than being controlled by the thermostat”, and decided to focus on other innovations.

So Honeywell doesn’t (or didn’t) want to pursue this particular innovation. But it doesn’t want a slick little startup like Nest to have it either. The problem is, an industry behemoth like Honeywell has a lot more financial clout and could sink Nest with a lengthy and costly litigation process -- even if it doesn’t win the patent lawsuit, it could at least deliver a critical hit. Which is discouraging for innovation all around.  Because lets face it: Nest’s thermostat is a hot-ticket item because it fuses design with functionality in a way that’s innovative, much like Apple’s recent products have -- not just for its WiFi capability or interview-style interface.

Protection of intellectual property is important, and we must take active steps as a community to find the best solutions to issues which arise out of our new technologies with regard to those protections. But we should not stifle innovation and improvement through overly broad restrictions on the creation of products and ideas.

Google Fiber comes to Kansas City

We’re very excited to see Google announce the commencement of their Google Fiber project in Kansas City today. Google Fiber will be putting down thousands of miles of cables to create a new broadband infrastructure which will eventually see data speeds of more than 100 times faster than the average speed most Americans currently enjoy.   

The project is enabled by the Gigabit Challenge -- a competition sponsored by the Kauffman Foundation seeking entrepreneurial ideas to create innovative and forward-thinking businesses to work alongside Google Fiber. Senator Jerry Moran has been a major proponent of the Gigabit Challenge, which goes hand in hand with the core initiatives he co-authored for the Startup Act -- which we strongly support -- a bipartisan agenda for invigorating the economy through innovation.

We look forward Kansas City’s continued growth as an entrepreneurial hub, and we also look forward to further expansion of high-speed broadband to every corner the country as we look towards building the future of the tech driven economy.

70 Groups Ask Congress to Halt Work On SOPA and PIPA

In the wake of all successful protest movements, once the dust settles, the time comes to take positive action. With SOPA and PIPA dead in the water, thanks to the sustained and comprehensive efforts of the internet community; the thousands of phone calls we made, the millions of us that signed Google’s petition, it’s time for our community to come up with alternative legislation - a solution that addresses online copyright infringement without compromising free speech and innovation. 

A letter sent today to Congress and signed by 70+ companies, including Engine, Mozilla, and Public Knowledge, urged Congress to “to take a breath, step back, and approach the issues from a fresh perspective.” 

The letter warned against repeating the mistakes of SOPA and PIPA, and requested that legislative debate surrounding the issue be “open, transparent, and sufficiently deliberative to allow the full range of interested parties to offer input and to evaluate specific proposals.” That means taking into account the views from tech companies and media companies. It means seeking out information and statistics from unbiased sources.

It means keeping the users of the internet in the loop, because our input matters, and we have shown that we can and will make ourselves heard.

Read the letter, in full, here from Public Knowledge.

#censorship? Not So Much.

The well-publicized January 18th blackout was so effective for SOPA and PIPA opposition that legions of Twitter users refused to Tweet last Saturday, January 28th, organizing their go dark movement via #TwitterBlackout. The protest was over a change in Twitter’s censorship policy, and, perhaps still rabid over the (very real) threat to open internet, Twitter users flew their freedom of speech flags defiantly.  Given a few days to meditate on the issues at hand, though, it seems clear that the righteous indignation of these protesters may have been a little hasty.

Twitter will indeed be censoring tweets - on a country by country basis according to the laws of the country being tweeted in. So, if a country’s government outlaws certain content, offending tweets will be taken down - but only in that country. Olivier Basille, from Reporters Without Borders, drafted a letter urging Twitter to reconsider a policy that from his point of view, kowtows to localized censorship and could therefore potentially contravene international free speech standards.  Basille posits that the change will stifle online dissidents who have previously used Twitter to great effect to stay informed and organize protests, such as last year’s social media fuelled revolution in Egypt.

But there are plenty of arguments to suggest that this won’t be the case.  For starters, the new policy differs from their previous one in only one respect: until now, these tweets would have had to be blocked worldwide. This means that instead of completely censoring any content deemed illegal by any government, all content will be available everywhere, with limitations only in effect for the country with the legality issue. And for those worried that localized censorship will hinder activism, John Castone over at Mashable makes a good point when he says that activists are smart enough to tweet in code if need be.  Twitter explicitly says they can’t block a user unless there is “valid and applicable legal order”.

Furthermore, Twitter will be posting all its take downs on watchdog site ChillingEffects.org. It’s also worth noting that all sites have to censor content to stay within the bounds of the law (in order to avoid being shut down) -- including eBay, Google, and Facebook. Most of them just don’t tweet about it.

On balance, it appears there will actually be less censorship than before - and more transparency when censorship does occur. As effective an activism tool as it has proven to be, even Twitter can’t operate outside of the bounds of the law. By complying with government regulations, despite any questions as to the morality of these laws, the platform can remain in countries where activism might be needed most.  

How the Internet Beat SOPA and PIPA: Advocacy in a Networked World (Part 1)

From our friend, Tina Lee, at ZeroDivide. Read more here.

The Sky is Rising

We’ve all heard how peer to peer music sharing sites are keeping dollars out of artist’s bank accounts. Or maybe we know someone who works in publishing who is throwing up their hands at how sites like Amazon are choking the industry, making it impossible for them to compete. Hollywood would like you to know that downloading pirated movies is pretty much the same as snatching a handbag or stealing a car.  So everyone is agreement. Something has to be done, before our creative industries are submerged completely by cut-rate imitations. Right?

Wrong.

What if we told you the obliteration of these industries is not nigh? That actually, our creative industries are steadily growing, and that far from being a death knell, the internet is proving to be a bastion of opportunity for artists and those who enable them?

A report published by Floor64 (and proudly sponsored by us here at Engine) highlights some pretty fascinating research which shows that our entertainment industries have not only been thriving over the last few years despite the biggest recession since the Great Depression - they have been expanding.  

Take the music industry, for example.  Ok, true, the era of the rock star might be over. Big music execs no longer have the last word on who is meteorically risen to the ranks of the famous, and when.  On the other hand, what we have now, is more.  More artists producing more quality product, more platforms for those artists to market themselves on, more opportunities to create business models that are innovative and successful. More successful than you might think.  From lowering production costs, using crowdfunding, or offering up a “pay what you think is fair” payment structure, there are several non-traditional methods which have garnered incredible success, and which co-authors Masnick and Ho have found very interesting case studies for.

So yes, there is reason for people in traditional businesses in these industries to be feeling the pinch.  But by protecting the interests of these players, we’d be jeopardizing the prospects of the industry itself, of the artist, and of the consumer.  

This report is worth your time.  Read it, share it, comment.

Artists against SOPA/PIPA

We’re excited to be part of a letter put together by a handful of individuals within the creative community to highlight the harms of PIPA and SOPA, and their belief in continued openness of the Internet. These are musicians, actors, and authors that the vast majority of Americans have welcomed into their lives and by virtue, into their homes.

Like all of us, these artists are keenly aware of the harms posed by copyright infringement, but wish to highlight for lawmakers that this legislation -- which is being moved through Congress at an alarming pace -- goes too far, threatening an ecosystem they rely on to reach their current fans and find new ones.

At a time when music sales are at an all time high due to distribution methods that rely on the Internet, and entertainment spending across the board is up 15% over the last decade, it is important to remember that the web continues to open up new markets and new possibilities every day. And that our favorite content creators have been able to harness that power in ways that would never have been imaginable 20 years ago.

We all must urge the Senate and House to carefully consider the ramifications of their actions and engage everyone impacted by this legislation to ensure we are protecting rightsholders’ creations
and
the platforms they (and we) rely on.

Read their letter. Call your Senator.

Censorship Around the World

While we’ve been fighting SOPA and PIPA, other countries around the world are also waging battles against the dire consequences of internet censorship.

The oppressive regime in Belarus set a new law into effect today which tightens the already strict regulation of internet use by making it illegal for Belarussians to visit foreign websites.  The Eastern European country established an extreme level of control over internet use last year when it issued Presidential Decree No. 60 , under which ISPs are required to block access to certain types of content and specific URLs – which are so far not disclosed to the public.  A similar, US version of this legislation – the Communications Decency Act of 1996 -   sparked controversy in the mid-90’s and was eventually overturned for violating First Amendment rights.

The new law is ostensibly to regulate online commerce – that is, making sure only domestic domains are used to provide online services – and violating it will result in a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed the equivalent of about $125.  However, the implications could be much more serious than a slap on the wrist and a small fine.  The law requires that internet cafes and individuals providing internet access to other parties be responsible for any illegal browsing or e-commerce, and failure to report illegal usage of foreign sites could result in the business being shut down.   This kind of excessive punishment essentially discourages public internet use.  The government also has authorization to change and add to the list of banned sites – a level of governmental control that civil rights groups are distressed by ( Freedom House rates Belarus’ press freedom “not free” with “substantial political censorship”).

Meanwhile, Spain has passed anti-piracy legislation remarkably similar to the SOPA bill. Under the new Sinde law , a special commission will be formed to react to copyright infringement complaints made by rightsholders.  Slightly less draconian than SOPA, the websites will have ten days to remove the infringing material before being shut down. However, the bill has generated major opposition in Spain to what people see as a misleading law enacted for the benefit of Hollywood.

These battles mark crucial junctions for the future of open internet.  Just as the rejection of the Communications Decency Act was a pivotal moment in the creation of an unrestricted and dynamic internet landscape back in 1996, laws like Decree No. 60, Sinde, and SOPA/PIPA could set the tone for a more closed, stifled, and creatively impoverished world wide web.  

Verizon, Google Wallet and the LTE Network Agreement

Verizon Wireless has come under fire for blocking the mobile payment app, Google Wallet, from the keystone of its newly-released product line. Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus, which was developed in partnership with Google, was released last week after delays and speculation over whether or not Verizon would ship the phone with Google Wallet functionality.  Ship it did, absent the app - and it seems that in doing so Verizon may have violated its open-devices and open-applications conditions in its legal licenses for the 700MHz spectrum - the spectrum that operates its LTE network.  An open letter to the FCC was promptly dispatched by Barbara van Schewick, a professor at Stanford Law School and Director of the Center for Internet & Society.

The letter urges the FCC to investigate Verizon’s blocking of the app, as it appears to contravene FCC Service Rules which prohibit standards that block specific devices or applications or “
other services that compete with wireless service providers’ own offerings”.  For example, Verizon and AT&T’s new mobile payment application slated for launch next year ISIS, which will be in direct competition with Google Wallet.  

Van Schewick’s letter added that such a violation will have serious ramifications for all innovation in mobile technology -- not just mobile payment technology -- because investors will shy away from a business that is entirely at the mercy of wireless providers; companies that may have a stake in stifling competitive technologies.

Verizon already has a big piece of C-Block Spectrum- they recently signed a deal with Comcast and Time Warner to acquire 122 Advanced Wireless Spectrum licenses from SpectrumCo, which means they control a pretty significant chunk of the bandwidth -- a pretty hot commodity in the toll-road style spectrum system we currently have, and the very same type of license AT&T will now transfer to T-Mobile in the wake of their failed merger attempt.  So if the wireless companies can claim this much control over spectrum, do we really want to give them a monopoly over which companies and products they allow to use it?  The FCC still has to approve the Comcast/Time Warner deal. Only time will tell if Verizon’s move will play into their decision - and how similar deals are structured going forward.

SOPA Markup on Hold. Now What?

In an unexpected move this morning, the House Judiciary Committee voted to suspend the markup of the hotly-contested Stop Online Piracy Act until the "next reasonable business day." To the 10,180 of you who (as of this writing) have made phone calls to your respective legislators, consider the beginning of this post a hearty, well-deserved congratulatory pat on the back.

The good news is that we now have more time to sway more hearts and minds on the committee and in the Congress and educate them as to why SOPA is such bad legislation in its current form.

The bad news is, the next meeting could be as early as Tuesday.

Let's keep the pressure on. Your voice is working. We heard that loud and clear in the halls of Congress this week. Now is the time to double down, make another phone call and let Congress know that as it stands right now, we stand united against SOPA and for finding a new way forward.

You can make a call right now at engineadvocacy.org/voice and now is the perfect time to let Congress know you won't stand for an internet that is easily censored and made insecure.

Thank you for your work so far, and for the work we all will do over the next weeks and months. The tide is turning in our favor, so stand up, keep fighting, and together we can protect the this essential resource in our lives.

UPDATE: Chairman Smith has scheduled the next round of markup for next Wednesday, December 21st according to multiple sources.

Internet Censorship in Malaysia

We’ve heard through third parties that there have been a number of inquiries from both the Malaysian government and in-country press expressing disapproval for our having included their nation in our ad on Wednesday. They object to being listed along with China and Iran as example governments who have been known to censor Internet traffic within their borders.

We included Malaysia in this list because it recently ordered various sites to be blocked for copyright reasons without meaningful due process for the affected sites -- just as the current versions of SOPA and PIPA in the United States would propose to do.

The Malaysian government's desire to stop large-scale, commercial piracy is an admirable goal, and one that we agree with, but site blocking is not the right way to do it -- it censors legal content unnecessarily (like the legitimate artists who use sites Megaupload to distribute their works); it is ineffective; and it threatens the security and integrity of the Internet.

By putting Malaysia in between China and Iran in that sentence, we did not mean to imply that its level of censorship and repression of free expression is akin to theirs. That would be a false comparison. To our knowledge, Malaysia's action in this particular instance of copyright is a break from their history of fostering ICT development.

It is our hope that Malaysia will take steps to ensure it has no place on this list.

Stand with Tech Entrepreneurs; Call Congress now to Stop SOPA

Today, 17 Web luminaries sent a letter to Congress opposing SOPA - the Internet censoring, innovation killing copyright legislation.

Will you stand with them and call Congress now.

Please spread the word to friends too - SOPA is heading for a committee vote tomorrow, so time is of the essence. The founders' letter will run as print ads, full page in today's New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Washington Times, Roll Call, The Hill, Politico, and CQ. You will not be able to pick up a paper in the DC area (or, really, many other places) without reading this letter. There will also be an online ad on CNET, TechCrunch, Gigaom, and Mashable, and Politico already has a story up. The ads point to a call Congress alert run by Engine Advocacy: http://stopthewall.us/

Tumblr Staff: SOPA Update

staff:

This weekend, we hosted a meeting at Tumblr HQ with top technology companies, politicians and advocacy groups to coordinate our effort to reform or prevent the well-intentioned but deeply flawed Stop Online Piracy Act from becoming law. You guys have already made a huge impact in Washington, but...

Benetech: Why I'm Scared of SOPA

So, we shouldn’t have anything to fear from a bill entitled “Stop Online Piracy Act,” right? Unfortunately, that’s not the case.

Read more at Beneblog

Keep the Web #OPEN

One of the main criticisms Hollywood has levied at Silicon Valley throughout the SOPA/PIPA debate is "Hey, it's not a perfect bill but it's not like you guys are offering better solutions."

The esteemed gentleman from California (and a few friends) beg to differ.

Today, Congressman Darrell Issa launched KeepTheWebOPEN.com, a site on which he invites public comment on his proposed Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act, which is envisioned as a more sensible option to protect copyright online by using international trade laws as enforcement mechanisms.

You can visit the website, read the proposed bill in full and add your voice to what you would like to see in the proposed legislation at the same time. So take a look, and do what you can to keep the web #OPEN.