Welcome!

Spotlight: SIIA and Partners Convene for EdTech Advocacy Day 2026

On April 29-30, SIIA, along with CoSN, ISTE+ASCD, and SETDA, hosted EdTech Advocacy Day and Fly-In.  More than 50 education technology leaders from 22 states descended on Capitol Hill for EdTech Advocacy Day, meeting with nearly 60 congressional offices and engaging with Administration officials to push for federal policies supporting safe and effective use of technology in K-12 classrooms. Discussions covered broadband funding, student data privacy, cybersecurity, AI, and screen time guidelines. One of the biggest topics related to state legislation focused on screentime restrictions that could deepen inequities. SIIA thanks all member organizations that supported the event, as well as the sponsors: CDW, edWeb.net, Classlink and ClassDojo. 

Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Tech

In April, we:

• Submitted a letter to a subcommittee of the House Committee on Natural Resources about the critical role of copper in the technology supply chain, calling for the U.S. government to establish a strategic copper reserve; modernize regulatory classifications for advanced recycling; and implement “friend-shoring” frameworks to secure mineral flow.
• Submitted comments to the General Services Administration (GSA) on its proposed AI System Terms and Conditions for Federal Acquisition Service solicitations. Inside AI Policy covered SIIA’s comments in this article.
• Were highlighted in Senator Cantwell’s press release on the unanimous passage of the National Quantum Initiative Reauthorization Act out of the Commerce Committee. SIIA’s endorsement of the bill was also included in Politico Morning Tech.
• Submitted a letter to the House Foreign Affairs Committee leadership outlining our views on the package of export control bills under consideration during the Committee’s April 22 markup.
• Joined a broad coalition of industry leaders, academic institutions, and public interest organizations in sending letters to House and Senate appropriators urging robust funding for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Fiscal Year 2027.
• Participated in three expert roundtable discussions hosted by Axios on national security tech; chatbot use by youth; and agentic AI security.
• Participated in an expert group of technical and policy practitioners convened by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on AI and cybersecurity policy.
• Commented on OSTP’s memo on "adversarial distillation" of American artificial intelligence models, conveying support for enhanced public-private coordination to detect, mitigate, and respond to these attacks.
• Attended a conference co-hosted by the MIT FutureTech and Google that provided expert-level insight into what impact AI is likely to have on the future workforce.
• Recorded a podcast with The USC Marshall Center for Global Supply Chain Management on the future of AI and its profound impact across various industries. 

Youth Privacy and Safety & Education Technology

In April, we:

• Co-authored an op-ed that ran in the Commonwealth Beacon. We raised concerns with a Massachusetts bill that would ban social media access for children under 14 and require parental consent for teens ages 14 and 15. SIIA also submitted a letter raising concerns about the bill.
• Submitted a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee leaders expressing strong opposition to the GUARD Act (S. 3062), warning that its mandatory age-verification requirements would create significant privacy, cybersecurity, and constitutional concerns.
• Issued a statement commending the DOJ’s Interim Final Rule extending  the compliance dates for Title II of the ADA Web Accessibility regulations by one year. 
• Were featured in Sens. Schiff’s and Rounds’ press release introducing the Literacy in Future Technologies (LIFT) Artificial Intelligence Act, bipartisan legislation to improve artificial intelligence literacy as part of students’ K-12 education.
• Published a blog “Unintended Consequences: The Cybersecurity and Privacy Implications of Strict Age Verification Mandates,” which expands on SIIA’s longstanding positions on the value of age assurance and the challenges that strict age verification mandates pose to youth, adults, and the security of the online ecosystem.

Privacy, Data Policy, and Cybersecurity

In April, we:

• Sent a letter to House Communications & Technology Subcommittee leadership endorsing the Satellite and Telecommunications (SAT) Streamlining Act, which shortens the timeframe and simplifies the processes for issuing and modifying some satellite and terrestrial licenses.
• Submitted preliminary comments to the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) on its effort to reduce friction in the exercise of California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) rights, urging the agency to preserve workable compliance options across different business models.
• Spoke on “The National Security and Privacy Implications of Commercially Available Information in the Age of AI” at the Venice Privacy Symposium alongside the National Security Agency’s head of the Office of Civil Liberties, Privacy, and Transparency; the President of Belgium’s Intelligence Oversight Committee; and the Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology Europe’s Security, Surveillance, and Human Rights Programme.
• Joined a broad coalition of business associations issuing a joint statement welcoming H.R. 8413, the Securing and Establishing Consumer Uniform Rights and Enforcement over Data (SECURE Data) Act. SIIA also issued a separate statement supporting introduction of the bill.
• Launched a new website describing the work of SIIA’s Data Policy Advisory Council (DPAC). The DPAC has been instrumental to adding nuance to our advocacy on the ever more complex landscape of data policy, and we are excited to continue our work with the group.

Competition, Innovation, and Digital Trade

In April, we:

• Submitted comments urging the FTC not to issue a new “negative option rule” as existing legal authorities provide strong protections against harmful subscription practices.
• Joined a multi-association letter to Secretary Lutnick and Ambassador Greer on EU digital regulations, urging the Administration to reinforce a clear set of priorities to ensure that commitments already undertaken by the EU are upheld in practice, including with respect to the Cloud and AI Development Act, the Digital Networks Act, and the EU Space Act. 
• Published a blog on the FTC’s case against Amazon, highlighting the FTC’s failure to disclose what specific remedy or remedies it is seeking three years after having initiated the case.
• Commented here on a new antitrust bill in California that would have imported the EU’s DMA framework into California state law, failed to make it out of the State Senate Privacy Committee.
• Commented here on the Australian Government’s latest version of its proposed News Media Bargaining Charge Bill. Under the proposed framework, a company that meets certain revenue thresholds and provides a significant social media or search service in Australia must pay a News Media Incentive Charge.  
• Submitted comments and issued statements in support of the FCC’s vote to modernize its satellite spectrum-sharing rules. See our comments, reply, and blog. 

Intellectual Property

In April, we:

• Joined a broad industry coalition urging the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to confront global trade barriers caused by unfair Standard Essential Patent (SEP) licensing practices.
• Presented at the ABA IPL annual meeting on a panel titled, "The Other Stuff: An Update on Trade Secret, Right of Publicity, and Industrial Design Law." Nate’s presentation highlighted recent updates in design law, including on the USPTO's new, more permissive guidelines regarding design patents for graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and digital icons.
• Met with staff at the office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to discuss standard essential patents (SEPs). The conversation focused specifically on the treatment and impact of SEPs and the proliferation of foreign injunctions within the context of the USTR's Special 301 report.
• Engaged with staff from the Joint Economic Committee to address the escalating threats of scams and fraud in the digital economy. The meeting emphasized the substantial and growing harms these illicit activities pose to the digital ecosystem and U.S. economy. SIIA also issued a post highlighting the FBI’s recent internet crime report about the massive impact of this problem.

Strategic Litigation

In April, we:

• Filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting Amazon’s preliminary injunction against Perplexity AI to enforce platform access controls against unauthorized AI agents accessing password-protected portions of Amazon’s website.
• Filed an amicus brief in the Anthropic PBC v. U.S. Department of War, et al. lawsuit pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the District Of Columbia. This is the third amicus brief SIIA has submitted in Anthropic’s ongoing dispute with DoW.
• Filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to support Meta, Google, and Apple in defending Section 230 immunity for in-app payment processing.
• Joined a coalition of technology companies to file an amicus brief in support of website operators on appeal from the Rose v. Variety case.
• Joined the High Tech Inventors Alliance to file an amicus brief in Barry v. DePuy, supporting DePuy’s petition for rehearing before the Federal Circuit. SIIA expressed concerns about unfounded patent assertions that rely on mathematically unsound expert testimony to calculate damages. 
• Published a new episode of SIIA’s The Business of Information Podcast. In this episode, Chris Mohr sits down with Anne Voigts, partner at Pillsbury, for a conversation centered on the case, United States v. Chatrie, to examine how the Fourth Amendment is being tested in the digital age.

State Policy

In April, we engaged in the following states:

• California: Signed onto a number of coalition letters led by the California Chamber of Commerce – AB1776, AB2465 (one and two), AB1542, AB2023, and SB1119.
• Florida: Submitted comments to Florida lawmakers regarding SB 482, warning that the bill’s broad scope and unclear definitions could negatively impact innovation and the broader AI ecosystem.
• Illinois: Testified twice in Illinois. Danny Bounds testified on SB 3735, the Student Educational Technologies Rights Act, urging lawmakers to adopt a more precise and evidence-based approach to regulating technology in classrooms. To see his oral and written testimony, click here. Bethany Abbate testified on a series of AI bills, with a focus on frontier model regulation and AI chatbots. To see her oral and written testimony, click here.
• Illinois: Submitted comments to Illinois lawmakers on SB 2875 and SB 3890, expressing support for a comprehensive state privacy framework that aligns with existing laws in states like Connecticut and Virginia. 
• Maryland: Sent a letter to Maryland Senate leadership, urging the Senate to issue an unfavorable report on HB 711, arguing that the bill would go far beyond its stated immigration-enforcement purpose and instead make broad changes to Maryland’s privacy, public records, and government data access framework.
• Rhode Island: Submitted a letter opposing Rhode Island HB7895 (Safe School Technology Act of 2026), arguing that while the bill aims to protect student safety and privacy, it would ultimately harm educational outcomes.
• Tennessee: Submitted a letter to Tennessee lawmakers expressing opposition to SB2171, the Artificial Intelligence Public Safety and Child Protection Transparency Act. The bill, as written, would impose unworkable burdens on developers, hinder innovation, and fail to effectively enhance consumer protection or public trust.
• Vermont: Submitted a letter to Vermont lawmakers outlining concerns with H.650, arguing that the bill fails to distinguish between institutional educational technology and consumer applications. Abigail later testified in the Vermont Senate Education Committee.