[CTC] WaPo: Big Tech rivals enter fight over U.S. digital trade

Thu May 18 08:58:45 PDT 2023

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/18/big-tech-rivals-enter-fight-over-us-digital-trade/ <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/18/big-tech-rivals-enter-fight-over-us-digital-trade/>

Big Tech rivals enter fight over U.S. digital trade
Analysis by Cristiano Lima <https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/cristiano-lima/?itid=ai_top_limac>
May 18, 2023 at 9:05 a.m. EDT 

A coalition of technology companies are calling out efforts by the tech giants to shape the United States’ stance on digital trade, joining a growing cast of lawmakers and advocacy groups taking aim at Big Tech’s role in the Indo-Pacific negotiations.  

On Tuesday, companies including email provider Proton, review site Yelp and pricing service Kelkoo wrote to the Biden administration <https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/9ee18cda-efb8-44ac-a84d-b53b48534a91.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_6> expressing concern that Big Tech companies are trying to “block policies that would prohibit their anticompetitive practices” through trade talks. 

And on Thursday, they are kicking off a public campaign <https://proton.me/blog/big-tech-ipef> urging public officials to reject what they call attempts by their Silicon Valley rivals to “overrule democratically passed anti-monopoly laws.”

They become the latest entrants to the increasingly contentious debate over digital trade, which has emerged as a proxy battle in broader global efforts to rein in giants like Amazon, Google, Apple and Meta. 

U.S. negotiators for months have been seeking to hash out trade terms with 13 other countries including Japan, North Korea and Australia, one of the first major tests of the administration’s approach to issues including digital trade policy.

The companies took issue with what they called a “lack of transparency” around the talks, writing in their letter to the Commerce Department and U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) that it “has allowed the views of a few digital firms to dominate while the small and medium tech firms that are the backbone of the industry have been largely excluded from the process.”

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and a slew of consumer advocacy groups have echoed the concerns in recent weeks: 

·        A group of Democratic lawmakers led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote to USTR and Commerce <https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/1c8ae425-392a-49bf-afe1-d3d0ff0e8601.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_7&itid=lk_inline_manual_16> last month voicing concern over industry efforts to “weaponize these digital trade rules” to fend off tech regulations globally, as we wrote <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/24/big-tech-trying-weaponize-us-trade-talks-democrats-warn/?itid=lk_inline_manual_16>.

·        A group of Republican lawmakers sent a similar letter <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-04/gop-lawmakers-urge-denial-of-tech-lobby-indo-pacific-trade-input> this month urging the Biden administration not to adopt in its Indo-Pacific trade talks a proposal “that binds the United States to competition policies that Congress may soon reject,” as Bloomberg News reported <https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-04/gop-lawmakers-urge-denial-of-tech-lobby-indo-pacific-trade-input>.

·        A coalition of consumer advocacy groups in March called on Commerce and USTR “not to replicate the Big-Tech-favored terms,” as we wrote <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/15/advocates-urge-us-not-offer-big-tech-favored-terms-trade-talks/?itid=lk_inline_manual_18>.

The issue has now mobilized many of the same lawmakers, advocates and smaller tech companies — including Proton and Yelp — that rallied unsuccessfully last Congress to pass major antitrust legislation targeting the tech giants.

USTR spokesman Sam Michel said in a statement that their Indo-Pacific trade framework “includes high-standard provisions designed to promote inclusive, sustainable growth in the digital economy, including online consumer protections.” 

“Ambassador Tai has always said we need to expand the policymaking conversation to include diverse perspectives, not just those that can afford Washington lobbyists,” Michel said, adding that the agency has held numerous briefings with lawmakers and outside groups. 

The Commerce Department referred an inquiry on the latest letter to USTR.

Tech industry groups representing some of the industry’s biggest companies have called on the administration to ensure their digital trade policies address potential economic barriers for American tech companies overseas. 

Jonathan McHale, vice president of digital trade for the Computer & Communications Industry Association trade group, said in a March statement <https://ccianet.org/news/2023/03/ccia-corrects-the-record-on-digital-trade-rules-ahead-of-ipef-negotiating-round/> that the talks should “prioritize developing enforceable rules that can counter trade-distortive practices, rather than embracing perceived fears of digitalization in general to justify new trade restrictions.” 

The group counts Amazon, Apple, Google and Meta as members, among other companies. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.) 

While critics are calling out the role of the tech giants in the trade process, some business groups have taken the opposite tact, targeting what they called efforts by Big Tech antagonists within the administration to shape the negotiations.

“Digital trade provisions ensure that foreign governments do not erect trade barriers that exclude American workers and businesses that rely on data flows to deliver products and services,” the Chamber of Commerce wrote in a recent letter <https://www.uschamber.com/international/chamber-letter-to-white-house-calling-for-greater-oversight-of-ftc-and-doj> to the White House.

Christine Bannan, U.S. public policy manager for Proton, said that argument runs counter to the very aim of the trade negotiations. 

“Protectionism fundamentally is against free trade, and negotiating agreements to protect national companies at the detriment of others … just is not consistent with the … stated purpose of free trade,” she said in an interview Wednesday.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20230518/c9510d2c/attachment-0001.htm>