An informed citizenry is the basis of a robust democracy. This was true at the founding of our American republic, and it is even more true today. That information and data are multiplying is beyond dispute. We have more channels, more information and more data available to us than ever before. It is less clear that their distant cousins – knowledge and wisdom- are growing apace. Because this is a presidential election year, citizen-voters should have access to the best contextualized knowledge available as they make their decision about who will govern their country for the next four years. The Annenberg School for Communication is committed to fostering knowledge in the public interest, especially as it intersects with our specialty domains of media, journalism and communications.  In the spirit of contributing to the public debate and to the commonweal of the nation, we offer the results of a modest project undertaken by our faculty and students to compare and contrast the positions of the Republican and Democratic candidates for president and their parties, in this critical policy domain. 

We do not pretend that these are the only important communications policy issues; there are certainly others. We view this is a start to help the public and the press navigate the sometimes murky waters of net neutrality, media concentration and other topics.

Ernest J. Wilson, Dean, Annenberg School For Communication

TOPICS
Media Ownership and Consolidation
Ownership by Women and People of Color
Public Service Media in the New Digital Landscape
Universal Broadband and America's Digital Decline
Network Neutrality
Copyright, Patents, Access to Knowledge

CANDIDATES' OFFICIAL PLATFORMS
Barack Obama
John McCain

The Issue

The Telecommunications Act of 1996, the first major reform of American media and communications laws since 1934, significantly relaxed restrictions on traditional media ownership. Section 202 of the 1996 Act requires the FCC to review its ownership rules every two years to “repeal or modify any regulation it determines to be no longer in the public interest.” During these review processes, the FCC has moved to further relax media ownership restrictions and limits on cross-media ownership, inviting opposition from both media activists and members of Congress. Since 1996 ownership concentration has intensified to unforeseen levels. A shrinking pool of multi-media conglomerates (e.g. Time Warner, Disney, and NewsCorp) have diversified their holdings such that they now wield disproportionate control over the production, distribution, and delivery platforms of radio, television, film, and increasingly internet media. While some continue to argue that large, concentrated media industries do not represent a threat to public discourse (largely stakeholders in those industries themselves), most recently, the Senate released a declaration that a December 2007 FCC decision to rescind restrictions preventing an owner from owning a city’s monopoly newspaper as well as local broadcast interests “will have no force or effect.” 

Obama

Obama’s platform states that he believes “the nation’s rules ensuring diversity of media ownership are critical to the public interest.” He promises that “he will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum. .. [and] promote greater coverage of local issues and better responsiveness by broadcasters to the communities they serve.”  He also stresses his commitment to anti-trust enforcement in order to promote competitive business practices in the information sector.

During his Senate career, Obama has maintained that the media industry should not be deregulated at the expense of ownership diversity.  He was one of nine Democratic (including Hillary Clinton) and four Republican co-sponsors of the Senate Resolution against the 2007 FCC decision to relax newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership restrictions.  In July 2006, he co-authored a letter with John Kerry asking the FCC to first address minority and small-business media-ownership issues before moving to general media ownership rules.  He re-iterated his support for diverse ownership in an October 2007 letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin calling for an independent review panel on media ownership diversity.

McCain

Although McCain is a senior member of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees the Federal Communications Commission, and has frequently spoken out on the importance of media policy, neither McCain’s platform nor the general RNC platform makes specific mention of media ownership issues.

During his Senate tenure, while McCain has cautioned that “companies consolidate when they can't compete, and consolidation without competition can hurt consumers," he has generally been an advocate of loosening media ownership restrictions. He was one of thirty-eight Republican Senators who opposed efforts to reverse the FCC’s 2003 decision to increase national media ownership caps from 35% to 45%. He has authored several letters urging the FCC to uphold individual corporate exceptions to ownership restrictions.

McCain was the only Republican senator to vote against the final version of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, arguing not that it threatened viewpoint diversity due to the loosening of media ownership caps, but instead that its regulations of telecommunications remained too stringent. During floor debates on the bill, he noted that "the Progress & Freedom Foundation is right on the mark when it calls for the abolishment of the FCC." He has, however, supported legislation that would set aside technical roadblocks to setting up community-based lower power FM radio stations.

Issue Summary

As is so often the case, what is left out of campaign policy statements—in particular, the problems they acknowledge, or don't—is perhaps more telling than what is in them. Obama’s policy statement indicates concern with disproportionate concentration of media ownership and the adjoining issue of the needed expansion of media owned by women and people of color. Past statements indicate he sees both issues as tied to structural reform fixes, as opposed to more ‘behavior-altering’ measures. (In June 2008, for instance, as largely Republican efforts to permanently prevent reinstatement of the ‘Fairness Doctrine’ recommenced, a letter sent by Obama’s press secretary Michael Ortiz explained that Obama "considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible.")

According to his platform (addressing not media concentration, but other issues), John McCain “does not believe in prescriptive regulation...but rather he believes that an open marketplace with a variety of consumer choices is the best deterrent against unfair practices.” The lack of even a mention of the issue signals that his campaign is not willing to publicly acknowledge any potential concern with the present state of affairs, such as they are. Perhaps this points to the greatest point of contrast between the two candidates: McCain has said he believes that cable stations, satellite providers, and Internet access mitigate any effects of an increasingly consolidated 'traditional' media environment, an argument the Republican majority at the FCC used to justify loosening rules in 2003. McCain, following this logic, does not address overlapping and entangled interests amongst these sectors, as well as documented patterns of information distribution (internet-only sources hardly can be considered to handily compete with traditional media organs; independent sources tend more to comment on traditional media content than generate new content) and media use (Americans still rely most heavily on local television news, for instance, making local consolidation a very real concern).

Back to top

The issue

Diversifying the gender and ethnic background of the owners of media companies is another goal in the drive to increase opportunities for content diversity. Advocates for stronger federal intervention note that racial and gender diversification of ownership is directly linked to diversification of ideas, viewpoints, and representation; at present, women and people of color each currently hold majority interests in less than 4% of stations in the country, according to a 2006 study.

This deficiency has been addressed by legislation in the past. In 1978, the FCC initiated the Minority Tax Certificate program. This program offered a number of incentives to promote more diverse ownership, including tax incentives to encourage the sale of broadcasting businesses to a majority female or minority owned entity, as well as tax incentives for those providing such businesses with start-up capital. This program was discontinued by Congress in 1995. Congress offered this cut as a choice between continuing to fund these tax breaks (which often went to large media corporations) versus funding a new proposed tax break for farmers. However, others have suggested that the catalyst for this move was Congressional rancor over the proposed upcoming sale of Viacom to a minority-owned group, which would have allowed the large company to defer up to $600 million; others have suggested it was discomfort surrounding basing tax benefits on gender or minority status. Since the 1995 discontinuation of this program, no other measures have been put in place to encourage diversification of ownership.

Obama

Encouraging diversity in media ownership is an explicit part of Barack Obama’s platform, though it is not specifically mentioned in the platform of the Democratic Party. In his platform, Obama criticizes the FCC for favoring consolidation at the expense of providing opportunities for women and people of color to own radio and television stations and states that he

“believes that providing opportunities for minority-owned businesses to own radio and television stations is fundamental to creating the diverse media environment that federal law requires and the country deserves and demands. As president, he will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum”.

On Dec. 4, 2007, Obama cosponsored a bill in the Senate (introduced by Sen. Byron Dorgan) that would “launch an independent review panel to recommend strategies to increase the representation of women and minorities in media ownership;” furthermore, importantly, it would require the FCC to act on this committee’s recommendations. However, this legislation’s future remains uncertain. Additionally, on both October 22, 2007, and July 20, 2006  (the latter with Senator John Kerry) Obama wrote letters to the chairman of the FCC strongly urging more attention to increasing minority, small business, and female media ownership, saying, in part, "Minority owned and operated newspapers and radio stations play a critical role in the African American and Latino communities and bring minority issues to the forefront of our national discussion. However, the Commission has failed to further the goals of diversity in the media and promote localism, and as a result, it is in no position to justify allowing for increased consolidation of the market."

McCain

McCain’s platform does not address this issue. In the past, nonetheless, John McCain has a history of support for certain efforts encouraging media ownership by women and people of color. McCain sponsored the Telecommunications Ownership Diversification Act of 2003, which offered tax benefits when any broadcasting business was sold to an economically and "socially" disadvantaged business. This benefit was meant to directly replace that which was lost in 1995 when the FCC’s prior Minority Tax Certificate Program ended. McCain’s legislation particularly encouraged sales to small businesses and new entrants to telecom ownership. However, this legislation never moved past its introduction; it was never debated. McCain has not made any more recent statements that specifically address diversifying media ownership.

Issue summary

Both candidates have a documented history of attempting to diversify media ownership through legislation. However, Obama has made this an explicit part of his platform, which increases the probability that these issues will be addressed early in an Obama presidency. It is likely that both candidates will, if elected, at the very least present an executive environment that is more welcoming than in the previous administration for legislation pointed toward these goals, with the likelihood that Obama will be more proactive in bringing the issue to the forefront.

Back to top

The issue

The U.S. system of public radio and television retains a high level of public trust more than forty years after passage of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. However, the system faces formidable challenges resulting from rapid changes in technology and audience preferences that has led to the rise of Internet-based media. What should be the role of public media in the new digital environment, and how can our existing institutions -- the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), and National Public Radio (NPR) -- move beyond broadcasting to engage new users and enhance their public service missions?

Some argue that the wide availability of audio and video content via cable, satellite and the Internet means that federal subsidies for public broadcasting can be reduced or eliminated. Each Administration budget over the past eight years has in fact proposed substantial cuts for public broadcasting. Congress has generally restored this funding, based on constituent support for local public radio and television stations, but the necessary transition from today’s public broadcasting to “public service media” in the digital network environment remains clouded.

Obama

The Obama platform explicitly calls for such a transition: “An Obama administration will encourage the creation of Public Media 2.0., the next generation of public media that will create the Sesame Street of the Digital Age and other video and interactive programming that educates and informs. Obama will support the transition of existing public broadcasting entities and help renew their founding vision in the digital world.

McCain

While the McCain platform does not focus specifically on how to bring pubic broadcasting into the digital age, John McCain has consistently supported federal funding for public radio and television. As a primary sponsor of S. 2645 in 2004, McCain said: “… I rise today to introduce The Public Broadcasting Reauthorization Act of 2004. This legislation is designed to reauthorize the Corporation for Public Broadcasting … through 2011 to carry forth its mission to support the Nation's public broadcasting system…”

Issue summary

Each candidate as Senator has backed Congressional appropriations for public broadcasting, and each would likely continue such support as President. Obama in addition supports efforts to help existing public broadcasting institutions achieve success in the new digital media environment. While the Obama platform lacks specifics on how to reach this desired outcome, it suggests that an Obama Administration would place priority on fostering the transition.

Back to top

The issue

Despite being the birthplace of the Internet, the US has a middling position amongst the 30 OECD nations in broadband Internet usage as of 2007, ranking 15th in percent of population subscribing (compared with 4th in 2001) and 17th in broadband penetration growth, according to OECD data. The US also placed 15th amongst OECD countries in a 2008 composite broadband leadership scoring (combining household penetration, download speeds and pricing) by the ITIF. Furthermore, there is a significant US national digital divide between rich and poor, urban/suburban and rural, as reported by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. The CWA's "Speed Matters" campaign argues for a national broadband policy that promotes universal high-speed Internet access.

Obama

According to his platform, "Barack Obama believes that America should lead the world in broadband penetration and Internet access. As a country, we have ensured that every American has access to telephone service and electricity, regardless of economic status, and Obama will do likewise for broadband Internet access." Obama has also stated that he considers expanding broadband access to be one of the three most important ways of promoting economic growth: "I will promote digital inclusion. Getting broadband Internet access into every home and business in urban America at an affordable rate could give low-income people increased opportunities to start businesses and engage actively in our communities."

He would update the FCC definition of broadband speed, presently 200 kbps (currently very low by international standards, and in Obama’s words, “distort[ing] federal policy and hamstring[ing] efforts to broaden broadband access”).  He proposes refocusing the Universal Service Fund toward broadband, in the process reviewing present usage of the wireless spectrum. He makes a goal ensuring broadband access for all schools, libraries, households and hospitals. He supports federal support of local area public/private broadband partnerships through tax and loan incentives. Significantly, Obama explicitly calls for "more efficient and more imaginative use of government spectrum." Given the US government (via the NTIA, as opposed to the FCC) controls 14% of allocated spectrum bands and shares 56% of other bands with other users (according to Jonathan Neuchterlein and Philip Weiser in their book Digital Crossroads), these heretofore publicly-and-commercially-inaccessible frequencies offer numerous opportunities for alternative approaches to spectrum management. Also significant is an interest in exploring new standards for wireless use, although details remain vague; however, this does seem to indicate friendliness to the exploration of new, spectrum-sharing technologies. 

In the past, Obama co-sponsored S. Res. 191 (110th Congress), calling for universal next-generation broadband network deployment by 2015 to be made an official national policy goal. He co-sponsored with 9 others S. 1190 (110th Congress), which encouraged the development of state-level initiatives to improve broadband services. He also co-sponsored with 18 others S. 1492 (110th Congress), which called for the improvement of government data on broadband services and promoted the deployment of affordable broadband services to all parts of the nation.

McCain

John McCain likewise expresses support for universal broadband and would seek to implement it by encouraging private broadband suppliers to satisfy unserved or underserved areas -- particularly rural -- through loan and bond incentives as well as private/public partnerships. Companies expanding their coverage of low-income consumers would be rewarded with a tax liability offset (the "People Connect Program").  Where private investment is still insufficient, local government investment would be encouraged to build out their own high-speed broadband services. McCain also wishes to promote telecommuting as a widespread practice enabled by universal broadband.  "America cannot afford to lag in providing its citizens access to 21st Century infrastructure. [...] John McCain has long believed that all Americans, no matter if rich or poor, rural or urban, old or young, should have access to high-speed Internet services and receive the economic opportunities derived from technology."

McCain has criticized the government-run Universal Service Fund, indicting he would favor a greater private sector role in a Universal Broadband program: "In 1934, Congress mandated that every American, regardless of where they lived, receive basic telephone service at approximately the same rate, and established the universal service fund to provide Americans with that service. Unfortunately, in a tale that is too familiar, the program became a breeding ground for waste, corruption, and grossly inefficient spending."

McCain is a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, having previously served during 1995-2001 and 2003-05 (Chairman, 1997-2001, 2003-05). He co-sponsored S. 1853 (110th Congress, the "Community Broadband Bill") and S. 1294 (109th Congress), which both sought to preserve the ability of local governments to provide their own broadband services. In 2002 he introduced, with no co-sponsors, S. 2863 (107th Congress) seeking elimination of aspects of the ability of states and localities to oversee  rights-of-way (to which broadband providers necessarily need access) as well as elements of the ‘open access’ regime operative at the time.

Issue summary

Both candidates express support for the general goals of universal broadband access and enhancing the country's international standing in broadband development. Where the two candidates differ is in what problems are acknowledged and the assumptions as to what will stimulate broadband deployment. Obama's platform notes the virtual duopoly many Americans face in broadband provision, if they even find that. McCain recognizes no such problem, largely offering further calls for letting ‘the market’ (such as it is) lead in stimulating growth and deployment. McCain favors continued spectrum auctions to commercial providers; Obama explicitly seeks to investigate new uses and standards for spectrum utilization, perhaps even opening up swaths of government-controlled spectrum for use, something McCain’s platform does not address. Both express interest in "public-private" initiatives, a common (and largely meaningless barring further details) trope in broadband policy today. (Certain public-private initiatives as ‘Connected Nation,’ a popular model in Congress, have come under fire for primarily seeming to buttress the powerful positions of the largest broadband giants in the US.)

McCain's policies look a great deal like those of the last two decades, with emphasis on private industry to solve deployment and access problems, perhaps with new tax incentives. This seems potentially problematic, as massive consolidation in the telecom and cable sector has occurred during this time, changing the landscape considerably; this remains unaddressed in his platform even as he stresses ‘protecting consumers’. Obama's platform remains vague as well, to be sure, but points to a nuanced understanding of present dynamics, as well as a seemingly fuller understanding of the role federal policy can play in providing space for new wireless initiatives that hold much promise for getting the unconnected online.

Back to top

The Issue

‘Network neutrality’ is the idea that broadband operators should not be allowed to block or degrade Internet content and services based on the origin, source or ownership of these content and services, nor should they be permitted to charge content providers an extra fee for speedier delivery or more favorable placement. The issue came to the fore after the Supreme Court’s Brand X decision, which declared that cable operators need not be required to share their conduits with independent internet service providers that sought to provide connection services for end-customers, a dramatic change from the ‘open access’ regime which operated in the dial-up world. (To illustrate, over dial-up, an individual may have Verizon as their telephone provider, but Verizon is required by law to allow this individual to obtain internet service from any provider—Earthlink, AOL, Verizon itself, and others. This is not possible, except perhaps at exorbitant rates, over cable or new fiber networks—not because it isn’t technically possible, but because regulation does not require telecommunications and cable companies to allow it.) This pitched battle was reignited during the summer, as Comcast was chastised by the FCC for blocking users' ability to utilize popular file-sharing application BitTorrent aboard its network.

Obama

Barack Obama strongly supports protecting the openness of the Internet via the principle of network neutrality, tying the issue to limited competition in the broadband arena. In a sweeping appraisal contained in his platform, he states,

 "Users must be free to access content, to use applications, and to attach personal devices. They have a right to receive accurate and honest information about service plans. But these guarantees are not enough to prevent network providers from discriminating in ways that limit the freedom of expression on the Internet. Because most Americans only have a choice of only one or two broadband carriers, carriers are tempted to impose a toll charge on content and services, discriminating against websites that are unwilling to pay for equal treatment. This could create a two-tier Internet in which websites with the best relationships with network providers can get the fastest access to consumers, while all competing websites remain in a slower lane. Such a result would threaten innovation, the open tradition and architecture of the Internet, and competition among content and backbone providers. It would also threaten the equality of speech through which the Internet has begun to transform American political and cultural discourse. Barack Obama supports the basic principle that network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or non-profit speakers, have the same opportunity as incumbents to innovate on the Internet and to reach large audiences.”

In the Senate, Obama was a co-sponsor of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2007, an effort to enshrine principles of network neutrality into law.

John McCain

John McCain opposes mandated network neutrality. His position states, "McCain does not believe in prescriptive regulation like ‘net-neutrality,’ but rather he believes that an open marketplace with a variety of consumer choices is the best deterrent against unfair practices.” McCain states he’ll focus on policies that “leave consumers free to access the content they choose; free to use the applications and services they choose; free to attach devices they choose, if they do not harm the network; and free to chose among broadband service providers." (That said, it should be noted that without enshrinement in law, these principles are generally non-enforceable; McCain opposes any such legislation.) Elsewhere, McCain has said, "Net neutrality legislation could be counterproductive and actually harm the openness of the Internet" (PC, 2008). Past legislation proposed by McCain sought to eliminate requirements that telecommunications providers share their conduits at reasonable rates with competitors (Warren's Cable Regulation Monitor, August 12, 2002), requirements which contributed to users having a wider choice of dialup internet providers than in today's broadband realm. While this is separate from a stake in present network neutrality debates, it reflects a general view that McCain believes, unlike Obama, that communications markets remain competitive and do not require intervention.

Issue summary

Perhaps the best way to summarize this area is to examine what problems the campaigns acknowledge, since both stances remain vague on details. Obama's stance on network neutrality indicates that he sees a twofold problem. First, it reflects that Americans have a dearth of choices when it comes to broadband access—generally, the telecom provider or the cable provider, a situation quite unlike that of the dial-up era, in which several ISPs were on offer no matter who provided telecommunications services to the end-user. Second, Obama recognizes and seeks to address preemptively the possibility that with such a hold over the market, providers might seek to profit from the resulting scarce access to users in favoring certain services or content over others, either by policy or for a fee. Such a fear appears justified, as “deep packet inspection” has come to the fore as an issue (in that certain ISPs teamed up with marketing firms to collect user data with the barest of opportunity for users to opt-out) as well as Comcast’s willingness to thwart access to BitTorrent.

McCain's statement, in contrast, admits to none of these issues or worries. He assumes away issues of market power users face in the 'last mile' and leaves the solution to "the market" such as it is. In sum, McCain sees the duopoly many Americans experience as ‘competitive enough’ to prevent the type of discrimination advocates of network neutrality fear. He offers “tax breaks” for further deployment of facilities; as much as these could be part of a solution, past policy decisions themselves have been much larger drivers in determining the online environment in which the US finds itself today than build-out incentives. With Comcast's explicit blocking of applications in full view in the BitTorrent case, McCain still has nothing to say on the matter. While Obama offers few specifics as to the mechanics of a network neutrality regime-in-practice, it seems that the lack of consideration given the concerns that could generate the need for a preemptive network neutrality policy of some stripe is a serious omission in McCain's platform.

Back to top

The Issue

Widespread access to personal computers, digital audio and video recording devices, and access to broadband internet have enabled an explosion in new forms of creativity and the rapid worldwide circulation of audiovisual materials and texts. Remix culture, digital sampling, and cut-and-paste cultural production have become more visible and popular than ever before. Hip-hop and sample-based electronic music, fan videos, machinima, mashups, and other genres of digital culture are widespread. Many people who used to be just 'part of the audience' are now actively making their own contributions to online culture, while musicians, videomakers, and other creative workers who formerly needed to sign distribution deals with major record labels or film studios can now reach their audience directly, without a middleman. At the same time, the Free and Open Source Software movement has made giant strides, creating everything from popular web browsers like Firefox to complete Operating Systems like Linux, all in a decentralized form and without charging any license fees to end users, simply by following the basic principle that source code should be free for anyone to download, modify, improve, and share with the world. This same principle has led to innovative knowledge resources that have become a part of the daily life of millions of Americans, like Wikipedia.

In many ways, existing commercial interests have found such developments threatening, reacting in a variety of manners to these sweeping, rapid shifts. Groups representing incumbent interests (such as the Recording Industry Association of America, the Motion Picture Association of America, and the Business Software Alliance) have worked with other industry allies to paint forms of filesharing and remix culture as piracy. Using their leverage to file costly cease-and-desist lawsuits or patent challenges against individuals and groups that can ill afford to fight back, the already contested notion of “fair use” has come under attack in new and striking ways. Legislation and regulation have also been sought restricting recording functions on digital set-top boxes, forcing hardware manufacturers to embed invasive so-called 'Digital Rights Management' systems in personal computers and electronics. Other tactics include claiming patents over basic elements of software processes and user interface design. Many of these efforts culminated in the 1998 Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which has been heavily criticized for overextending the reach of copyright and for its heightened penalties for copyright infringement; it remains heavily contested.

Over the next decade, it is clear that there is a dire need to steer the copyright and patent policies of the United States of America towards a balance that manages to reward authors and creators for their contributions while also respecting the rights of the public and other future creators to share, quote, remix, and otherwise build on the shoulders of giants.

Obama

The Obama campaign's platform on copyright and patent is largely focused on existing notions of copyright and patent. In the international realm, his platform states,  "The Motion Picture Association of America estimates that in 2005, more than nine of every 10 DVDs sold in China were illegal copies. The U.S. Trade Representative said 80 percent of all counterfeit products seized at U.S. borders still come from China. Barack Obama will work to ensure intellectual property is protected in foreign markets, and promote greater cooperation on international standards that allow our technologies to compete everywhere."

On the domestic front, there is at least acknowledgement of the need to strike a balance between authors and the public: "Protect Intellectual Property at Home: Intellectual property is to the digital age what physical goods were to the industrial age. Barack Obama believes we need to update and reform our copyright and patent systems to promote civic discourse, innovation and investment while ensuring that intellectual property owners are fairly treated."

In terms of patents, the Obama camp proposes some specific interesting reforms, like greater transparency at the Patent and Trademark Office and opening the patent process to citizen review:

"Reform the Patent System: A system that produces timely, high-quality  patents is essential for global competitiveness in the 21st century. By improving predictability and clarity in our patent system, we will help foster an environment that encourages innovation. Giving the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the resources to improve patent quality and opening up the patent process to citizen review will reduce the uncertainty and wasteful litigation that is currently a significant drag on innovation. With better informational resources, the Patent and Trademark Office could offer patent applicants who know they have significant inventions the option of a rigorous and public peer review that would produce a “gold-plated” patent much less vulnerable to court challenge. Where dubious patents are being asserted, the PTO could conduct low-cost, timely administrative proceedings to determine patent validity. As president, Barack Obama will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and collaboration."

McCain

McCain's campaign stance is not dissimilar from Obama’s. He seeks to crack down on 'piracy,' as well as make the patent system more transparent: "He’s committed to streamlining burdensome regulations and effectively protecting American intellectual property in the United States and around the globe."

Expressing concerns of commerce in the international arena, McCain says, "The entertainment industry is both a vital sector of the domestic economy and among the largest U.S. exporters. While the Internet has provided tremendous opportunity for the creators of copyrighted works, including music and movies, to distribute their works around the world at low cost, it has also given rise to a global epidemic of piracy. John McCain supports efforts to crack down on piracy, both on the Internet and off." Further, "Intellectual property protection is increasingly an issue for U.S. innovators operating in the global economy. John McCain will seek international agreements and enforcement efforts that ensure fair rewards to intellectual property."

Another plank says that "John McCain Will Protect Inventors’ Intellectual Property," noting

"The patent system has been with us since the founding of our nation. Protecting intellectual property creates the incentives for invention and investment in commercial innovations. Yet too much protection can stifle the proliferation of important ideas and impair legitimate commerce in new products to the detriment of our entire economy."

Stating an interest in more resources for the US Patent Office, he notes, "The increased workload at the United States Patent and Trademark Office threatens to undermine the quality of our patent examinations. New resources to hire and train quality examiners are needed to ensure timely, predictable and effective patent review."

McCain does include an interesting proposal to explore alternative dispute resolution around patents:

"Provide Alternative Approaches To Resolving Patent Challenges. For many important technologies, the only effective way to challenge a patent in the United States is through litigation, but litigation on patents is much too expensive. The lack of an affordable, reliable means to ensure that the Government only grants valid patents has led to overly broad, frivolous lawsuits designed to force innovative companies into big settlements."

Issue summary

In terms of media, communication, and technology policy going forward, copyright, patents, and questions of access to knowledge constitute perhaps the most challenging conceptual shift of our age. This is an era-defining set of issues, and how they are handled in coming administrations will largely determine the path of future technologies aboard broadband platforms, with broad-ranging implications for not just commerce but free speech, public commentary, innovative technological and artistic creation, and beyond. Both the Obama and McCain campaigns are, for the most part, not advancing the present terms of debate very far. It is problematic (but politically expedient) that neither mentions Creative Commons, Fair Use, Access to Knowledge, Voluntary Collective Licensing, Free and Open Source Software, Remix culture, or the Public Domain in their statements. The McCain campaign does recognize that the internet is a useful distribution mechanism for creators, and the Obama campaign does acknowledge that the existing copyright system might be in conflict with certain kinds of civic discourse and innovation. Both campaigns recognize that the current patent system is opaque and expensive, and suggest that greater transparency is needed. Obama's suggestion of citizen review of patents is an important one, as is McCain's suggestion that we need to find a way to resolve patent challenges outside of expensive litigation.

Nonetheless, neither McCain nor Obama seem willing at this stage to provide the visionary leadership that is needed to bring US copyright and patent policy up to speed with existing technologies and to transform our country into a champion of the new paradigm of Access to Knowledge on the world stage.

Additional links on presidential candidate IPR positions:
Copyright Alliance
Ryan Paul
Sourcewatch

Back to top