With Silicon Valley weathering its worst-ever year in Washington, it was perhaps only a matter of time before big tech made a tactical retreat on Capitol Hill. And as the tech industry’s top lobbying group now flips to support legislation it previously opposed, experts wonder whether other concessions on hot-button issues are still to come.
On Friday, the Internet Association—the D.C.-based lobbying arm of the most powerful tech firms—dropped its opposition to the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, a popular Senate bill that increases the legal liability of online platforms accused of knowingly assisting, facilitating, or supporting sex trafficking. The group framed the move as a compromise consistent with concerns that it raised during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing in September. “Important changes made to SESTA will grant victims the ability to secure the justice they deserve, allow internet platforms to continue their work combating human trafficking, and protect good actors in the ecosystem,” said Internet Association president Michael Beckerman.
But some experts are less sanguine about the compromise, which they say doesn’t do nearly enough to soften the bill’s damaging impact on the internet industry. They believe the Internet Association chose to cut its losses instead of continuing to argue over an issue as emotionally laden as sex trafficking. As legislators also weigh a crackdown on tech platforms for their role in spreading Russian disinformation during the 2016 election, experts say the Internet Association is choosing to expend its energy on a fight it can actually win.
“It’s a resource-constrained time for tech policy, so you’ve got to kind of pick your battles,” said Evan Engstrom, the executive director for Engine Advocacy, a lobbying group for tech start-ups that continues to oppose the sex-trafficking bill.
“There was such a strategic cost to opposing SESTA,” said Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University who argued against the bill during September’s Senate Commerce hearing. “And if it wasn’t going to be winnable anyway, you cut your losses and move on. Because you’ve got so many other battles you’ve got to fight.”
How big tech’s alleged capitulation on SESTA will impact a broader Capitol Hill crackdown remains unclear. Some believe that the legislation will be a precedent to justify new liability requirements on other online content—particularly posts promoting terrorism. But others see a special confluence of factors in the SESTA debate, saying it’s not necessarily indicative of a full-court press against big tech.
“This is kind of a unique situation,” said Engstrom. “There are very few issues that are going to be seen as compelling as stopping sex trafficking. Even issues related to political ads aren’t getting the type of immediate support that you’d think they would, in light of how visible that issue has been.”
Even before the Internet Association accepted last week’s compromise, SESTA was already a popular bill. The legislation—which now has 41 bipartisan cosponsors—stemmed from a years-long federal investigation into Backpage, an online classified-ad platform accused of knowingly permitting sex trafficking on its website. The bill is expected to sail through a Senate Commerce Committee markup scheduled for Wednesday morning. Even Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden, one of the few lawmakers to speak out on the bill’s purported negative impact in September, appears to have cooled his opposition. “Right now I’m just looking at the changes,” he told National Journal.
Those changes—while still less than ideal for Silicon Valley—aren’t exactly insignificant. The industry feared SESTA’s first draft because of the broad leeway it gave state attorneys general to bring criminal cases against online platforms, as well as an unclear definition of when an online platform “knowingly” facilitates trafficking. The new draft, however, requires state prosecutors to conform to federal sex-trafficking statutes and tightens up the “knowing” standard.
“SESTA is still a terrible bill—it’s bad policy, and it’s badly executed,” said Goldman. “The question that I’m focused on is whether it poses an existential threat to the internet. And I think it’s less likely to kill the internet than the prior draft would have been.” Goldman added, however, that many of those tweaks would likely have happened anyway, as the bill’s sponsors found obvious holes in their legislation.
Alexandra Levy, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who focuses on sex trafficking, believes the Internet Association was looking for a face-saving way to extricate itself from a losing fight. “I can say from experience that it’s not easy to be on the other side of a bill called the ‘Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act,’” she said. Levy opposes SESTA, arguing that it gives platforms a legal incentive to stick their heads in the sand and will drive trafficking to darker corners of the web.
Levy worries that the legislation is the opening salvo in a campaign to take down Section 230 of the Communications Act, a provision providing tech platforms with immunity from prosecution for content posted by their users. She believes content promoting terrorism is likely the next—but by no means the last—target. “All of these laws will have the same effect of incentivizing platforms to know less and regulate more—a price that will ultimately be paid by users,” she said.
Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal, one of SESTA’s strongest proponents and an architect of last week’s compromise, has hinted there may be more shoes to drop. “There’s an important and profoundly significant recognition of responsibility here,” Blumenthal said Tuesday when asked whether SESTA is the first in a wave of new regulations. “The social-media platforms are more than just a vehicle. They have a responsibility.”
But experts believe that big tech won’t submit as readily on other issues. While Silicon Valley has neither an ideological nor a pecuniary interest in defending the free speech rights of sex traffickers, that won’t be true in most other cases.
“I do think the internet companies will feel differently with other kinds of regulatory efforts,” Goldman said. “In some cases that will be because they’re more ideologically supportive of the content that’s being targeted. In other cases it’ll be because it’ll potentially cut into their revenues in a way they care about.”
What We're Following See More »
"Federal prosecutors have charged a former software engineer at the center of a huge C.I.A. breach with stealing classified information, theft of government property and lying to the F.B.I. The engineer, Joshua A. Schulte, 29, of New York, had been the main suspect in one of the worst losses of classified documents in the spy agency’s history. Government investigators suspect that he provided WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, with a stolen archive of documents detailing the C.I.A.’s hacking operations, but they had not initially charged him in that crime."
"The Senate voted Monday to reimpose the U.S. ban on Chinese telecom giant ZTE, in a rebuke to President Donald Trump and his efforts to keep the company in business. The provision targeting ZTE was part of the National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass defense spending bill that cleared the Senate by a vote of 85-10. It must now be reconciled with the House version of the measure, which takes a narrower approach to ZTE." Separately, Trump is directing U.S Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to identify $200 billion more in tariffs on Chinese products.
"Two longtime associates of President Donald Trump are now acknowledging a previously undisclosed contact in May 2016 with a Russian who they say offered dirt on Hillary Clinton. Roger Stone and Michael Caputo say they forgot to tell investigators about their contact with a Russian national who goes by the name Henry Greenberg — even though they say Greenberg offered to sell incriminating information to the Trump campaign for $2 million."
"As Trump signed a joint statement with Kim Jong Un that offered few details on how the North Korean leader would make good on his vow to denuclearize, Republicans on Capitol Hill said Tuesday that they want and expect the White House to submit any final agreement for their approval." Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called for any agreement to be in the form of a treaty.
President Trump announced that the United States will suspend "war games" with South Korea, which are "inappropriate" given his meeting with North Korean leader Kim-Jong Un. "We will be stopping the war games which will save us a tremendous amount of money," said Trump, "unless and until we see the future negotiation is not going along like it should." The military exercises "carried out each year by the US and South Korean militaries have been consistently cited by Pyongyang as a US rehearsal for war, and a reason it needs to build a nuclear arsenal."