Posted by Susan Molinari, VP of Americas Public Policy and Government Affairs
Today, there are more artists, publishers, and authors creating more works for global audiences, on a growing number of platforms -- on YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter, Dailymotion, Tumblr, Medium, SoundCloud, Etsy, Vine, Pinterest and more.
These digital exchanges have become an increasingly important driver of the global economy. As a result, more open trade has the potential to give creators, online platforms and other businesses access to more consumers around the world. And Trade Promotion Authority -- which empowers U.S. officials to negotiate trade agreements subject to up or down votes in Congress -- presents an opportunity to modernize our trade strategy for the Internet era.
While U.S. trade agreements have historically included copyright provisions to protect right holders, the Internet’s success
depends on both copyright protection and pro-innovation limitations and exceptions, such as fair use and safe harbors for online platforms. Without both, Internet platforms -- and the explosion of creativity and new distribution channels they have enabled -- would not be possible.
We tend to take this balanced approach for granted in the U.S. But without trade agreements reflecting that balance, there is a very real risk that the Internet’s most popular platforms -- like search engines, video sharing sites, and social networks -- could be hindered or even blocked in foreign markets on the basis of one-sided copyright principles. And that could hurt the overall U.S. economy;
one study found that 1 in 8 U.S. jobs are tied to industries that rely on copyright limitations and exceptions.
We were glad that U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman last year
committed to “asking our trading partners to secure robust balance in their copyright systems -- an unprecedented move that draws directly on U.S. copyright exceptions and limitations, including fair use.” That was a big step.
And while it’s unfortunate that the Trade Promotion Authority legislation now being debated by Congress does not on its face fully reflect Ambassador Froman’s commitment, we’re happy that the bill’s authors made clear for the first time ever (in their accompanying report on the bill) that trade agreements should foster an appropriate balance, including copyright limitations and exceptions. It’s progress. We’re also glad to see other provisions to promote pro-innovation policies globally.
We hope Congress will approve Trade Promotion Authority, and urge trade officials to increasingly promote the balanced copyright policies abroad that have enabled great content and Internet platforms to thrive.
I am genuinely confused. First you say "it’s unfortunate that the Trade Promotion Authority legislation now being debated by Congress does not on its face fully reflect Ambassador Froman’s commitment." Then you say "We hope Congress will approve Trade Promotion Authority." It would appear that you trust the USTR to make good on Froman's commitment. What have they done to merit this trust?
ReplyDeleteThere are many in the USTR who do not share Google's appreciation of the need for a balanced copyright policy, as discussed in this Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/26/heres-why-obama-trade-negotiators-push-the-interests-of-hollywood-and-drug-companies/. If congress were to grant Trade Promotion Authority, and the USTR were to renege on Froman's commitment to a treaty that mandates a balanced copyright policy, there is little that anyone could do. We would be stuck with a treaty that harms the Internet for the foreseeable future. So why does Google favor TPA in its present form?