Welcome!

Artificial Intelligence and Federal R&D

In August/September, we:

• Issued a statement endorsing the SANDBOX Act of 2025 and were quoted in an Inside AI Policy article about the bill. Our endorsement was also featured in a press release published by the Senate Commerce Committee.
• Submitted a letter for the record to the House Subcommittee on Science, Manufacturing, and Competitiveness regarding the September 10, 2025 hearing, AI’ve Got a Plan: America’s AI Action Plan. SIIA highlights the importance of Congress taking steps to build on the White House’s AI Action Plan to ensure U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence innovation while promoting a risk-based, pro-innovation policy framework.
• Spoke on Agentic AI Panel at the University of Southern California Global Supply Chain Summit. The panel explored the transformative potential of AI agents for modernizing global supply chain solutions. Bethany provided an overview of the current AI policy landscape, highlighting the growing fragmentation of approaches across U.S. states and the international sphere. You can watch the panel here.
• Met with the Department of Commerce to discuss concerns around export controls, and also provide feedback on the AI Export Program, created by executive order. SIIA provided suggestions on how the program guidance (which Commerce is drafting) can be designed to promote adoption of technology abroad in a more flexible manner that also addresses needs of potential customers.
• Were quoted in Sens. Hickenlooper’s and Capito’s press release reintroducing the Validation and Evaluation for Trustworthy AI (VET AI Act).
• Convened a members-only working group and held our first meeting to discuss emerging policy proposals that will impact AI chatbots and youth.
• Published a blog discussing how the growing emergence of different AI rules across the states risk creating a confusing patchwork that will harm consumers, small businesses, and innovation. Paul and Bethany argue instead for a coordinated, consistent federal AI regulatory framework.
• Published a blog titled “America’s AI Future Depends on Energy Today.” The blog focuses on encouraging policymakers to address the country’s urgent energy demands in order to keep pace with AI innovation. 

Education and Children's Privacy

In August/September, we:

• Attended an invitation-only White House AI in Education Task Force event. Aligning with the “Pledge to America’s Youth,” SIIA’s Chris Mohr was able to join members of the Trump Administration, the First Lady, some of our member organizations, as well as other technology companies, to celebrate public and private commitments to the future of AI education. To see Chris’s statement, please click here.
• Hosted an AI Education reception in Washington, D.C. Following the White House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence Education meeting, SIIA brought together AI Education and Workforce Champions and policy leaders at Joe's Seafood in downtown Washington. The reception featured remarks from White House officials, including Dr. Lynne Parker (Former Principal Deputy Director at OSTP) and Taylor Stockton (Chief Innovation Officer, Department of Labor), while attendees networked and discussed commitments under the Pledge to America's Youth.
• Were featured, along with member companies Google, Pearson Education, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Cengage, McGraw Hill Education, and Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, in an article published by the White House featuring major commitments to the “Pledge to America’s Youth.” We also posted a blog highlighting SIIA members’ commitments to the pledge.
• Submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Education (USED) on its proposed priorities for advancing artificial intelligence in education. We emphasized the importance of AI literacy for educators and students, the need for strong research and development to maximize AI’s potential, and the necessity of protecting student data privacy.
• Hosted a webinar with Access 4 Learning (A4L) Executive Director Steve Smith and Director of Data Privacy David Sallay. Steve and David discussed the Student Data Privacy Consortium's National Data Privacy Agreement (NDPA), the process behind the NDPA, and how they're approaching artificial intelligence and privacy.
• Submitted comments to the U.S. Senate’s working group on the Universal Service Funds highlighting how connectivity is critical for our member companies. Our comments aligned to our amicus briefs filed in Consumers Research v. F.C.C.
• Released a new episode of SIIA’s “The Business of Information” Podcast. Chris Mohr sits down with John Buchanan, Chief Growth Officer at GoGuardian, to discuss how data, AI, and purpose-driven strategy are shaping the future of education technology.
• Published a blog on children’s online privacy, arguing that Congress should take a balanced approach to internet regulation that protects privacy and safety while preserving online freedom.

Privacy, Data, Cybersecurity and Government Procurement

In August/September, we:

• Submitted comments to the House Committee on Financial Services on modernizing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). The comments emphasize protecting consumer privacy while ensuring clarity for businesses, recommending against broad expansions of “financial institution” definitions, preserving third-party data sharing liability structures, and promoting flexible data minimization practices to balance innovation and security.
• Issued a statement supporting the EU General Court’s decision in Latombe v. Commission to affirm the validity of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (DPF). The decision impacts SIIA members in the software and information sectors that engage in personal data transfers.
• Sent a letter to Senate Banking Committee leaders along with a statement endorsing the Ownership Clarity Act, which would allow licensed third-party service providers (TPSPs) access to beneficial ownership information from FinCEN.
• Submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) addressing how fragmented state laws in privacy, AI, and content moderation impose significant compliance costs and hinder interstate commerce, advocating for federal preemption to foster a unified regulatory landscape that supports innovation while protecting consumers.
• Joined a coalition letter calling on the Senate and House to include in the FY2026 NDAA provisions to increase the micro-purchase and simplified acquisition thresholds and to permit advance payments.
• Advocated for the reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA 2015). We issued a public statement applauding Rep. Garbarino’s introduction of H.R. 5079, the Widespread Information Management for the Welfare of Infrastructure and Government Act, and another statement supporting its passage and urging the Senate to reauthorize CISA 2015. We also joined a multi-industry letter to Congress, and published a blog.
• Signed a letter, along with the Operational Technology Cybersecurity Coalition and other cybersecurity organizations, urging Congress to reauthorize and strengthen the State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program (SLCGP). 

Competition, Digital Trade, and Innovation Policy

In August/September, we:

• Submitted a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Ranking Member Jamie Raskin regarding the Committee’s hearing on Europe’s Threat to American Speech and Innovation. The letter focused on the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and its harmful impact on American companies, online speech, innovation, and cybersecurity.
• Released a statement calling on both the U.S. government and European Commission to begin a formal dialogue around members’ concerns about certain aspects of the EU’s digital rulebook and enforcement of the Digital Markets Act.
• Submitted two sets of comments on the Digital Markets Act (DMA). In our comments on the DMA itself, we reiterated our long-standing concerns that the DMA’s one-size-fits-all regulatory framework, arbitrary thresholds for gatekeeper designations have hindered innovation in Europe, increased compliance costs, and further fragmented the EU digital market. In our response on the proposed extension of the DMA to AI, we emphasized that AI is a general-purpose technology with applications across multiple industries and already subject to DMA oversight when incorporated into covered platform services.
• Issued a statement on the U.S. v. Google remedy trial. While the court affirmed the competitive nature of the search and generative AI ecosystems and correctly rejected many of the fundamentally flawed remedies proposed by the DOJ, we are concerned that several of the remedy proposals adopted by the court cut against long-standing principles designed to benefit consumers and support dynamic markets.  
• Joined a coalition letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick highlighting the need to address longstanding digital trade barriers in Korea. Addressing these barriers would strengthen the bilateral trade relationship and create new opportunities for American businesses to compete.
• Joined the Hub and Spoke antitrust podcast to discuss the future of digital regulation across the Atlantic. SIIA’s Mort Skroejer talked about the politics and policy behind the Digital Markets Act and whether a robust regulatory dialogue could help ease current trade tensions.
• Published a blog discussing the challenges associated with a growing number of governments abroad advancing digital trade barriers, including digital services taxes, which are targeted levies imposed on revenue generated from certain online services in those markets.

Space Policy

In August/September, we:

• Filed a submission to the FCC on Equivalent Power-Flux Density (EPFD) limits for satellite broadband providers in the Ka and Ku spectrum. SIIA followed this with a reply filing addressing counter arguments and arguing that regulatory updates are a crucial part of improving America’s position as a leader in space-based infrastructure. We also joined a bipartisan group of stakeholders in a letter to the FCC urging the agency to update its outdated regulations on satellite power limits.
• Sent a letter to the US Department of Commerce’s Office of Space Commerce following the EU’s release of draft text of the EU Space Act. Our letter raises concerns about these non-trade barriers to American satellite companies.
  

Intellectual Property

In August/September, we:

• Joined a coalition letter to the Secretary of Commerce and the Attorney General, addressing the government’s recent statement of interest in Radian Memory Systems v. Samsung Electronics that supports making it easier for non-practicing entities (NPEs) to obtain injunctions in patent disputes.
• Were invited to serve as an observer in the Uniform Law Commission’s effort regarding laws that govern name, image, and likeness. As this project moves forward, we look forward to keeping you informed of developments.
• Met with many stakeholders on the NO FAKES Act. Based on our input and the concerted efforts of other trades, it appears that the cosponsors and others on SJC are considering amendments to improve the bill, including amendments aimed at SIIA’s top priorities.  
  

Strategic Litigation

In August/September, we:

• Joined an amicus brief in the Epic v. Google litigation in the Ninth Circuit that relates to Google’s Play Store on Android. The brief argues generally that the injunction against Google harms competition, and that the panel’s decision dangerously expands antitrust remedies beyond Supreme Court precedent, forcing Google to provide aid to direct competitors and compelling third-party developers to license valuable intellectual property under problematic terms.
• Joined an amicus brief in the In re HighLevel case, which involves a mandamus petition from the USPTO to the Federal Circuit and relates to the USPTO’s discretionary denials of meritorious challenges to patent validity through the inter partes review process.
• Filed an amicus brief in the 11th Circuit case challenging Florida's law (HB 3) restricting minors' access to social media. The law is particularly concerning for the software industry because it regulates services based on common design features like infinite scroll, use of algorithms, and push notifications.
• Joined a coalition of trade associations in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the case In re SandDisk and Western Digital. The brief supports a petition for mandamus relief challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) new "settled expectations" rule. This is the second amicus brief that SIIA has joined supporting a mandamus petition on the application of the USPTO’s new rules governing how patent validity challenges are handled in PTAB cases.

State Policy

In August/September, we:

• Sent a veto letter to Governor Gavin Newsom on SB53 (Weiner) on large frontier AI models and CalCompute. Previously, we issued a statement opposing SB53 in September and engaged with the CalChamber SB53 working group throughout the 2025 California legislative session. The statement was quoted in an Inside AI Policy article.
• Sent a veto letter to Governor Gavin Newsom (D) on AB1064 (Bauer-Kahan), the LEAD for Kids Act. While well-intentioned, SIIA warns the bill’s expansive definition of “companion chatbots” could restrict beneficial AI tools used in education, workforce development, and access to information.
• Joined a coalition letter in opposing California’s Assembly Bill 1018, which seeks to regulate automated decision systems (ADS) to prevent algorithmic discrimination. The coalition advocates for a risk-based approach focused on high-risk scenarios while preserving anti-discrimination protections.
• Submitted comments to the Colorado Attorney General on the proposed rulemaking under SB 24-041, which amends the Colorado Privacy Act to strengthen protections for minors’ online data by addressing heightened risks of harm
• Issued a statement urging opposition to a proposed amendment to Colorado's SB 004, arguing it would impose unprecedented restrictions on AI innovation and create an untenable liability framework for providers uninvolved in employment or consumer decisions.