Amazon’s Change of Course On Bill Brightens Prospects of Enactment
EC floats reform of laws to prevent electoral tampering; USDA accepting applications for $1.15 billion in broadband funds; FCC issues order to bridge online pandemic assistance funds
First, a bit of news. The Wavelength will transition to a paid product, but there will still be a free version available. The scope and shape of this change is still in the making but should be realized by January 2022.
Second, some scheduling matters. The last issue of The Wavelength of 2021 should be probably be on or about 20 December events permitting, of course. Then we would resume in early 2022.
Photo by Wynand van Poortvliet on Unsplash
After months of opposing a bill aiming at the problem of counterfeit and unsafe goods sold online, Amazon has thrown in its lot with one of the primary bills pending before the United States (U.S.) Congress that would change how it oversees large online sellers on its platform. The bill Amazon is backing is almost the same as the newer bill, which is a bit looser in the new regulatory scheme it would impose on the company and similar competitors.
In a posting on its website late last month, Amazon stated that it favors the version of the “INFORM Act” (H.R.5502) introduced by the chair and ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s subcommittee who listened to the company’s concerns. Incidentally, this bill was marked up and reported out of committee in mid-November, and it could come soon to the House floor. In any event, Amazon lauded the following:
In late April, however, Amazon had quite a different view on the “INFORM Act:”
As is de rigueur in Washington, the company makes the case this legislation will hurt “small businesses,” presumably those selling their products on Amazon. And yet, there is no mention of how this would hurt Amazon’s bottom line through increased compliance costs, which I suspect is the company’s paramount interest. The company also engages in another time-honored strategy of shifting the focus by arguing that stronger fraud laws and greater penalties against online criminals are needed, and not the “INFORM Act.”
In both posts, Amazon also takes aim at the proponents of the bill, taking the less frequently seen step of identifying them by name, and argued that these companies are trying to harm online retailers and “small businesses” through legislation that would preference brick and mortar stores. Of course, that may be true that these other companies are trying to drive up Amazon’s costs (or, in their view, evening the playing field and saving shopping diversity for consumers), and their concerns about counterfeit and unsafe products is secondary. Retailers have some disclosure and reporting responsibilities as established in the “Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) of 2008” (P.L.110-314) and implemented by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), but it appears Amazon qualifies as a retailer under the CPSC’s enabling statute, meaning the online giant needs to comply with this regime, too.
However, counterfeit, illegal, and unsafe goods have long been present in online commerce, and the U.S. government struggled to find and intercept these goods before the COVID-19 pandemic (see here and here.) In a report mandated by Congress, the CPSC acknowledged a dramatic reduction in port inspections of consumer goods entering the U.S. because of the pandemic.
It also bears some emphasis that Amazon has already run afoul of the CPSC and the laws it enforces. Over the summer, the CPSC filed an administrative complaint against Amazon in order “to force Amazon to accept responsibility for recalling potentially hazardous products sold on Amazon.com.” The CPSC is bringing this action because Amazon is selling through its Fullfilled by Amazon program children’s sleepwear that fails to meet federal flammability standards, carbon monoxide detectors that do not detect carbon monoxide, and hair dryers that fail to meet industry standards.
The first of the two bills was introduced in late March. The “Integrity, Notification, and Fairness in Online Retail Marketplaces for Consumers Act” (INFORM Consumers Act) (S.936) was drafted by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair and Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), and Thom Tillis (R-NC).
At its core, the INFORM Consumers Act would require Amazon and like companies to collect contact information from larger third-party sellers and make it available to consumers. Amazon and its ilk would have to suspend those sellers that do not comply, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) could hold them accountable if they fail to do so.
While the bill would regulate “high-volume third-party sellers,” the definition of who qualifies as one does not sound like very high volume. To wit, the term is defined thusly:
To reiterate, if an entity sells 200 or more items and earns $5000 or more, then he, she, or they are considered a high-volume seller. This seems like a low bar to clear and would seem to encompass many of the significant entities doing business on Amazon. However, it applies only to “new or unused consumer products,” placing entities selling used items such as books outside the new regime.
These sellers have two days to submit to any online marketplace once it exceeds the above sales criteria its bank account information, contact information, tax identification, and working phone numbers and email addresses. If any of that information changes, a high volume third-party seller must promptly inform the online marketplace. The online marketplace must annual reach out to every such seller and require them to certify within three business days the information on file or that such information has been changed. Failure to certify within the three day window requires the online marketplace to suspend the seller until such a certification is submitted. The online marketplace must do so or risk an FTC enforcement action if the agency catches wind of this. Moreover, the online marketplace has three business days after submission of a certification to verify the information.
These high volume third-party sellers must also disclose to the public its full name, physical address, whether it engages in manufacturing, importing, or reselling of consumer products, and contact information. But, what’s more, the high volume third-party seller must identify “any seller that supplies the consumer product to the consumer upon purchase, if such seller is different than the high-volume third party seller listed on the product listing prior to purchase.” This sounds very much like high volume third-party seller X must tell me if another seller is actually fulfilling the sale.
There is an exception to the high volume third-party seller’s public disclosure requirements if he or she does not have a business address or a busines phone. In this case, the seller needs to provide alternative methods of being contacting such as email. This seems designed to accommodate people selling items out of their homes who understandably do not want their personal information splashed across the internet. But, if such sellers make false representations about a lack of business address or phones, the online marketplace must immediately suspend them from selling until they provide the proper contact information.
Online marketplaces must provide an online method with every product listed for high volume third-party sellers for consumers to report suspicious activity. There does not appear to be any requirement that the online marketplace follow up and investigate any such reports, however.
Under the “INFORM Consumers Act,” the FTC could punish violations with civil fines of more than $43,000 per violation because they would be deemed to be violations of regulations banning unfair and deceptive practices. The agency would also receive authority to promulgate regulations under the notice and comment process (aka the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) method) rather the much more onerous Magnuson-Moss rulemaking procedures.
The House’s bill, H.R.5502, is almost identical save for some significant differences. First, high volume third-party sellers would have ten days to submit the required information to online marketplaces such as bank, contact, and tax information. Second, these sellers would have ten days to respond the online marketplace’s annual certification request, and should it fail to do so, the online marketplace must give the seller ten more days to comply before it must suspend them. Third, the online marketplace has ten days to verify the annual certification. Fourth, this bill imposes a data use limitation for the information this class of sellers submits unless another federal statute requires disclosure or use. Fifth, the disclosure to the public of contact information is limited to those high volume third-party sellers that has an aggregate of $20,000 or more in annual sales. Sixth, in the event the high volume third-party seller is not fulfilling an order, it must furnish contact information for the actual seller of item upon request after a person has bought the item. Seventh, the disclosure requirement for those sellers without business addresses or phones provide more information, for the seller must disclose his or her country, and state if in the U.S. Eighth, state attorneys general may enforce the new regime subject to limitations should the FTC also bring an action on the same grounds against the same party.
It bears mention that both the House and Senate bills are bipartisan, suggesting support in both parties. The ideological range of sponsors of the Senate bill suggest good chances of passage if sponsorship is not intended to be the legislative form of virtual signaling.
Other Developments
Photo by Christian Lue on Unsplash
§ The European Commission (EC) “presented a proposal on transparency and targeting of political advertising, as part of measures aimed at protecting election integrity and open democratic debate” according to its press release. The EC stated that “the aim is for the new rules to enter into force and be fully implemented by Member States by spring 2023, i.e. one year before the elections.” The EC summarized the proposed law:
o With the digital transition under way, people must be able to easily distinguish whether they are looking at paid political content – offline and online, and be able to participate in open debates, free from disinformation, interference and manipulation. People should be able to clearly see who sponsored a political advert and why. The main measures set out in the proposed Regulation on transparency and targeting of political adverts include:
§ Scope: Political ads will cover ads by, for or on behalf of a political actor as well as so called issue-based ads which are liable to influence the outcome of an election or referendum, a legislative or regulatory process or voting behaviour.
§ Transparency labels: Paid political advertising must be clearly labelled and provide a set of key information. This includes the name of the sponsor prominently displayed and an easily retrievable transparency notice with (1) the amount spent on the political advertisement, (2) the sources of the funds used and (3) a link between the advertisement and the relevant elections or referenda.
§ Strict conditions for targeting and amplification: Political targeting and amplification techniques, which use or infer sensitive personal data, such as ethnic origin, religious beliefs or sexual orientation, will be banned. Such techniques will be allowed only after an explicit consent from a person concerned. Targeting could also be allowed in the context of legitimate activities of foundations, associations or not-for-profit bodies with a political, philosophical, religious or trade union aim, when it targets their own members. For the first time it will be mandatory to include into the ads' clear information on what basis the person is targeted and to publish which groups of individuals were targeted, on the basis of which criteria and with what amplification tools or methods, among others. Organisations making use of political targeting and amplification will need to adopt, apply and make public an internal policy on the use of such techniques. If all transparency requirements cannot be met, a political add cannot be published.
§ Fines for breaches: Member States will be required to introduce effective, proportionate and dissuasive fines when the rules on transparency of political advertising are breached. Under the proposed Regulation, National Data Protection Authorities will monitor specifically the use of personal data in political targeting and have the power to impose fines in line with EU data protection rules.
§ A United States (U.S.) federal court rejected former President Donald Trump’s attempt to stop Twitter from moving his lawsuit from south Florida to northern California per the platform’s user agreement. Trump filed suit in July for alleged censorship related to his permanent ban from Twitter.
§ The United Kingdom’s (UK) Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport and Home Office announced the awarding of funds for five entities with “[n]ew innovative technology to help stop the spread of child sexual abuse material on end-to-end encrypted social media and online messaging platforms.” The agencies asserted:
o The five projects - including tech companies in Edinburgh, Poole, St Albans and London - are the winners of the Safety Tech Challenge Fund, which aims to encourage the tech industry to find practical solutions to combat child sexual exploitation and abuse online, without impacting people’s rights to privacy and data protection in their communications.
o The winners will each receive an initial £85,000 from the Fund, which is administered by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) and the Home Office, to help them bring their technical proposals for new digital tools and applications to combat online child abuse to the market.
o Projects include new AI plug-ins that can be run in the background of existing encrypted messaging services to identify images of child abuse and flag them to moderators. Others will use age estimation and facial recognition technology to scan for and detect child abuse images before they are uploaded. Another project will look specifically at how to prevent livestreaming of violence and child sexual abuse material.
§ The United States (U.S.) Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced it “has begun accepting applications for up to $1.15 billion in loans and grants to help people in rural areas get access to high-speed internet.” The USDA added:
o USDA is making $1.15 billion in funding available through the ReConnect Program starting today. Eligible applicants are state, local or territory governments; corporations; Native American Tribes; limited liability companies and cooperative organizations.
o This funding, which does not include the nearly $2 billion from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, is available for projects that serve rural areas where at least 90 percent of the households lack broadband service at speeds of 100 megabits per second (Mbps) (download) and 20 Mbps (upload). USDA will give funding priority to projects that will serve people in low-density rural areas and areas lacking internet access services at speeds of at least 25 Mbps (download) and 3 Mbps (upload).
o Applicants must commit to building facilities capable of providing broadband service at speeds of 100 Mbps (download and upload) to every location in a proposed service area at the same time. In making funding decisions, USDA will also consider the economic needs of the community to be served; the extent to which a provider will offer affordable service options; a project’s commitment to strong labor standards; and whether a project is serving Tribal lands or is submitted by a local government, Tribal government, non-profit or cooperative.
o Applications for funding must be submitted through USDA Rural Development’s online application system on the ReConnect webpage. For additional information, see the Oct. 25, 2021, Federal Register.
§ United States (U.S.) Representatives Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) “reintroduced the “Online Privacy Act” (H.R.6027), legislation that creates user data rights, places limitations and obligations on companies collecting and using user data, and establishes the Digital Privacy Agency (DPA) to enforce privacy laws.” Eshoo and Lofgren stated that “[t]he updated legislation includes several improved provisions and additional privacy protections, including adding an Office of Civil Rights in the DPA and authorizing state privacy regulators (e.g., California Privacy Protection Agency) to enforce the legislation alongside state attorneys general.” They further stated:
o The Online Privacy Act protects individuals, encourages innovation, and restores trust in technology companies by:
§ Creating User Rights – The bill grants every American the right to access, correct, or delete their data. It also creates new rights, like the right to impermanence, which lets users decide how long companies can keep their data.
§ Placing Clear Limits and Obligations on Companies – The bill minimizes the amount of data companies collect, process, disclose, and maintain, and bars companies from using data in discriminatory ways. Additionally, companies must receive consent from users in plain, simple language.
§ Establishing a Digital Privacy Agency (DPA) – The bill establishes an independent agency led by a Director that’s appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for a six-year term. The DPA will enforce privacy protections and investigate abuses.
§ Strengthening Enforcement – The bill empowers state attorneys general to enforce violations of the bill and allows individuals to appoint nonprofits to represent them in private class action lawsuits.
§ The United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) touted a technology it helped fund and develop, “iVerify is a fact-checking initiative which combats the spread of false narratives during election periods by combining new technology like AI and machine learning with tried-and-true in-person fact-checking.” The UNDP stated:
o Here is how it works. iVerify processes articles and outputs reports with a determination of their veracity. The inputs are either manual, by members of the public or the iVerify team, or automated. People can submit articles for review via text (WhatsApp, SMS, and more) or directly through the iVerify platform. Leveraging CrowdTangle, which allows iVerify to track public content across social media, iVerify also automatically reviews articles in Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit daily, running them through Detoxify, an open-source algorithm which uses machine learning to detect hate speech.
o These reports are then sent to the team of in-person fact-checkers, composed of individuals linked to one or several national counterparts that have been capacitated and equipped through the iVerify’s initiative. As part of their fact-checking assignment, the team follows up with the people or institutions mentioned in a story to determine the veracity of the claims made. If those in-person verifiers find hate speech, disinformation, or misinformation, they flag it and publish an article on the iVerify website to let the world know. iVerify leverages another open source technology, Check, to help. It uses human-in-the-loop machine learning to match content so that anything already labeled false doesn't have to be reviewed again, improving efficiency. All of these tools and approaches are open and available to anyone to use.
o The tool was piloted in Zambia, ahead of the historic August 2021 general elections in which opposition leader Hakainde Hichilema took power from Edgar Lungu, who had led the country since 2015.
§ The United States (U.S.) Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an order to smooth the transition for those receiving broadband and other assistance under a program funded through the “Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021” (P.L. 116-260) that is set to end with 2021 per the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” (P.L. 117-58). The FCC explained:
o In this Order, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) sua sponte waives sections 54.1610(b), (c) and (d) of the Commission’s rules governing the enrollment freeze and notice requirements for the end of the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program (EBB Program), which will cease no later than December 31, 2021 as a result of the text in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Infrastructure Act). At that time, households enrolled in the EBB Program will have an automatic 60-day transition period during which time they will continue to receive their current EBB-benefit amount. In addition to waiving the enrollment freeze and consumer notice rules for the EBB Program, we also provide preliminary guidance to help consumers, service providers, outreach partners and other stakeholders prepare for the transition from the EBB Program to the Affordable Connectivity Program.
o On December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (Consolidated Appropriations Act) became law and established an Emergency Broadband Connectivity Fund of $3.2 billion in the United States Treasury to help Americans afford internet service during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Act directed the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) to use that fund to establish the EBB Program, under which eligible households may receive a discount off the cost of broadband service and certain connected devices during an emergency period relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, and participating providers can receive a reimbursement for providing such discounts. The EBB Program was designed to be a temporary, emergency program that would conclude when the fund is expended or six months after the end of the public health emergency.
o On February 25, 2021, the Commission adopted rules and policies creating and governing the EBB Program pursuant to the Consolidated Appropriations Act. In light of the emergency, temporary nature of the EBB Program, the Commission adopted rules to help manage the end of the EBB Program, including an enrollment freeze and a requirement that providers send notices to consumers concerning the end of the EBB Program. Under these rules, the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) is required to provide participating service providers 60-days’ notice of the end of the EBB Program, and enrollments in the EBB Program would freeze concurrent with that notice. In addition, participating service providers are required to issue notices to their EBB Program households no later than 15 days after the announcement of the end of the EBB Program, and issue a customer notice at least 30 days before the end of the EBB Program. These requirements were intended to limit volatility in EBB Program reimbursement claims after the announcement of the end date of the EBB Program, and to ensure that consumers are appropriately informed about the end of the EBB Program and any resulting changes to their broadband service rate.
o On November 15, 2021, the Infrastructure Act was enacted, providing $14.2 billion for the longer-term Affordable Connectivity Program. The Affordable Connectivity Program will extend and supplant the EBB Program, and will continue to provide eligible households with a discount on broadband service and connected devices. On November 18, 2021, the Bureau issued a Public Notice seeking comment on the rules and administration of the Affordable Connectivity Program, and providing 20 days for initial comments, and 20 days for reply comments. The Infrastructure Act makes several changes to the eligibility criteria for the new program, and reduces the monthly benefit amount from up to $50 to up to $30 (with the exception of eligible households residing on qualifying Tribal lands or high-cost areas, which will receive up to $75 monthly). The Infrastructure Act also directs the Commission to effectuate for the Affordable Connectivity Program specified changes, such as to EBB Program eligibility and the program benefit amount, by the effective date, which the statute defines as the date the Commission notifies Congress that all EBB Program funds have been fully expended or December 31, 2021, whichever is earlier. As explained in the Affordable Connectivity Program Public Notice, based on current projections, EBB Program funds will not be fully expended on December 31, 2021, and we therefore consider December 31, 2021 to be the effective start date of the Affordable Connectivity Program.
§ President Joe Biden announced two nominees for the United States (U.S.) Privacy and Civil Liberties Board (PCLOB). The Board currently has two Senate confirmed members, but its last Chair Adam Klein stepped down in June 2021. If confirmed by the Senate, Biden’s nominees would still leave an open seat on the U.S. government’s privacy watchdog. The White House identified and provided biographies of the nominees:
o Sharon Bradford Franklin, Nominee for Member and Chair of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
o Sharon Bradford Franklin is an attorney with deep experience in legal and policy issues involving civil liberties, civil rights, and national security. She currently serves as Co-Director of the Security and Surveillance Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), and leads advocacy on a broad range of issues involving surveillance, cybersecurity, encryption, civil liberties, and civil rights. Before joining CDT, Franklin was the Policy Director for New America’s Open Technology Institute (OTI), directing OTI’s policy work on issues including cybersecurity, encryption, freedom of expression online, government surveillance, privacy, and platform accountability.
o From 2013 through 2017, Franklin served as Executive Director of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, where her work included reviewing federal counterterrorism activities in support of the Board’s mission to ensure that such programs include appropriate safeguards for privacy and civil liberties. Previously, she served as Senior Counsel at the Constitution Project, a nonprofit legal watchdog group, where her work included participating as a member of the Cybersecurity Subcommittee for the Department of Homeland Security’s Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee. Franklin has also served as a Trial Attorney in the Housing & Civil Enforcement Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, worked on civil rights policy matters as Special Counsel in the Office of General Counsel at the Federal Communications Commission, and served as Executive Director of the Washington Council of Lawyers. She began her legal career as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Jane R. Roth. Franklin graduated from Harvard College and Yale Law School.
o Beth Williams, Nominee for Member of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
o Beth A. Williams served as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy at the United States Department of Justice from August 2017 to December 2020, after unanimous confirmation by the United States Senate. In that role, she advised on policies including national security. Prior to becoming Assistant Attorney General, Ms. Williams was a litigation and appellate partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, where her practice focused on complex commercial, securities, and First Amendment litigation. From 2005 to 2006, Ms. Williams served as Special Counsel to the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Ms. Williams graduated from Harvard College magna cum laude, with a degree in History and Literature, and she earned her law degree from Harvard Law School, where she served as Executive Editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.
§ Europol, Eurojust and the European Judicial Network published the third annual edition of the SIRIUS European Union Digital Evidence Situation Report, “a central reference point in the EU for knowledge sharing on cross-border access to electronic evidence.” The agencies asserted:
o It offers a variety of services, such as guidelines, trainings and tools, to help with accessing data held by online service providers. These services are available to law enforcement and judicial authorities via a platform and an application. To this day, SIRIUS serves a community of competent authorities from 44 countries, representing all EU Member States and a growing number of third countries.
§ The United States (U.S.) Department of State “is offering a reward of up to $10,000,000 for information leading to the identification or location of any individual holding a key leadership position in the Sodinokibi ransomware variant transnational organized crime group.” The agency is also “offering a reward offer of up to $5,000,000 for information leading to the arrest and/or conviction in any country of any individual conspiring to participate in or attempting to participate in a Sodinokibi variant ransomware incident.”
§ The United States (U.S.) Department of Justice (DOJ) unsealed an indictment charging “Yaroslav Vasinskyi, 22, a Ukrainian national, with conducting ransomware attacks against multiple victims, including the July 2021 attack against Kaseya, a multi-national information technology software company.” The DOJ “also announced today the seizure of $6.1 million in funds traceable to alleged ransom payments received by Yevgeniy Polyanin, 28, a Russian national, who is also charged with conducting Sodinokibi/REvil ransomware attacks against multiple victims, including businesses and government entities in Texas on or about Aug. 16, 2019.”
§ The United States (U.S.) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) “is seeking information about the public and private sector marketplace trends, supply chain risks, legislative, policy, and the future investment needs of eight emerging technology areas, including: Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things in Manufacturing, Quantum Computing, Blockchain Technology, New and Advanced Materials, Unmanned Delivery Services, Internet of Things, and Three-dimensional Printing.” The agency explained “[t]his Request for Information (RFI) is seeking comments to help identify, understand, refine, and guide the development of the current and future state of technology in the eight emerging technology areas named above…[and] [t]he information will inform a final report that will be submitted to Congress.”
§ The United States’ (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking “public comment on the Cybersecurity Capability Maturity Model (C2M2) to inform the C2M2 Working Group as it develops future model updates.” The DOE explained:
o The C2M2 helps organizations evaluate and improve their cybersecurity capabilities, considering their specific risk environment. The model is a voluntary tool, tailored specifically for the energy industry, that enables companies to set targets, evaluate and benchmark their cybersecurity capabilities, and use the results to prioritize actions and investments. It is scalable for a company of any size, and is designed to evaluate practice in both the information technology (IT) and operational technology (OT) environments.
o DOE originally developed the C2M2 with input from energy industry partners in 2012, and released an updated Version 1.1 in 2014, with separate versions targeted for the electricity and oil and natural gas subsectors. Version 2.0, released July 2021, is designed for use across the energy sector, and can be used by other critical infrastructure sectors as well.
o The Version 2.0 update was guided by input from the Energy Sector C2M2 Working Group, which DOE formed with the Electricity and Oil & National Gas Subsector Coordinating Councils. The update better addresses new technologies like cloud, mobile, and artificial intelligence, and evolving threats such as ransomware and supply chain risks.
§ The United States (U.S.) President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) issued a report titled “Software Assurance in the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.” NSTAC called on President Joe Biden to establish a new public-private working group to tackle the issue of software security and argued:
§ The United States and Australia signed a “statement of intent to cooperate and share in the enormous opportunities and benefits that world-leading quantum science and technology advancements present” per a White House release that “creates more opportunities to promote research and development, and encourages greater market access for quantum businesses in both nations.”
§ Twitter issued a research paper titled “Algorithmic Amplification of Politics on Twitter” that presented these findings:
o First, we studied Tweets by elected legislators from major political parties in 7 countries. Our results reveal a remarkably consistent trend: In 6 out of 7 countries studied, the mainstream political right enjoys higher algorithmic amplification than the mainstream political left. Consistent with this overall trend, our second set of findings studying the U.S. media landscape revealed that algorithmic amplification favours right-leaning news sources. We further looked at whether algorithms amplify far-left and far-right political groups more than moderate ones: contrary to prevailing public belief, we did not find evidence to support this hypothesis.
Further Reading
Photo by Mikel Parera on Unsplash
§ “Report: Government Inaction on 6G Risks Ceding More Tech Ground to China” By Alexandra Kelley — Nextgov. As the Biden administration looks to improve the nation’s telecommunications networks and expand access to internet services to reduce the digital divide in the U.S., industry analysts are recommending a slew of federal investments, including a nationwide 6G strategy and supporting infrastructure. A report published by researchers at the Center for a New American Security, framed within the rivalry between the U.S. and China over technological innovation and deployment, offered solutions to expedite and streamline the U.S. rollout of advanced 6G connectivity.
§ “House Science Committee Ponders Ways to Strengthen U.S. Semiconductor Industry” By Patience Wait — Nextgov. The same day that the Federal Trade Commission sued to block a $40 billion merger between two American semiconductor companies, the House Science Committee held a hearing on the topic of reinvigorating the U.S. semiconductor industry. The supply chain woes of the industry have been on full display during the pandemic. From automobiles to cellphones, smart household appliances to electronic toys and games, consumers have discovered things that they want to purchase are simply unavailable, whether because of shipping bottlenecks, semiconductor plants closed by climate events or workers sheltering at home, among other factors.
§ “NSO was about to sell hacking tools to France. Now it’s in crisis.” By Patrick Howell O'Neill — MIT Technology Review. In July, accusations emerged that spyware from NSO Group had targeted French president Emmanuel Macron, causing a major controversy. The company denied the claims—part of a string of allegations about use of the Israeli hacking group’s Pegasus software. Israel’s military officials, meanwhile, rushed to end a diplomatic crisis by meeting with their French counterparts and promising to investigate the charges.
§ “Who Is Parag Agrawal, Twitter’s New C.E.O.?” By Mike Isaac, Kate Conger and Cade Metz — The New York Times. When Jack Dorsey, then Twitter’s executive chairman, pushed the company to build out its machine learning and artificial intelligence capabilities in 2014, he turned to an engineer, Parag Agrawal. When Mr. Dorsey later became Twitter’s chief executive and needed help overhauling the company’s infrastructure, he also tapped Mr. Agrawal. And when Mr. Dorsey envisioned a future for Twitter in 2019 that would be based on the concept of decentralization and technologies such as the blockchain, he again pulled in Mr. Agrawal to help.
§ “New Twitter CEO’s Tenure Begins With People Dragging Old Tweet in Bad Faith” By Jordan Pearson — Vice. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey stepped down on Monday, and announced that CTO Parag Agrawal will be taking over. Agwaral's tenure at Twitter then immediately started in the most painfully Twitter way: a pile-on based on a tweet he made a decade ago. The tweet in question was made on October 26, 2010, at 5:29 AM EST. The tweet quotes an episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, and says: "If they are not gonna make a distinction between muslims and extremists, then why should I distinguish between white people and racists."
§ “Social media companies could be forced to give out names and contact details, under new anti-troll laws” By Tom Lowrey — ABC News. Social media companies could be forced to reveal the identities of anonymous users in an effort to crack down on online trolling, under new laws being drafted by the federal government. The laws would require social media companies to collect the details of all users, and allow courts to force companies to hand over the identities of users to aid defamation cases.
§ “Union Vote at Amazon Warehouse in Alabama Is Overturned by Regional Labor Office” By Noam Scheiber — The New York Times. A regional office of the National Labor Relations Board on Monday ordered a new union election at an Amazon warehouse in Alabama, upholding a union challenge to a vote that the company won decisively. The decision was widely expected after a hearing officer recommended in August that the results be thrown out and that a new election take place. The company declared after the August decision that it intended to appeal to the labor board in Washington if it did not prevail at the regional level, but it did not say Monday whether it would follow through.
§ “China seeks better cross-border control of big data with new plan” — Reuters. China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT)called for improved cross-border security management of big data till 2025, in a five-year plan published on Tuesday. The plan, which builds off of China's 14th Five-Year Plan published earlier this year, comes as the country has pushed forward its regulatory framework for data and technology. It re-affirms data as a "factor of production" and a "national strategic resource".
§ “You’re not paranoid to cover your webcam. But the cameras you can’t cover are scarier.” By Tatum Hunter — The Washington Post. John Goncalves is a bit of a maverick. Unlike most everyone he knows, he doesn’t cover the tiny webcam at the top of his laptop screen with a plastic slider or piece of tape. “Everybody tells you, ‘Cover your webcam — people could be watching you.’ But I’m thinking to myself, like, why would somebody want to watch me?” said Goncalves, a 19-year-old student on a gap year in Toronto.
§ “AT&T, Verizon Propose 5G Limits to Break Air-Safety Standoff” By Drew FitzGerald and Micah Maidenberg — The Wall Street Journal. AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. said they would limit some of their fifth-generation wireless services for six months while federal regulators review the signals’ effect on aircraft sensors, an effort to defuse a conflict that has roiled both industries. The cellphone carriers detailed the proposed limits Wednesday in a letter to the Federal Communications Commission. The companies said they would lower the signals’ cell-tower power levels nationwide and impose stricter power caps near airports and helipads, according to a copy reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
§ “Hunt for the ‘Blood Diamond of Batteries’ Impedes Green Energy Push” By Dionne Searcey and Eric Lipton — The New York Times. A man in a pinstripe suit with a red pocket square walked around the edge of a giant pit one April afternoon where hundreds of workers often toil in flip-flops, burrowing deep into the ground with shovels and pickaxes. His polished leather shoes crunched on dust the miners had spilled from nylon bags stuffed with cobalt-laden rocks. The man, Albert Yuma Mulimbi, is a longtime power broker in the Democratic Republic of Congo and chairman of a government agency that works with international mining companies to tap the nation’s copper and cobalt reserves, used in the fight against global warming.
§ “Air Force Spent Millions on Encrypted App Wickr” By Joseph Cox — Vice. The U.S. Air Force has spent millions on licenses from encrypted chat platform Wickr, according to Air Force documents and public procurement records reviewed by Motherboard. The documents further solidify Wickr’s position as a preferred tool of the U.S. government and military. Although Wickr is well known for its free-to-download app, it also sells products based on the same technology to businesses and agencies.
§ “A Tech Whistle-Blower Helps Others Speak Out” By Erin Woo — The New York Times. Last month, Gov. Gavin Newsom of California signed a bill to expand protections for people who speak up about discrimination in the workplace. A new website arrived to offer tech workers advice on how to come forward about mistreatment by their employers. And Apple responded to a shareholder proposal that asked it to assess how it used confidentiality agreements in employee harassment and discrimination cases. The disparate developments had one thing — or, rather, a person — in common: Ifeoma Ozoma.
§ “Antitrust Tech Bills Gain Bipartisan Momentum in Senate” By Ryan Tracy and John D. McKinnon — The Wall Street Journal. Support for curbing large technology companies’ market power is widening in the Senate, with lawmakers in both parties endorsing new legal constraints on search engines, e-marketplaces, app stores and other online platforms. Lawmakers say they are responding to public concerns over the size and influence of the tech companies. “I have been working on these issues for years, and it feels like we have finally reached a tipping point where we will take serious steps forward,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), a lead sponsor of some of the key bills, said. “There is bipartisan momentum to get something done, and the public is on our side.”
§ “Google Play apps downloaded 300,000 times stole bank credentials” By Dan Goodin — Ars Technica. Researchers said they’ve discovered a batch of apps downloaded from Google Play more than 300,000 times before the apps were revealed to be banking trojans that surreptitiously siphoned user passwords and two-factor authentication codes, logged keystrokes, and took screenshots. The apps—posing as QR scanners, PDF scanners, and cryptocurrency wallets—belonged to four separate Android malware families that were distributed over four months. They used several tricks to sidestep restrictions that Google has devised in an attempt to rein in the unending distribution of fraudulent apps in its official marketplace. Those limitations include restricting the use of accessibility services for sight-impaired users to prevent the automatic installation of apps without user consent.
§ “Why billions in broadband money may go to the wrong places” By John Hendel — Politico. Washington is finally tackling one of the biggest obstacles to closing the nation’s digital divide: identifying the broadband dead zones where millions of Americans lack fast internet service. But that’s coming too late for the broadband gold rush of 2021.
§ “Local News Outlets Could Reap $1.7 Billion in Build Back Better Aid” By Marc Tracy — The New York Times. For The Storm Lake Times, a family-run paper in northwestern Iowa, it could mean $200,000 in federal subsidies the first year and nearly $500,000 over the four years after that. For EO Media, which publishes more than a dozen community newspapers in the Pacific Northwest, it could amount to $1.2 million the first year and $2.9 million over the next four. And Gannett, the largest newspaper chain in the country, could receive $37.5 million the first year and tens of millions after that.
§ “How Steve Bannon Has Exploited Google Ads to Monetize Extremism” By Craig Silverman and Isaac Arnsdorf — ProPublica. Almost a year ago, Google took a major step to ensure that its ubiquitous online ad network didn’t put money in the pocket of Steve Bannon, the indicted former adviser to Donald Trump. The company kicked Bannon off YouTube, which Google owns, after he called for the beheading of Anthony Fauci and urged Trump supporters to come to Washington on Jan. 6 to try to overturn the presidential election results. Google also confirmed to ProPublica that it has at times blocked ads from appearing on Bannon’s War Room website alongside individual articles that violate Google’s rules. But Bannon found a loophole in Google’s policies that let him keep earning ad money on his site’s homepage.
§ “What Uber’s Spies Really Did” By Kate Conger — The New York Times. The men who gathered intelligence for Uber were supposed to be ghosts. For years, they were un-Googleable sentries, quietly informing executives about the actions of competitors, opponents and disgruntled employees. But the secrecy of the tightknit team ended abruptly in 2017 when one of its members turned on the others, accusing them of stealing trade secrets, wiretapping and destroying evidence.
Coming Events
Photo by Jaime Lopes on Unsplash
§ 6 December
o The United Kingdom’s Parliament’s Draft Online Safety Bill (Joint Committee) will hold a private meeting.
§ 7 December
o The Senate Finance Committee’s Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Growth Subcommittee will hold a hearing titled “Promoting Competition, Growth, and Privacy Protection in the Technology Sector.”
o The United Kingdom’s Parliament’s Draft Online Safety Bill (Joint Committee) will hold a private meeting.
§ 8 December
o The United States (U.S.) National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board (ISPAB) will hold an open meeting with this tentative agenda:
§ Briefing from NIST on recent activities from the Information Technology Laboratory,
§ Board Discussion on Executive Order 14028, Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity (May 12, 2021) deliverables and impacts to date,
§ Discussion on Agency Responsibilities for Cybersecurity Risk Management,
§ Presentation from NIST on Cybersecurity Metrics and Measurements,
§ Briefing from NIST on the Post Quantum Program,
§ Briefing from the Office of Management and Budget on recent cybersecurity policies,
§ Public Comments.
o The United States (U.S.) Senate’s Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee’s Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Data Security Subcommittee will hold a hearing titled “Protecting Kids Online: Instagram and Reforms for Young Users” with Instagram Head Adam Mosseri.
o The United Kingdom’s Parliament’s Draft Online Safety Bill (Joint Committee) will hold a private meeting.
o The United States’ (U.S.) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Cybersecurity Advisory Committee will hold a partially open meeting.
§ 9 December
o The United States (U.S.) National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board (ISPAB) will hold an open meeting with this tentative agenda:
§ Briefing from NIST on recent activities from the Information Technology Laboratory,
§ Board Discussion on Executive Order 14028, Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity (May 12, 2021) deliverables and impacts to date,
§ Discussion on Agency Responsibilities for Cybersecurity Risk Management,
§ Presentation from NIST on Cybersecurity Metrics and Measurements,
§ Briefing from NIST on the Post Quantum Program,
§ Briefing from the Office of Management and Budget on recent cybersecurity policies,
§ Public Comments.
o The United States (U.S.) House of Representatives’ Science, Space, and Technology Committee will hold a markup of the following bills:
§ The “Promoting Digital Privacy Technologies Act” (H.R.847)
§ The “Abandoned Well Remediation Research and Development Act” (H.R.4270)
§ The “National Nuclear University Research Infrastructure Reinvestment Act of 2021” (H.R.4819)
o The United States (U.S.) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will hold an online workshop titled “Cybersecurity Labeling for Consumer IoT and Software: Executive Order Update and Discussion.”
o The United States (U.S.) House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee’s Communications and Technology Subcommittee will hold a hearing titled “Holding Big Tech Accountable: Legislation to Build a Safer Internet” with witnesses yet to be announced to discuss the following bills:
§ The “Social Media Disclosure and Transparency of Advertisements Act of 2021” (H.R.3451)
§ The “Algorithmic Justice and Online Platform Transparency Act” (H.R.3611)
§ The “Telling Everyone the Location of data Leaving the U.S. Act” (H.R.3991)
§ The “Internet Application Integrity and Disclosure Act” (H.R.4000)
§ The “Kids Internet Design and Safety Act” (H.R.5439)
§ The “Deceptive Experiences to Online Users Reduction Act” (H.R.6083)
§ The “FTC Whistleblower Act of 2021” (H.R.6093)
o The United States (U.S.) Senate’s Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee’s Communication, Media, and Broadband Subcommittee will hold a hearing titled “Disrupting Dangerous Algorithms: Addressing the Harms of Persuasive Technology.”
o The United Kingdom’s Parliament’s Draft Online Safety Bill (Joint Committee) will hold a private meeting.
o Australia’s Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement will hold a hearing on law enforcement capabilities in relation to child exploitation.
§ 10 December
o Australia’s Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement will hold a hearing on law enforcement capabilities in relation to child exploitation.
§ 14 December
o The United States (U.S.) Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold an open meeting.
§ 16-17 June 2022
o The European Data Protection Supervisor will hold a conference titled “The future of data protection: effective enforcement in the digital world.”