Obama Administration Serious About Jobs, Creators
Wednesday, December 16th, 2009 by Patrick Ross
Print This Post
Three cheers to the Obama Administration for hosting Tuesday at the White House a key jobs summit, one involving the jobs of creators and their collaborators in creation. The Associated Press quoted the host of the event, Vice president Joseph Biden, as saying of copyright piracy:
“This is flat unadulterated theft, and it should be dealt with,” Biden said. “We are committed to making some real inroads — to stop the talking and start the acting.”
Many high-level Obama Administration officials were present and committed to increased protection of the rights of copyright owners, including some who have spoken forcefully in the past on the importance of copyright protection, such as Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director David Kappos. Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller were there, part of a commitment for more robust action at the Department of Justice against infringement, to be funded in part by new monies and programs that resulted from last year’s passage of the PRO-IP Act.
The PRO-IP Act also led to the creation of an Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator at the White House. Victoria Espinel just received Senate clearance for that post, and was on hand Tuesday as well.
Biden and other Obama Administration officials noted the millions of jobs at stake, from individual creators to workers in copyright industries from make-up artists to engineers, as well as the billions of dollars lost to the U.S. economy by piracy. As the AP put it: “Calling it a top priority, the Obama administration said it will draw on law enforcement, trade agreements and other pressure to force compliance with copyright laws.”
This is a welcome move by the Administration. Many of its Cabinet members, including USTR Ron Kirk, have spoken forcefully about the need to enforce copyright owners’ rights, but a White House summit certainly helps. There are many problems in our economy that cannot easily be solved by government action.
But there are many steps the U.S. government can take, small steps that yield large rewards.
During the PRO-IP debate, respected economists noted that cutting losses due to counterfeiting by even five to ten percent would create at least 174,000 new U.S. jobs per year after three years. During that time, overall U.S. economic output would increase by at least $27 billion due to domestic production reclaiming the market from pirated goods. For every tax dollar spent on increased intellectual property enforcement as a result of the steps called for in PRO-IP, at least three new dollars in federal taxes would be collected, and federal tax revenue would increase $1.4 billion or more over 3 years.
One of the authors of that study was Dr. Laura Tyson, an MIT-trained economist who was the chief economic advisor for President Bill Clinton and teaches at the University of California, Berkeley.
Several unions were represented at the White House event, one of many types of organizations that represents individual creators in the copyright community. Those unions put out a statement thanking Vice President Biden and the Administration for the summit and for their commitment to increased enforcement of creators’ rights. Noting piracy was eroding the funds the unions use to provide health care and pensions to members, they added:
But if intellectual property can be protected from the insidious threat posed by digital theft and counterfeiting, the Internet can become the vehicle for innovation, creation, ingenuity and job growth, instead of the undoing of a vital domestic industry. This is wholly dependent upon the creation and implementation of regulations, laws and programs to prevent, deter and enforce against the crime of digital theft.
As we saw during the PRO-IP debate, we have many laws in this country, and around the world, meant to protect creators’ rights, but enforcement is sorely lacking. All of us as consumers of copyrighted works benefit when there is a market to create those works, and thus benefit from increased enforcement of those rights and laws.
Not everyone was happy with yesterday’s summit. I blogged yesterday about how some on the extreme of this debate won’t accept even the notion that there is clear, black-and-white piracy that benefits no one but the thieves, to borrow Vice President Biden’s turn of phrase; this piracy harms creators and their professional partners and makes it more difficult for future creative works to be financed and produced.
We saw another example of this striking lack of acknowledgment of reality in a statement by a group dedicated to reducing copyright owners’ rights. The statement was the latest attack on the Obama administration by a group that championed then-Senator Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign; having been in Washington twenty years, I’m still amazed when folks turn on their own in a public and aggressive manner.
Back in April, the Copyright Alliance joined with forty other unions, artists’ alliances, think tanks, corporations and trade associations in defending President Obama and his Administration from a similar, narrow-minded attack from some of his “friends.”
This latest attack will be unlikely to be taken with much seriousness by the Administration. For one, it suggests that Vice President Biden knows little about intellectual property: “If Vice President Biden is truly interested in learning more about intellectual property, we hope he will continue his consultations with a group of people who share a wider range of views than those with whom he will meet today.”
Yup, at a summit focused on jobs and economic activity, the Vice President met with those creating jobs and employed in an industry producing great economic activity. How reckless of him.
The Vice President, while a Senator, was one of the foremost experts on intellectual property and its contributions to our economy. He shared some of his expertise this spring in speaking at an event in D.C., but anyone who observed him as the former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary and Foreign Relations Committees saw that knowledge in action. Oh, and did I mention that he was a co-founder and co-chairman of the Congressional International Anti-Piracy Caucus?
Yes, the best way to influence the Vice President of the United States is to tell him he has a lot to learn about an area of his expertise. Smooth.
We like to focus on the positive at the Copyright Alliance, and once again — just as when we took individual creators recently to a warm meeting at the White House — we have many positives to focus on with the Obama Administration.
On behalf of all artists and creators and copyright owners, thank you.
Here’s the media advisory from the White House, reprinted below:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
December 14, 2009
**MEDIA ADVISORY**
Vice President Biden to Host Roundtable Discussion on Enforcing Laws Against Piracy of Intellectual Property
WASHINGTON, D.C .– Tomorrow, Tuesday, December 15, at 3:15 PM EST, the Vice President will hold a roundtable discussion on this Administration’s commitment to enforcing laws against the piracy of intellectual property. The Vice President will be joined by Attorney General Eric Holder, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, FBI Director Robert Mueller, USSS Director Mark Sullivan, as well as CEOs from major media conglomerates, union representatives, legal experts and other government officials. This White House meeting is the first of its kind, and will bring together all of the stakeholders to discuss ways to combat piracy in this rapidly changing technological age.
The opening remarks by the Vice President, Attorney General Holder, Secretary Napolitano and Secretary Locke will be POOLED for TV cameras, and OPEN to print, online, radio and still photographers. An RSVP is required to participate.
WHAT: Vice President Biden to hold roundtable discussion on this Administration’s commitment to enforcing laws against the piracy of intellectual property.
WHO: Vice President Joe Biden
Attorney General Eric Holder
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano
Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke
FBI Director Robert Mueller
USSS Director Mark Sullivan
CEOs from major media conglomerates, union representatives, legal experts and other government officials
*Full List of Meeting Attendees is included below
WHEN: Tuesday, December 15, 2009
3:15 PM EST
Gather time: 2:30 PM EST on Jackson Place, outside the White House Conference Center
WHERE: White House Conference Center
726 Jackson Place (adjacent to Lafayette Square Park)
RSVP: Press who wish to cover this event should RSVP to press@ovp.eop.gov
at 11:00 AM EST and include their Date of Birth and Social Security Number.
###
Full List of Meeting Attendees:
The Honorable Joe Biden
Vice President of the United States
The Honorable Eric Holder
United States Attorney General
The Honorable Gary Locke
United States Secretary of Commerce
The Honorable Janet Napolitano
United States Secretary of Homeland Security
The Honorable Robert S. Mueller
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
The Honorable John T. Morton
Assistant Secretary, United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Department of Homeland Security
The Honorable David Kappos
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and
Director, United States Patent & Trademark Office
The Honorable Douglas A. Smith
Assistant Secretary, Office of the Private Sector
Department of Homeland Security
Valerie Jarrett
Senior Advisor and Director, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement
The White House
Mark J. Sullivan
Director, United States Secret Service
Michael Lynton
Chairman & CEO, Sony Pictures Entertainment
Barry Meyer
Chairman & CEO, Warner Bros. Entertainment
Carol Melton
Executive Vice President, Time Warner Inc.
Philippe Dauman
Chairman & CEO, Viacom
DeDe Lea
Executive Vice President, Viacom
Jeffrey Zucker
CEO, NBC Universal
Rick Cotton
General Counsel, NBC Universal
Alec French
Vice President, NCB Universal
Edgar Bronfman
CEO, Warner Music Group
Linda Bloss-Baum
Vice President, Warner Music Group
Brian Murray
President & CEO, Harper Collins
Zachary Horowitz
President & COO, Universal Music Group
Matthew Gerson
Executive Vice President, Universal Music Group
Michael Regan
Executive Vice President, News Corporation
Richard Bates
Senior Vice President, The Walt Disney Company
Toni Bush
Partner, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Daniel Glickman
Chairman & CEO, Motion Picture Association of America
Mitch Bainwol
Chairman & CEO, Recording Industry Association of America
Matthew Loeb
International President, The International Alliance of Theatrical Stage
Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of
the United States
Kim Roberts Hedgpeth
National Executive Director, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists
Taylor Hackford
President, Directors Guild of America
Jay Roth
National Executive Director, Directors Guild of America
David Israelite
President & CEO, National Music Publishers’ Association
David White
National Executive Director & Chief Negotiator, Screen Actors Guild
Alan Hoffman
Deputy Chief of Staff, Office of the Vice President
Victoria Espinel
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, Office of Management &
Budget
Terrell McSweeny
Domestic Policy Advisor, Office of the Vice President
Andrew Kline
Senior Advisor for Crime Policy, Office of the Vice President
Susan Davies
Associate Counsel to the President
James Garland
Counselor to the Attorney General and Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Justice
###
December 17th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Patrick, you’re creating a straw man while ignoring the legitimate issues others have with this summit. Imagine, for your point of view, Lawrence Lessig is VP and he chairs a summit on the subject of protecting digital technology from copyright law, inviting a variety of technology companies like Google & ones that make peer to peer file-sharing products. No record label / television or other “pro-content” executives are invited.
You can bet the outcry would be heard to the ends of the earth.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
I disagree with your outcry scenario. Please show me the pro-copyright voices in this event — http://worldsfairuseday.org/ . I am a big believer in fair use, used it every day for a decade as a reporter, and would be happy to discuss how fair use is thriving. I respect that PK can choose not to have a voice drawing a connection between strong copyright and robust fair use, that they are in fact complimentary. I didn’t put out a press release criticizing the absence of a voice stating that in that event.
The Vice President has been specifically tasked by President Obama to focus on job creation and preservation, as I’m sure you know. His event fit that mission perfectly.
I will decline to comment on the idea of Professor Lessig as VP, as fun as that would be to address.
December 17th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
It is good to know that VP Biden has realized the economic effect that copyrite theft has on our domestic economy. It is also worth noting that music and movies are 2 of our largest exports, bringing in many, many dollars to the U.S. As an artist I find it heartbreaking after all of the late nights in the studio, $$ spent on recording time, etc, etc to see the results of my labor being downloaded thousands of times from torrent sites, by people who just don’t give a damn. The notion that any exposure is good just doesn’t hold water with me, I’m not interested in a “fan” who is all about taking and not giving back. I’m not making music to get rich by any means, but a fair exchange between the artist and the consumer so that I might break even one day is a reasonable thing to hope for. This country was not built by selfish people who only wanted to take for themselves…and yes I am a Republican !
December 20th, 2009 at 9:25 am
How do you meet the substance of PK’s objection?
“No consumer or public-interest groups, technology companies, technology associations or Internet Service Providers are on the guest list. No one who questions the need for Draconian governmental policies on behalf of the privileged special interest group for whom this meeting is being held is on the guest list. ”
Madison said that the beauty and power of the copyright clause lay in its perfect balancing of public and private interests. This meeting sounds more like a lovefest of unbalancing against the public interest. Persons who are serious about copyright do well to /think/ about this issue, not wave it away with strawmen and cheerleading for one side.
December 20th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Are you serious, David? I guess you are.
I’d ask the executive director of PK about straw men; her press release on this reinvents the summit as one. She frequently boasts on her blog and in public fora about how she has numerous friends in the White House and across the Administration, and they love to have her in to chat and eagerly take her calls; PK is hardly hurting for access!
The Vice President called a summit seeking input on how to increase copyright enforcement. He has studied the issue for more years than most PK supporters have been alive. He feels strongly that there is a dearth of copyright enforcement domestically and abroad, and that this lack of enforcement of creators’ rights significantly undermines creativity, U.S. employment and our economy. Other Administration officials, including Ambassador Ron Kirk and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, repeatedly make the same argument. Some of us happen to agree with them.
Had the summit been about whether increased enforcement was needed, that likely would have drawn a different crowd. It’s understandable why PK was upset at the summit, because the folks at PK disagree with its very premise, that more copyright enforcement is needed. I’m sure they convey their own message to the Administration in all those chats they boast about.
Let me note that I take great offense at the language you quote from PK. She is accusing the Obama Administration of wishing to pursue “Draconian” policies; speaking of substance, she should demonstrate what she means with such a strong denunciation of White House leadership. It is also offensive to refer to the many union workers represented at the summit, and the many individual creators and contributors to creative efforts (make-up artists, set carpenters, etc.) also represented by their employers at the summit, as a “privileged special interest group.” The artists and creators I know hardly feel privileged, when so little is done to enforce their rights online; more than 11,000 said so when they signed a letter to President Obama and Vice President Biden on our site. How dare PK demonize hard-working American artists and creators. But it’s the end of the year, and PK needs to work folks up to get more donations; creating FUD is one way to do that.
I’d suggest that rather than paraphrasing Madison, you go read his actual language in the Federalist Papers. Given his wisdom on copyright, I’d have been happy to have had him at the summit, were he still with us. At least the U.S. Copyright Office — a strong defender of the rights of “authors,” as the Founding Fathers referred to artists and creators — is housed in a building that bears Madison’s name.
December 21st, 2009 at 2:41 pm
I wouldn’t jump to any conclusions regarding these meetings. Although I was somewhat surprised to see no ISP representation given the role they may have to play in enforcement. While Obama comes out as a strong supporter of Artists rights he’s also a a strong supporter for law, privacy and individual rights. I don’t see anyone influencing him to the point of infringing anyone else’s rights over another’s and I believe he’s made comments of that nature before.
As everyone knows in politics we’ll have to wait for the action, talk is only talk.
December 21st, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Thanks. Yes, I have read the Federalist Papers. They are pretty good.
Federalist #43 (Madison), the first and second paragraph. When I referred to “balance” I had in mind this sentence: “The public good fully coincides in both cases with the claims of individuals.” What do you think he means by that?
In this context, one might also look at Madison’s letter to Jefferson (July 31, 1788), which is also about the copyright and patent clause :
“With regard to monopolies they are justly classed among the greatest nusances in Government. But is it clear that as encouragements to literary works and ingenious discoveries, they are not too valuable to be wholly renounced? Would it not suffice to reserve in all cases a right to the Public to abolish the privilege at a price to be specified in the grant of it? Is there not also infinitely less danger of this abuse in our Governments, than in most others? Monopolies are sacrifices of the many to the few. Where the power is in the few it is natural for them to sacrifice the many to their own partialities and corruptions.”
what do you think he means by that?