CCIA's Black Tells Senate, "Internet Censorship Is A Trade Barrier"

BY CCIA Staff
November 18, 2010

Computer & Communications Industry Association President & CEO Ed Black is scheduled to testify Thursday at a Senate Finance subcommittee hearing, “International Trade in the Digital Economy.” The issue of Internet censorship and filtering has received more attention from the State Department and USTR during the Obama administration.
Black has been an advocate on international free speech and censorship issues for decades and continues to serve on the State Department’s Advisory Committee on International Communication and Information Policy.
Black will tell the committee that CCIA members report 40 countries engage in broad, widespread Internet censorship. Whether this is to block information for political reasons or to protect domestic firms from competition, the net impact is that US companies are facing barriers to foreign markets.
Black says information discrimination represents a classic “non-tariff trade barrier” and recommends U.S. officials enforce existing laws and ensure new international agreements better protect the digital economy by clearly banning Internet filtering, censorship and secondary liability.
In his testimony, Black will offer details on which countries are creating barriers along with examples of nations enacting policies that keep US firms from doing business and favor incumbent domestic tech companies. The examples range from intentionally redirecting Internet traffic from foreign sites to domestic sites, to using filtering technology that causes foreign-based services to be degraded for domestic users. There is also a ripple effect beyond tech companies to the advertisers, who are the direct revenue source for many Internet services.
The following quotes can be attributed to CCIA President & CEO Ed Black’s testimony:
“The free expression and free flow of ideas is a necessary condition for successful governance under democratic principles. Attempts to control the citizenry’s access to information must be relegated to the dustbin of history. Government restrictions on content and services are more worthy of “1984” than 2010.
“When governments treat foreign firms differently, they are erecting to market entry that would not otherwise exist, creating advantages for domestic firms and disadvantages for foreign competitors. Such advantages range from intentionally redirecting Internet traffic from foreign sites to domestic sites, to using filtering technology that causes foreign-based services to be degraded for domestic users. These practices also affect advertisers, who are the direct revenue source for many Internet services.
“Restrictions on access to information will reduce demand for computing devices and consumer communications devices, markets in which U.S. businesses have strong positions and strong brands. Information discrimination thus impairs many industries at the heart of the U.S. information technology sector.
“Unreasonable liability rules in other countries are effectively acting as market barriers. Since the early days of the Internet, Congress has recognized that holding Internet and e-commerce businesses liable for the wrongful conduct of their users would jeopardize the growth of this vital industry and place unreasonable burdens on these companies. We next to export language like the safe harbors provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright act as well as another provision in the Communications Decency Act that that allows Internet companies to combat undesirable or illegal content without fear of liability.
“We must also discourage attempts to deputize online intermediaries into law enforcement. If the United States cannot maintain a free and open Internet, we cannot expect that any other nation will do so. Proposals to require Internet communication services to build in back doors for government eavesdropping would create vulnerabilities in secure communications systems, making it easier for governments across the globe to further tamp down on the free flow of information, censor content, and block disfavored services.”

Related Articles

CCIA, NetChoice Ask To Block Texas Social Media Law From Taking Effect During Appeal

Sep 29, 2022

Washington – The Computer & Communications Industry Association has asked a federal appeals court to prevent Texas’s controversial social media law from taking effect ahead of a potential Supreme Court hearing of the case. CCIA along with its partner NetChoice argue that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling is likely to be overturned because…

CCIA Recommendations on Canada’s Online News Act Ahead of Committee Hearing

Sep 23, 2022

Washington — The Heritage Committee in the House of Commons of Canada will meet at a  hearing on Friday afternoon to discuss Bill C-18, dubbed “the Online News Act.” The bill would require large “digital news intermediaries” including search engines and social media platforms to pay Canadian news companies to index their content or to…

CCIA Statement on Florida’s Petition To U.S. Supreme Court In Social Media Law Case

Sep 21, 2022

Washington – Florida has filed a legal brief asking the Supreme Court to hear the case challenging its social media law, which an appeals court struck down in May as unconstitutional. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled unanimously in a 3-0 decision that Florida’s social media censorship law violated the First…