ECPA Pushes Past 235 Co-Sponsors

For the last few months, we’ve closely watched the progress of a bill in Congress seeking to reform and update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. We’ve discussed the current law’s outdated regulations of our communications infrastructure, but a piece of that could be updated very quickly through Kansas Congressman Kevin Yoder and Colorado Congressman Jared Polis’ Email Privacy Act. Essentially, as we’ve noted before, law enforcement currently doesn’t currently need a warrant to read your email--leaving many startups in the unenviable position of not being able to protect their customers. We think this is wrong, and it turns out a bunch of our elected representatives agree.

Less than a month ago, we noted that the bill had reached 218 co-sponsors, fully half of the House of Representatives, and which, let’s face it, is a monumental achievement with such a divided Congress, and a testament to ECPA reform’s popularity. With this week’s announcement that six more Republican co-sponsors are signing on, that number has now ballooned to 235 and is threatening to climb even higher.

Even as we creep closer and closer to mid-term elections, there are certain things Congress can still do while it’s in session. The Email Privacy Act, which would drastically enhance both privacy and security for Internet users and bring our laws into the 21st Century, is a great example of the “art of the possible” and we encourage the House to listen to itself and pass this much-needed reform swiftly.

Memphis Soul Boosts Startup Economy

Last month, the Engine production team took a trip down South to experience for ourselves the vibrant local startup economy we’d been hearing about in Memphis, Tennessee. We had the opportunity to meet a number of local entrepreneurs, some based full-time in Memphis and some just in town for the summer, participating in an accelerator program at StartCo. Across the board, we found a group of extremely dedicated tech entrepreneurs, many working seven days a week, more than 12 hours a day, to ready their companies for launch -- and a community taking shape that is passionate about building a better future for the city.

Some founders were lifelong Memphians who had chosen to keep their companies there, aiming to bring jobs, vitality, and a new phase of entrepreneurship to their hometown. These founders spoke of Memphis’s rich business history and entrepreneurial spirit. St. Jude, FedEx, and Autozone are among the companies that call Memphis home, and many founders spoke about these companies with an excitement that seemed to inspire their own hard work and dedication. Within the community, we met logistics startups, saw innovation in the healthcare space, and heard about medical device accelerators in the area. These were companies obviously attracted to Memphis for the resources already built into the local economy.

We also found teams from all over the country who had come to reside in the center of downtown Memphis and take advantage of the startup ecosystem that has taken shape there within the last few years. Teams from places such as NYC and Silicon Valley had come to Memphis to focus on building their businesses, looking for a different pace and a less saturated market. They described their year-round homes as having a lot of noise, and they had come to Memphis for the summer to focus on building their product -- finding real benefit living in a place where they could find a little more calm. They were astounded by the abundance of resources at their disposal: talented mentors, investors, and other startup founders -- all ready and willing to help.  

This is not to say that Memphis is lacking a noise of its own -- we were able to meet with entrepreneurs in a variety of backdrops -- from their offices, to blues clubs on Beale Street, to the tops of their tents at BBQ Fest alongside the Mississippi River. The StartCo accelerator uses Memphis in May, an international festival showcasing arts, food, and music, as a networking opportunity for its companies. As one entrepreneur put it, “What better way to build relationships than over beer and barbeque?” By the end of our visit, we had to agree. There was a liveliness and enthusiasm -- at the festival on the river, as well as in the office, that was contagious.

As with the barbeque, startup founders have taken notice, and taken advantage, of the Southern hospitality they have encountered in Memphis. A very common theme in the interviews we conducted was the sense of community, kindness, and the willingness of anyone and everyone to help out. We spoke with the founders of eDivv from NYC, who told us “the best thing about Memphis is everyone knows each other, and everyone is willing to help. They want to see Memphis succeed. It’s a small community within a big city.” Layla Tabatabaie of BarterSugar agrees: “Of all the meetings I’ve had with local residents, professors, and others in the area, they’re all willing to help and they’re all very kind. I think that is something that is sometimes harder to find in places like New York.”

As a Memphian for the vast majority of my life, it was no surprise to hear about the close-knit community as well as the kindness of complete strangers. What I was surprised to hear, though, was how these ingredients of a place I lived for 18 years are fueling a new phase of growth in the local economy. I left for San Francisco without any knowledge of a startup community in Memphis, and it was not until I spent a couple of years involved in the community here that I began to take notice of the activity in my own hometown. It was very exciting to return to Memphis and discover such a vibrant community there -- one so diverse and different than that of Silicon Valley, and one that had not existed in the Memphis I knew.

Whether a lifelong Memphian, or a founder just in town for the summer, everyone we met had a personal interest in boosting the local economy. They hoped to create jobs and bring growth to local businesses, with a heartfelt interest in improving the community they had become a part of. Though the concept of technology startups reviving the local economy may be a fairly new one for Memphis, the passion and dedication of Memphians to make Memphis a better place is not. When we asked locals to sum up Memphis in one word, one we heard quite often was “soul”. It’s easy to see how the history and soul of Memphis are finding their way into a new chapter.  

Watch our Startup Cities, Memphis video here:

Evan Engstrom: Engine’s New Policy Director on Smart Policy

This is an incredibly important time for technology policy.

We're in the midst of what future generations of tech policy wonks will remember as the summer of net neutrality. But, it's not just policy nerds that recognize how important it is to preserve an open Internet. Citizens by the thousands have filed comments with the FCC—over a million comments in all—to weigh in on what is in large part a rather dry question of regulatory authority. Many of these folks have been moved to comment because they recognize that the economic, technological, and cultural advances of the past decade were possible because of the Internet’s freedom and openness, which allowed anyone with an idea and a little technical know-how to start a business with global reach.

While a positive outcome on net neutrality would go a long way to ensuring that future entrepreneurs remain free to innovate, we still have much work to do. In the coming years, we hope to see key changes to immigration policy, patent reform, copyright law, and other matters of great interest to the startup community. Being able to shape the direction of these issues is a thrilling prospect; it’s why I’m so excited to be joining Engine.

Engine is already one of the most respected voices on matters of tech policy from patent reform to access, and one of the only organizations addressing these issues from the perspective and the backyard of startups and entrepreneurs. As Engine’s new Policy Director, I’m looking forward to maintaining and expanding our focus, growing the policy team, and ensuring that when we weigh in on an issue, we are providing insights backed by concrete examples, data, and expertise. This is no simple task, but an important one.

Helping to craft policy today means both anticipating the future concerns of a sector that's moving faster than the law, and making sure that policymakers and the public understand the often complex technological issues involved.  We must ensure that policy solutions are strong enough to provide the certainty necessary to encourage investment while remaining flexible enough to efficiently adapt to changing technologies. To do so, it is crucial that we maintain a dialogue with entrepreneurs and investors to keep apprised of where technology innovation is headed and where technology policy must adapt to meet new needs.

Engine is uniquely situated to lead on these important issues.  As a policy shop tied to an advocacy organization with a research arm, and a community of over 500 startups, technologists, and investors, we are closely involved with the most innovative people and companies in the tech space today.  We will continue to foster a connection between startups and government. Engine is ready to lead the conversation on tech policy, and I’m eager to be a part of this important effort.

Net Neutrality Comments Crash FCC Website: Keep The Pressure On

Back in May, we sent a letter to the FCC signed by over 150 startups supporting net neutrality. Since then, we have thought a lot about the dangerous uncertainty the lack of real net neutrality will cause, and the FCC has received nearly 700,000 comments and counting on the subject -- including some from education startups, software companies, reddit, and Internet giants. In fact, so many people are filing today that the system crashed, prompting organizations (us included!) to file by hand, and forcing the FCC to extend today’s deadline to midnight (eastern time) on Friday.

This is great, because we have to keep the pressure on Chairman Tom Wheeler to make sure he does the right thing, and issues a strong, sensible rule that preserves the open Internet. If you still want to file comments, you can do so here.

There is still a strong wave of opposition from individuals and groups committed to letting telecommunications companies build fast lanes on the Internet for those who can pay. And unfortunately, those telecommunications companies, and their supporters, have targeted the U.S. Congress, and now we are anticipating amendments to the Appropriations bill currently being debated in the House. The Latta bill, for example, would gut the FCC’s ability to reclassify the Internet as a utility, and other similar telecom-favoring legislation like prohibiting communities from building their own broadband networks.

You can help preserve an open Internet by letting your representative in Congress know that any such bill is unacceptable. Our friends at Free Press have set up a call tool to contact your member of Congress today. It is especially important that Democratic members who have generally (though not entirely) been supportive of our goals stand strong against these tactics.

You can make that call here.

And if you can’t call, think about sending out a tweet. Here are some examples:

Stand up for an open Internet. Say no to a bill that would stop the FCC from issuing real #NetNeutrality rules! http://goo.gl/mH95YT

Startups need an open Internet. Say no to the Latta amendment and stand up for #NetNeutrality! http://goo.gl/mH95YT

#NetNeutrality supporters in Congress, please make your voices heard and say no to the Latta amendment. Preserve the open Internet!

It’s time for the telcos to stop messing with #NetNeutrality. Call Congress and tell them to stand up for innovation http://goo.gl/mH95YT

Finally, if you haven’t already done so, please sign up with http://www.startupsfornetneutrality.org/ to show your support and join the movement for an free and open Internet.

More Companies Comment on Net Neutrality

In our continuing series of filings with the FCC and their open docket on Net Neutrality rules, we have a series of comments this week from a broad range of companies and organizations, again focusing on one critical viewpoint: that the Chairman of the FCC has within his power the ability to reclassify the Internet as a utility under Title II, and that he should do so. From the web, Opera Software is one of the world’s leading web browsers with more than 350 million users worldwide, and comments have been written by Chief Technology Officer Haakon Wium Lie from their head office in Oslo, Norway in support of reclassification with a global perspective. 

Opera Software services many users in sub-optimal situations, mostly those with poor connectivity or lower-end devices, which is first among many reasons that in a marketplace designed for ease of switching with only marginal cost, speed is a key factor in retaining consumers. And with one of Opera Software’s key differentiators being their proprietary compression service, Lie points out they would “have to” secure fast lane agreements under the Chairman’s proposal in order to stay effective for their users. In a sense, Opera Software provides a service on the margin for those on the margins of our society, and the reason they do so is that the Internet is the great equalizer. Even those without the latest and most powerful devices, or the best connectivity and bandwidth, can still explore the vast recesses of information and connect with people around the globe.

And, as Lie points out, if other countries copy the FCC’s current proposal, we run the risk of continuing to chip away, not just at the innovative Internet which has brought us so many products and services to enrich our life, but the very fabric of the community built online by restricting access to those who may not be able to afford to connect. In that “undue bureaucratic burden” says Lie, we find the greatest cause for alarm, all of which can be averted, in his words, by reclassifying the Internet as a utility under Title II of the Telecommunications Act.

We also hear from organizations in the global health space, including the Global Healthy Living Foundation, which creates disease-specific communities and networks to help many facing chronic illness get the support they need. And from the interactive world, Heyzap and TouchCast create new experiences online. Without rules that keep the Internet open for innovation, their businesses won’t reach their users.

In all of these cases, especially in the delivery of high-bandwidth content like YouTube videos or other interactive devices, user experience could be hamstrung to the point of dysfunction without clear rules keeping the Internet open for innovation. “If we aren’t in a fast lane, by definition we are in a slow lane,” says GHLF. According to Heyzap, “If we had pay a special fee to each phone company to get the same treatment as our competitors, we would have to slow our growth and our hiring,” and that even if litigation under commercial reasonableness standard were available, it wouldn’t help them with ISPs. And TouchCast points out, “When someone views a TouchCast, they not only stream video, but also download web pages and data from the Internet all at the same time. Any perceived delays in video streaming rates or the presentation of any other information within a TouchCast would result in high consumer abandonment rates.”

We have links to the full comments comments and some key quotes below. If, like any of these organizations, your business and customers will be adversely affected by the Chairman’s proposal, sign up with us at startupsfornetneutrality.org. And if you can file a comment, let us know at comms@engine.is.

---

Opera Software

“In the hyper-competitive market for web browsers, speed is key. Consumers will switch browsers to experience the web marginally. Competition would suffer if some browser vendors have fast lane arrangements, or if the non-fast lanes do not provide sufficient capacity. Under the Chairman’s proposal, in order to have a viable web compression service, we would have to secure agreements for a fast lane. “

“Our worst-case scenario is that other countries copy FCC’s proposal. The United States is not only influential with new technological innovations, but also Internet policy. Opera Software would never be able to provide web companies, including U.S. companies, with access to 350M end users if we had to negotiate Internet fast lane agreements with all network operators globally. If other countries follow the logic of the FCC proposal, we and other Internet companies would have to prioritize countries and regions.”

Global Healthy Living Foundation

“We are the first source of health-related news for thousands of people. When several contaminated vials of methotrexate (an arthritis medication) were recalled, we were one of the first organizations to reach out to the people in our community. Within two hours of disseminating the recall message through the Internet, we received two replies from members who were scheduled to take the contaminated medicine that afternoon. Our ability to quickly and efficiently reach a large number of people very likely saved lives. If we had slow or patchy service, we likely would have had a much smaller network that relied on us less often for information.”

Heyzap

“We could not have become the company we are today under the rules proposed by the FCC. We provide real-time recommendations of apps based on data gathered from users. This requires gathering a lot of data, bringing it to our computers, processing it, and sending recommendations and ads back to our users—all in fractions of a second. We need to process a lot of data, quickly. Any limitations in speed or consistency of our service would be noticeable to our users.

Meanwhile, under the Chairman’s proposed rules, broadband providers have strong incentives to make the differences between their standard and premium access options noticeable. If there were no noticeable differences, then no edge provider would feel the need to pay for premium access.”

TouchCast

“We are hoping to change the way people watch videos and TV. Established broadcast companies are wealthy and powerful, and they could easily forge exclusive agreements with broadband providers and lock us from those providers’ networks. While the Chairman’s proposal prevents NBC from forming an exclusive agreement with its affiliate, Comcast, it does nothing to prevent NBC from forming the same agreement with Verizon, or CBS with both Verizon and Comcast. These exclusive agreements could shut us out of the game entirely.”

Diversity Numbers Aren't Good, But Tech is Taking Action

Back in May, Google became the first major Internet company to disclose its workforce diversity data to the public. Since then, more of tech’s big names -- LinkedIn, Yahoo, and most recently, Facebook -- have followed suit and published their own employment statistics. While Google, LinkedIn, Yahoo, and Facebook are four different companies with different products in different sectors, there is a troubling, but not-so-shocking sameness to the diversity of their workforces. There is a lot of work to be done, but these businesses are starting to take action.

Sixty to seventy percent of the workforce at each company are male; white employees make up over 50% of total employees across all four companies; the percentages of Asian employees ranges from 30%-39%, and all four companies employ only 2% of black and 3-4% of Latino workers.

Each company has conceded that making these statistics public is their first step on the long road to solving tech’s inclusion problem, and have made clear that they won’t stop at these revelations. The starkness of their data has presented an imperative to act, and all four have introduced initiatives such as partnerships with pipeline organizations and the implementation of employee resource groups to improve their recruitment and retention.   

Google

• Google has over 13 employee resource groups ranging from Ethnic groups, sexual orientation, and age, that aim to provide support communities and discuss targeted recruitment and retention initiatives.
• Partnered with HBCUs such as Howard to elevate coursework and attendance in CS.
• Hosts education outreach programs, talent development programs, and technical conferences and events worldwide, while also sponsoring conferences put on by external organizations such as the National Society of Black Engineers, the AdColor Industry Coalition, and the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing.
• Partners with organizations that work to increase the diversity of talent in tech including: Anita Borg Institute for Women in Technology, American Association of People with Disabilities, Leadership Education and Development, and Richard Tapia Celebration of Diversity in Computing.

LinkedIn

• Partners with organizations that promote women in technology, including the Anita Borg institute; and sponsor development events such as the Grace Hopper Conference.
• Created and pioneered DevelopHer, an annual women’s hackday to engage and support women in tech.
• Partnered with Management Leadership for Tomorrow, an organization aimed at career development for black, Latino, and Native Americans.
• Sponsored the 2014 Out & Equal Workplace Summit to work towards an end to employment discrimination for LGBTQ employees.

Yahoo

• Supports a wide range of employee resource groups to create an inclusive workplace environment and engaged workplace environment.
• Yahoo!’s Women in Tech group hosts an annual Yahoo! Women Working Wonders event as well as partners with organizations such as Girl Geek Dinner that bring together female-identified technologists and aspiring women in tech for networking events around the world.

Facebook

• Hosts Facebook University, a program that provides undergraduate freshman from underrepresented groups with internships at Facebook.
• Partners with pipeline programs such as Girls Who Code, Code 2040, the National Society of Black Engineers, and the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers and Management Leadership for Tomorrow.
• Works with Yes We Code to help connect 100,000 youth to computer programming education programs.
• Provide unconscious bias training for employees to help staff recognize and stop racism and sexism they may unknowingly exhibit.
• Supports employee resource groups for staff from diverse ethnic, cultural, and contextual backgrounds.

With four of tech’s biggest players outing their diversity data, companies like Apple and Amazon are becoming more conspicuous in their discretion. Getting #diversity trending in the tech industry is one thing, but making it stick for the long term with lasting change is another. As companies become more transparent and vocal about what they are doing and hope to do to improve diversity in the workplace--best practices and ultimately, an industry standard are being set as we speak. Alongside sales and profits, a diverse workforce is now a priority and marker of a successful, forward-thinking company.

Education Startups File Net Neutrality Comments with FCC

As you likely know by now, this summer is key in the fight for net neutrality and an open Internet. It is crucial for stakeholders to take this time to file comments at the Federal Communications Commission explaining why an open Internet is essential to their life and  businesses. Today, with our help, four startups in the education space -- who work directly with students to help them acquire the necessary skills to compete in the very global economy -- did just that.

The comments, filed by Codecademy, CodeCombat, General Assembly and OpenCurriculum, all make the central point that harm to net neutrality is harm to startups. In this case specifically, harm to education startups is harm to the pursuit of knowledge and America’s ability to compete in a global technological marketplace. And all four believe that harm can be mitigated by reclassifying the Internet as a utility under Title II of the Telecommunications Act.

We’ll be working with more startups to file comments as the summer continues. We want to make sure that startups in every industry have a voice in this debate. If you are interested in filing comment for your business, and would like our help, email us at comms@engine.is for more information. We hope you’ll join the fight and help us preserve an Internet free and open for innovation.

The existing comments will be posted to the FCC’s comment intake page and are available below for you to read at length:

Overall, these education startups reflect a wider community belief that reclassification is the best (and only) way to achieve the necessary end goal of making sure the Internet does not devolve into a mess of paid prioritization -- or fast and slow lanes. Staying this result is critically important in the field of education, where margins are tight, business is seen as a service, and the outcomes may provide the best fix yet for our economy on the rebound.

From CodeCombat comments:

When CodeCombat first started, resources were scarce, and if we had to negotiate with and pay funds to ISPs, we would have been unable to do so. At that time, we also would not have been able to use the FCC’s standard of “commercial reasonableness” or even a public advocate provided by the FCC to protect our interests. We still may not be able to do so.

...

Almost a million people have learned to code using CodeCombat, including 343,000 students during Code.org’s Hour of Code, a campaign that both President Obama and Republicans encouraged and embraced.We’ve also helped thousands of more experienced programmers hone their skills with more advanced levels. In addition, we’ve translated our game into 40 languages so that students around the world can learn to program as well.

...

We firmly oppose the FCC proposal. We urge the FCC to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under title II of the Communications Act of 1934 to prevent technical discrimination, paid prioritization, interconnection disputes, and the host of other harmful issues which would arise as a result of the adoption of the proposal.

From General Assembly comments:

With national attention on the rising cost of higher education and the crippling debt for recent graduates, General Assembly offers an important outlet for students looking to receive a high return on investment from their education. Over 100,000 students have benefitted from our services, including our 10 - 12 week long immersive programs and our three-month apprenticeship program that provides students with a paid opportunity to further hone their newly-acquired skills on the job.

...

Clear rules are important in promoting innovative enterprise. The factors of the commercial reasonableness test are too vague to provide certainty. These standards include “harm to consumers” or “to competition” and evaluation of a totality-of-the- circumstances. Such a standard will only lead to expensive and time-consuming litigation that start-ups cannot afford and which will therefore curb entrepreneurial activity to the benefit incumbent players and their legal teams.

General Assembly believes we need strong network neutrality rules that prohibit blocking, discrimination, and access fees. These require reclassification under Title II of the Communications Act. The Internet works well today; allowing ISPs to price discriminate will harm businesses like ours, the general public, and the economic well-being of our country.

From OpenCurriculum comments:

We want to spend our time and resources transforming education, changing the lives of teachers and students, with the awareness that such education will have lasting impact on today’s young people throughout their entire lives and benefit society in general. Asking us to negotiate for “commercially reasonable” deals in light of our larger competitors being willing to pay a premium to keep us out of the market is rigging the market so we (and other entrants) lose. “Comforting” us with the right to hire lawyers and expert witnesses, or wait years for an FCC Ombudsman to win or lose a case whose legal standards are also stacked against us, provides no comfort.

….

Even if we find ways to pay for premium tiers with different cable and phone companies, this is going to significantly eat into our capital ­ affecting the way we grow and our ability to allow more teachers in the United States and around the world to get access to better quality teaching materials for the future generations.

...

The FCC should instead reclassify access to the Internet as a common carrier service and forbid unreasonable technical discrimination, define pay­-for­-play deals as inherently unjust and unreasonable, define access fees as inherently unreasonable charges, and apply these rules to both mobile and fixed platforms.

From Codecademy comments:

Codecademy is an innovative solution for schools and students to save money. Our company also has an important impact on job creation. We're building the basic steps of competency to help people start their own companies, websites, apps, and products and get entry level jobs right now. The next big thing, or an innovative solution to a social problem, could be developed by someone who learned how to code using Codecademy.

But none of that may happen if the FCC adopts its fast-lanes proposal and abandons an open Internet.

Nashville's Vibrant Community is No Surprise

Before this trip, I was already one of Nashville's biggest fans. I was lucky to go to school here and spend time in this amazing city. But what struck me today is how the things I love most about Nashville -- its welcoming attitude, its strong sense of community, and its appetite for arts and adventure -- have come together to build a vibrant, engaged, and diversified startup community. And, even more, how that community is helping to cement Nashville's position as one of the nation's most exciting places to be.

It's obvious that the close-knit and supportive community that exists here is driving its success. But it's more than just the startup community's success: it's the success of the whole city. This was true in the other places we visited this week -- but especially so in Nashville. One need look no further than the Trolley Barns, home to the Nashville Entrepreneur Center, the exciting epicenter of what's going on here (thanks in no small part to the community's biggest cheerleader, Michael Burcham). The Trolley Barns, 1930s-era buildings that, yes, did house they city's trollies, have been redeveloped as a home for startups, artists, and now restaurants and businesses. Just a few years ago, they existed in a part of the city devoid of commercial and residential activity. Now it's buzzing.

This was consistent with what we saw at Marathon Village and the BowTruss Building - formerly deserted and underused structures that have or are being renovated to house exciting new businesses, and are making new communities safe and successful. Just more proof that good startups are more than just good business, they're good community.

It's no surprise that Nashville, home for generations to some of the country's best artists, would also be home to some of its most exciting and disruptive startups. It has the support of civic leaders, like Burcham, and elected officials, like Gov. Haslam, who joined us today. And, like most successful communities, it has members who are engaged, helping their compatriots rise to the top, and encouraging them to plug back into the larger cities and communities in which they live.

Nashville, I always knew you had it in you.

Cincinnati's Renaissance

Cincinnati is going through a renaissance in the traditional sense of the word. Leveraging longstanding expertise in brand development, and belief in the power of consumer products and local manufacturing, this accessible city is embracing its artistic roots and rebuilding neighborhoods.

With Proctor and Gamble headquartered in Cincinnati, the city has long been the capital of consumer branding. Now, P&G is deeply involved with the next generation of great consumer products via grants to startup incubator Centrifuse, and mentorship responsibilities for a host of other businesses. Between big businesses getting involved, and the world-class industrial design program at the University of Cincinnati, this truly American city is poised to take full part in the next wave of economic growth through serious innovation.

We started the day in the old brewery district visiting Roadtrippers - one of a few great success stories here. Having grown from 20 people to 140, the company (founded by an Englishman on a green card!) now occupies an entire building. But right down the road, there are still boarded-up homes and old warehouses -- fertile ground for community art projects, but also room for improvement!

Next we moved on to the infamous Over-the-Rhine district to visit The Brandery -- a successful incubator focused on -- you guessed it -- building great brands! As the story goes, the first time the Brandery founders came to tour the space, they took a bullet in their window. Here in Cincinnati, like Pittsburgh, deprived and dangerous neighborhoods are being reclaimed for widespread benefit. Jobs are being created, community services and social areas are being built, and the area is becoming more populated.

People (like Roadtrippers founder) moved to Cincinnati specifically to join the Brandery. In fact, half of the room at the Brandery fireside was made up of Cincinnati transplants. In addition to new faces, more people are staying who might have left a few years ago, and more people are moving back to be a part of what’s going on. All of this is just another testament to the power of entrepreneurship to revitalize the landscapes of our cities and bring jobs back to the rest of the country.

Strength Begets Strength in Startup Pittsburgh

Much like Detroit, Pittsburgh is an historic industrial city. And like Detroit again, when American manufacturing went into decline, so did the steel city. But Pittsburgh also has a long history as a center of advanced learning; with over fifty major university research departments in the city, focusing on topics from Information Technology to Life Sciences, Robotics, and Physics, the steel city’s new economy is being powered by academic research, and advanced manufacturing.

Despite these assets that prepare this city to be a leader in the next wave of technological innovation, Pittsburgh’s humility makes its people charming but can be one of its economy’s worst enemies. The story of what’s happening here is just not getting out.

Luckily, some success speaks for itself. Carnegie Mellon University spins out the most businesses per research dollar spent than any other university in the country; thirty companies have been started by faculty and students this year alone. Alongside the University of Pittsburgh, and others, the wealth of knowledge here -- seasoned academics, professionals, and young graduates -- provides the expertise to support the youth startup revolution spreading across the country. Pittsburgh is wisely using what already makes it strong.

At the working spaces we visited, and the pitch competition hosted by AlphaLab, we saw well-developed companies, many of which were involved in making and manufacturing tangible things. Pittsburgh’s tech scene is not about software. Positioning itself apart from  Silicon Valley, and not as an imitator, has been Pittsburgh’s strength.

There’s also a human story here. In the midst of their rising success, community members are working hard to make sure that the city’s growth benefits everyone in Pittsburgh.

We met Urban Innovation21, an unparalleled public-private partnership that supports entrepreneurial growth, while also connecting that growth to underserved communities. It’s exciting and inspiring to see the innovation economy being used to revitalize deprived and underrepresented constituencies. 

We also visited StartUptown, an incubator space that is helping Uptown grow from an historically disadvantaged neighborhood to an area known for its community and entrepreneurial culture. By thinking about how growth affects the broader community, and actually using the new economy to make the city better, StartUptown is a crucial piece of Pittsburgh’s future.

If Pittsburgh can tell the story of what’s being built here, it can only help accelerate their growth. And if Pittsburgh can tell the story of how they are using their talents to make their city better for everyone, they might just be able to redefine people’s perceptions of what “tech” means, and what it’s capable of doing.

Senator Markey: FCC Already Has Power to Save the Internet

UPDATE 7/15/14: Sen. Markey has rallied fellow Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer, Al Franken, Ron Wyden, Richard Blumenthal, Jeff Merkley, Elizabeth Warren, Sheldon Whitehouse, Ben Cardin, Kristen Gillibrand, Cory Booker, and Barbara Boxer, as well as independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, to sign his letter telling the FCC they already have the power to save the Internet and reclassify under Title II. Here is a draft of the letter. Sen. Ron Wyden also backed the push for Title II "common carriage" regulation in a comment to the FCC. Wyden wrote that the FCC should call the Internet what it is: a "telecommunications service."

The last time Congress took up the issue of how to regulate telecommunications (telephones, broadcasting etc.), the Internet was but a dream, haltingly emerging into reality. It was 1996. At the time, then-Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts was the lead Democratic co-sponsor of the Telecommunications Act in the House of Representatives; he shepherded the bill through various committees and the floor of the House, ultimately becoming a leading champion for the Internet along the way before the bill was signed into law by President Clinton.

Fast forward to today, and the Internet as we know it, shaped in large part by the 1996 Act, is under direct assault. Now-Senator Markey is still an advocate for the power of the Internet and is working to protect the needs of consumers and businesses nationwide.

The Senator is asking his fellow Senators to sign a letter urging FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to make use of the power they believe is already afforded to him by the Telecommunications Act to reclassify the Internet as a utility under Title II. Only with reclassification under Title II can the FCC ban paid prioritization (fast-lanes) on the Internet.

As we’ve documented extensively, we agree with this sentiment and urge the Chairman to do exactly that. You too can help by urging your Senators to contact Senator Markey’s office and sign the letter. This battle must be fought on a number of fronts, and this is one where we have an opportunity to exert pressure.

Call your Senator today, and tell them to sign on with Ed!  Tell Chairman Wheeler to do what he has the power to do: reclassify the Internet under Title II.

It’s Morning in Detroit

This week we’re traveling with Steve Case on the Rise of the Rest road trip to celebrate entrepreneurship, in all its forms, across America. Every day we’ll post dispatches from the cities we’ve seen. Stay tuned for updates from Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Nashville.

Almost a century ago, Detroit was home to the transportation revolution and pioneering entrepreneurs like Henry Ford, but over time the city lost its way. Now this famous city is coming back with a new revolution focused on reimagining the city as the best version of itself: better infrastructure, stronger businesses and tighter communities. This story is one of regeneration, renewal, and rebirth.

We spent the morning touring spaces filled with great talent from Michigan’s universities (and across the country), and bursting with great passion for rebuilding this city. From the M@dison Building to Quicken Loans, DIME (Detroit Institute of Music Education), Detroit Labs and Bizdom, it’s clear how much energy Detroit has for its next incarnation. And then at Shinola -- a local company that produces watches, bicycles, leather goods, and journals -- we saw that the manufacturing heritage that once made Detroit is again making it a world leader.

As recently as 60 years ago, Detroit was one of the top high-growth cities in the nation. Now it has an incredible opportunity to take its heritage, to inspire and retain the skilled individuals that are coming out of Michigan’s universities (Michigan has more engineers per capita than any other state in the nation), and to play leapfrog.

Ironically, one of Detroit’s great strengths is that everyone had given up on it; the stories have been so bad that it’s galvanized America’s interest. The fact that it got so bad here has created a platform for an unusual level of excitement and a boundless sense of possibility.

Had the city not lost 60 percent of its population and gone bankrupt, if Detroit did not have the chance to start again from the beginning, and rebuild from the ground-up, we might have seen a very different city today. Cities like Austin have already been through this sort of rebirth; we know that this looks like.

Today Detroit looks like a very different place. We met with Gov. Dan Snyder, Mayor Mike Duggan, and civic leaders like Dan Gilbert. We toured co-working spaces and met investors and startups that are growing quickly – bringing jobs and excitement to Detroit. People are staying in the area, and moving back to Detroit from San Francisco and New York City to be a part of what’s happening here. The energy is palpable, and the dynamics of Detroit’s story are changing.

Detroit has a long history of innovation, and today we saw a vibrant community working hard to bring that tradition back to life. What remains is the task of bringing the automotive industry back into the fold. The industrial giants have the experience to help build a new Detroit, and this new Detroit has the power to breathe new life into these incumbent industries.

 The future is bright in Motor City. Good morning Detroit! 

President Obama and Rise of the Rest Both Highlight Pittsburgh

We were excited to learn that this week the President traveled to Pittsburgh to celebrate innovation with a visit to TechShop -- the firm that helps entrepreneurs and inventors build low-cost prototypes of their creations. Next week, we too will be in Pittsburgh and at TechShop as part of the Rise of the Rest road trip with Steve Case.

Signalling his support for more policies that encourage entrepreneurship, the President announced three executive actions designed to support advanced manufacturing and innovation:

• $5 billion worth of advanced equipment in federal R&D facilities will be made available to innovators and startups to develop new technologies and launch new inventions. For example, entrepreneurs may be able to access NASA’s National Center for Advanced Manufacturing to produce the high-strength, defect-free joints required for cutting-edge aeronautics, and DOE’s Manufacturing Demonstration Facility at Oak Ridge National Laboratory for collaborative projects in additive manufacturing, composites and carbon fiber, and other leading clean energy technologies.
• Five Federal agencies will invest more than $150 million in research to support the Materials Genome Initiative, increasing the Administration’s investment in the manufacturing of game-changing advanced materials. The aim of the The Materials Genome Initiative is to cut in half the time it takes to develop novel materials that can fuel advanced manufacturing and bolster the 21st century American economy.
• In response to the President’s call to action, more than 90 Mayors and local leaders have committed to the ‘Mayors Maker Challenge’. The promise is to expand access to physical locations and new manufacturing and prototyping equipment, support manufacturing entrepreneurship, and inspire young people to pursue careers in manufacturing and engineering.

Just as the President and leaders across the country are recognizing “makers”, and the importance of supporting entrepreneurship, we can’t wait to celebrate what’s being built right here in America. Check out our infographic here!

Watch Steve Case tell the story of what we’re doing and join us in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Nashville, June 24-27.

New Legislation Revives JOBS Act Intentions

When I sat in the Rose Garden in April 2012 watching President Obama sign the JOBS Act into law, I remarked to myself, and anyone who would listen, just how far “the Internet” had come in terms of polished political activism and policy coherence in such a short amount of time: The JOBS Act was passed in six weeks. As originally intended, JOBS Act would have opened up new avenues for investment in early-stage startups, providing new ways for entrepreneurs to secure the funding they need to turn their ideas into reality.

But, just two years later, there are many within this community who have been left disheartened by the haphazard implementation of such an important law, and have also become hamstrung by the limitations put on them by the Securities and Exchange Commission -- in stark contrast to the spirit of that legislation.

The crowdfunding for equity provisions have yet to become a reality. And, perhaps more importantly, provisions on general solicitation aimed at making it easier for startups to widen their investor base in a more rational way, as opposed to the previous, wink-and-nod style capital formation, have made the situation worse to the point of being untenable for many early-stage companies, especially those who grow through accelerator programs.

Luckily, news from Washington this morning signals the beginning of a solution we hope will make the JOBS Act work for startups, angel investors and all those who wish to join their ranks. Dubbed the Helping Angels Lead Our Startups, or HALOS, Act (clever, because they’re supporting angels!), this important legislation, offered in a bipartisan manner in both houses,but led by Illinois Democrat Rep. Brad Schneider and Ohio Republican Rep. Steve Chabot, would change the Regulation D rules governing General Solicitation to once allow “Demo Days” to continue once again.

Demoing early stage startups and their products has been a key way for companies to accelerate growth, but the unintended consequences of JOBS Act’s rulemaking at the SEC have complicated the process by which these startups can present their groundbreaking ideas. The current status quo stands in total contrast to the original intent of the legislation, and unfortunately we need a further fix.

Luckily, Reps. Schneider and Chabot have been joined by Sens. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Patrick Toomey (R-PA) and John Thune (R-SD) to provide that legislative fix in the form of the HALOS Act. You can read the (short) bill in its entirety here. We encourage you to reach out to the co-sponsors and thank them for their foresight here, as well as to your own representative and Senators urging them to pass this important legislation.

Supreme Court’s Latest Patent Decision Reins-in Federal Circuit, Again

Today, the Supreme Court issued its latest  9-0 opinion, once again reining in the Federal Circuit’s consistently overbroad interpretations of patent law. The ruling, in Alice v. CLS Bank, deals with the question of what can and cannot be patented. Put simply, the Court held that unpatentable “abstract ideas” do not miraculously become patentable when they are merely tied to general purpose computers or generic hardware. Our patent laws already do not allow the government to issue patents on laws of nature, natural phemonen, and these so-called abstract ideas because we do not want to grant monopolies on things that belong to everyone. This concept is incredibly important because it deals directly with whether or not software is an unpatentable “abstract idea”. Is software an abstract mathematical algorithm? Or is it more?

Traditionally, software was always unpatentable. But that changed in the mid-1990s when the Federal Circuit issued a string of rulings allowing for software patents. In this 20-year experiment, we’ve seen serious abuses of the patent system, starting with poor quality patents, leading directly to the patent troll problem. Armed with these low-quality software patents, trolls have been able to wage a war on small businesses and individuals, costing our economy billions of dollars a year.

Despite this, the Federal Circuit (the appellate court that has jurisdiction of all patent cases), has been unwilling and unable to fix the quality problem with software patents. Which brings us to today’s ruling. Alice v. CLS Bank involved patents covering a computer system that helps with closing financial transactions by avoiding settlement risk (the risk that comes with any financial transaction if one party cannot uphold its end of the bargain). During the case’s tortured history, the Federal Circuit upheld those patents, and then later invalidated them. The last Federal Circuit opinion was 135 pages long, and the judges could only agree on 55 words.

So the Supreme Court took the case (along with five other patent cases this term -- an unprecedented number), and today, all nine justices invalidated the patents. Invalidating them wasn’t a surprise -- these patents were of particularly poor quality -- but the Court did make some important statements about patents and abstract ideas that should reign in the worst software patents.

First, it unequivocally stated that if you have an idea so abstract that it cannot be patented, simply tying it to a “generic computer cannot transform a patent-ineligible abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention."

Second, it stated that tying an abstract idea to “purely functional and generic” hardware similarly will not make the idea patentable.

This legalese is important. Most of the worst software patents do exactly what the Court said they can’t: present a general idea (e.g., hedging risk, one-click shopping, etc.) and say, because this idea is done on a computer, or a generic piece of hardware, it is not just an idea anymore. As computers play an ever-growing part in our everyday lives, you can understand the flaws in this logic. Today, the Supreme Court stopped it in its tracks.

Now, it’s true that the Court didn’t comment directly on “software” patents. But it did say that if you’re going to patent a software invention, it must be tied to something more specific than a general purpose computer or a generic piece of hardware. You can’t just run a generic piece of software on a general purpose computer and then stop everyone else in the world from doing the same for 20 years. Because, as we said at the outset, these types of ideas belong to everyone. They are fundamental building blocks of today’s technology, and society benefits when everyone can use them.

So we applaud the Court’s decision today, along with five others this term, for reminding the Federal Circuit Court that owning a patent monopoly is not an inherent right. Instead, patent law must be a delicate balance between granting patent owners limited and worthy monopolies, while leaving the rest of us with a vibrant public domain of ideas and technology on which to build.

ECPA Reform Bill Attracts Majority Support in House

This morning, Congress has taken a significant step towards defining privacy for the digital age in a way that will benefit startup companies and their users. The Email Privacy Act -- a common-sense piece of legislation that would bring ECPA (the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) better in line with how the Internet actually works -- is supported by a majority of the House of Representatives. This kind of support, before a bill even comes to a vote, is an important sign that policymakers and their constituents understand that something must be done.

The Email Privacy Act gives online documents the same privacy protections granted to physical documents. Specifically, the bill would require government agencies to obtain warrants from a judge in order to force service providers to disclose private emails and documents they store online for their customers.

Since data play an increasingly important role for many startups, any uncertainty over compliance increases the burden of time and resources needed to handle the issue. The current status quo also disenfranchises businesses and consumers, and places an added strain on user trust. Under the current law, a complex legal request from law enforcement would force businesses to chose between facing fines and legal action while protecting their users, or complying with the government at the cost of alienating users.

The Email Privacy Act clarifies existing law, and provides a much-needed update to bring regulations in line with the digital age. We thank Reps. Yoder and Polis for their leadership on this important issue, and with majority support we look now to House leadership to move this bill, and we hope they act swiftly to pass this common sense reform.

New Bill To Ban Paid Internet Fast Lanes

This morning, Rep. Matsui and Sen. Leahy introduced a bill that would direct the FCC to ban paid prioritization deals on what’s known as “the last mile" - the final distance web content travels to reach a consumer. The draft “Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act” would ban preferential treatment on the Internet, upholding the principle of net neutrality.

Paid prioritization deals, as we have already argued, are inherently anti-competitive and violate the principles of a truly free Internet ecosystem. So this bill should be applauded for promoting the interests of startups, content creators, and Internet users; we support this effort and hope it sends the FCC a strong message that paid fast lanes should not become a new Internet standard. They should instead be banned.

"A free and open Internet is essential for consumers," said Matsui. "Our country cannot afford ‘pay-for-play’ schemes that divide our Internet into tiers based on who has the deepest pockets."

But, it's worth noting here that there is no way to achieve these aims without first reclassifying broadband Internet under Title II.

This year’s Verizon v FCC decision makes relying on section 706 legally impossible. In that case, the DC circuit court actually went so far as to say that under Section 706 the FCC would have to permit exclusive access arrangements, e.g., paid prioritization, among edge providers and ISPs, and that it could even charge similarly situated edge providers very different prices for the same level of access.

Only under Title II can the FCC can eliminate certain classes of fees and discrimination, including banning paid prioritization (or “fast lanes”) on the Internet altogether. We applaud Rep. Matsui’s and Sen. Leahy’s efforts to ensure an open Internet, and we hope the FCC follows suit.

There Are Lessons To Be Learned Outside Silicon Valley

Skip Newberry, President of the Technology Association of Oregon, co-authored this post.

When asked for a general perception of what the startup community looks like, all too often people will volunteer information about bespectacled youths wandering around Silicon Valley with bundles of money, wearing ironic t-shirts, sipping single-origin coffee, and creating apps for you to while away time on your commute. It is, in a sense, the same type of reaction to the Portlandia phenomenon. Neither of these characterizations is entirely false–to be fair there is a lot of bird-related art throughout the Rose City–but there is a truth behind both perceptions: a new birth of economic growth and prosperity that cuts across traditional socio-economic lines that can be an enormous force for good in our communities.

Earlier this year, Engine teamed up with the Technology Association of Oregon to tell the story of Portland’s startup community. It’s the first part of the Startup Cities series that will profile more underrepresented communities around the country where startups are taking root and presenting new avenues for cities to capitalize on the innovation of its citizens to benefit the community as a the whole.

Portland was chosen as the pilot first because the city’s long history of entrepreneurship has translated very quickly into a supportive, thriving and prosperous startup community. The technology industry in the Portland Metro Area was the fastest growing in the country during the past ten years. In this same time period, the Portland Metro Area climbed to 9th in the country for startup density, and is attracting increasing levels of talent from Seattle, San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, and Denver. Large companies such as ebay, Salesforce.com, Walmart Labs, SquareSpace, and Airbnb are also taking notice and expanding into the area.

And we know from Engine’s research that community benefits extend beyond the high wage tech jobs created. For every person a technology startup hires, 4.3 additional jobs are created in the local non-tradable sector. That’s everything from bakers to bankers, plumbers, and lawyers. Within Portland’s thriving startup community, these effects are visible and powerful.

But even more importantly, the community in Portland knows that to succeed everyone must work together. Serial entrepreneurs are becoming angel investors, helping entrepreneurs new to the scene jump in with both feet and grow products into businesses, and creating staying power that will help Portland succeed for years to come.

While no two entrepreneurial communities are alike, and replication of success stories can be a fool’s errand, the lessons of togetherness and support are ones on which Portland can lead, ones they can export, and in doing so become a leading community.

And Portland is just the first stop. It’s important that we start to look at the technology industry everywhere it exists to build a fuller picture of the community that is fast becoming the American electorate at large.

We Didn’t Fail on Patent Reform: An Open Letter to the Media, Congress and Tech

This post originally appeared in re/code

Last month, Sen. Patrick Leahy unceremoniously pulled patent reform off the Senate Judiciary calendar -- denying a good piece of compromise legislation a vote -- reportedly under pressure from Sen. Harry Reid, who was reportedly under pressure from the trial lawyers’ lobbying arm. This took many of us who have been working hard to fix a dangerous patent troll problem by surprise. And not a pleasant one.

I’ve taken some time to reflect in the aftermath of this failed bill. I’ve looked for a lesson, a single take-away. None exists. But some points must be made, to the media, who I think have largely missed the point; to D.C. insiders, whose failure to make patent reform happen will have real consequences; and to the tech community, whose hard work has paid off but who still faces an uphill battle in navigating policy and politics.

First, to the media who report that tech is “D.C.’s biggest loser” and highlight “Silicon Valley's lost year in Washington”: you’ve got your story wrong. For starters, if you’re living in the same political universe that I am, it should be clear that this Congress is notorious for getting nothing done. It should come as no surprise that tech’s causes are not miraculously turning into legislation. No one’s are.

Still, so-called tech issues are driving political debates at all levels of government. The movement for patent reform has already had a serious chilling effect on patent trolls, and it’s far from over, as courts and states keep chipping away at the troll “business model”. And other issues that tech traditionally cares about -- immigration, privacy reform like an update to ECPA, government surveillance, and net neutrality -- dominate headlines. Many have turned into social movements that are not at all limited to the “tech community,” and each will continue to shape policy in this do-nothing Congress, and hopefully in the more productive ones that come next.

Second, to D.C. policymakers: when you failed to even put patent reform to a vote in the Senate you taught many proponents of reform what all too many knew already, that politics is “pay-to-play” and that deep, entrenched interests make it nearly impossible to get anything meaningful done in D.C. What many of you failed to recognize, however, is that the so-called “tech community” is actually becoming the American electorate at large. Soon, there will be no distinction between the “tech community” and the rest of the country. As today’s digital natives turn 18, they all become tech voters. The politicians who understand that, and work to legislate policies that help technologies and the startups who create them thrive, will be the future of this country.

Finally, to tech. Two messages: the work you did and the community you built to support patent reform did help. But we need to do more.

The Difference A Year Can Make: A Court Grants FindTheBest Attorneys’ Fees

For those of you who thought patent reform is dead: it’s not.

Sure, the comprehensive piece of legislation we need to put an end to a dangerous patent troll trend has stalled, but the fight against those trolls continues.

Remember when startup FindTheBest found itself facing a patent troll threat a year ago? A “company” called Lumen View Technology claimed that its patent covered a “computer implemented method to match the preference data inputted by at least two parties who input preference data into the website.” Lumen went on to sue FindTheBest, along with about 20 other companies, claiming that they all infringed that patent. There are a couple of big problems here. First, FindTheBest’s website undisputedly does not use match preference data. Second, it turns out the patent itself was invalid.

Late on Friday, a federal judge in New York ruled that Lumen will be on the hook to pay FindTheBest’s legal fees and costs, calling this case a “prototypical” one for making the loser pay. What’s interesting is that it’s also a prototypical patent troll case. For instance:

• Lumen continually threatened FindTheBest with expensive litigation if it did not agree to pay Lumen a licensing fee.
• Lumen threatened to raise the cost of settlement the longer FindTheBest continued to defend itself.
• Lumen did not conduct even a basic pre-suit investigation before it sued FindTheBest.
• As the Court found, “Lumen’s motivation in this litigation was to extract a nuisance settlement from [FindTheBest] on the theory that [FindTheBest] would rather pay an unjustified fee than bear the costs of the threatened expensive litigation.”
• The Court also found that Lumen’s tactics were “part of a predatory strategy aimed at reaping financial advantage from the inability or unwillingness of defendants to engage in litigation against even frivolous patent lawsuits.”

And this all brings us back to patent reform. Even as recently as a few months ago, courts very rarely granted attorneys’ fees in patent cases -- in fact, it happened so infrequently that it really wasn’t even considered a possibility. But the Supreme Court recently changed that in a case called Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness. There, the Court held that a losing party in a patent case might be forced to pay the other sides fees and costs (which can easily stretch into the millions of dollars range) in certain cases where a party either brings a particularly bad case, or acts unreasonably when litigating it.

Last week’s ruling was one of the first tests of the Supreme Court’s Octane ruling. And it showed that typical troll behavior -- like Lumen’s -- is enough to trigger fee-shifting. So, finally, the trolls can be held responsible for their actions.

This outcome was a direct result of all the hard work our community did on patent reform. We raised awareness of a dangerous problem that led the Supreme Court take an unprecedented five patent cases this term, and undoubtedly to this ruling.

This country still needs comprehensive patent reform legislation, and we’re going to keep fighting for it. And that legislation will still need a stronger fee-shifting provision than currently exists to make sure that it’s applied evenly across the country. But, in the meantime, parties facing patent trolls have a powerful new tool to fight back.