Technology

Since taking office, President Trump has issued dozens of executive orders, many addressing key technology policy areas that include international trade and investment, artificial intelligence (AI),  connected vehicles and drones, and trade controls.  Some of these executive actions reverse the previous administration’s efforts on these issues—such as the order revoking President Biden’s October 2023 executive order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence—and others initiate a formal review process, suggesting the Trump Administration will preserve, and perhaps strengthen or enhance, key tech policies implemented by the Biden Administration and the first Trump term.  

Several of the executive actions President Trump has taken so far offer important opportunities for stakeholders to weigh in with Executive Branch agencies as they consider next steps, including whether to revoke, expand, or retain tech policies initiated under President Biden. Key initiatives include: 

America First Trade Policy

The President’s America First Trade Policy memorandum, issued on January 20, directs certain federal agencies to review policies issued by the Biden Administration.  The memo does not provide specifically for public comment opportunities with respect to these policy reviews, but it provides insight into how the Administration may modify Biden Administration policy actions.  We recommend that interested stakeholders engage to share their views with the Administration.  Three critical areas in particular will affect stakeholders across tech industries:

  • China and Intellectual Property: Section 3(e) of the memo directs the Commerce Secretary to the assess the status of United States intellectual property rights such as patents, copyrights, and trademarks conferred upon PRC persons” and to “make recommendations to ensure reciprocal and balanced treatment of intellectual property rights with the PRC.” 
  • Connected Vehicles:  Section 4(d) The memo directs the Commerce Secretary to “review and recommend appropriate action with respect to the rulemaking by the Office of Information and Communication Technology and Services (ICTS) on connected vehicles.”  The memo specifically directs the Secretary to consider whether ICTS controls should be “expanded to account for additional connected products.”
  • Outbound Investment:  Section 4(e) of the President’s memo directs the Treasury Secretary, in consultation with the Commerce Secretary, to review whether President Biden’s outbound executive order “should be modified or rescinded and replaced,” and to “assess whether the [Treasury Department outbound investment regulation] includes sufficient controls to address national security threats.”  This review dovetails with the President’s America First Investment Policy memo, issued on February 21, which equates U.S. national security and U.S. economic security, and directs agencies to streamline regulatory reviews to promote foreign investment in the United States.

Continue Reading Flurry of Trump Administration Executive Orders Shakes Up Tech Policy, Creates Industry Opportunities

On January 29 – 31, 2025, Covington convened authorities from across our practice groups for the Sixth Annual Technology Forum, which explored recent global developments affecting businesses that develop, deploy, and use cutting-edge technologies. Seventeen Covington attorneys discussed global regulatory trends and forecasts relevant to these industries, highlights of which are captured below.  Please click here to access any of the segments from the 2025 Tech Forum.

Day 1: What’s Happening Now in the U.S. & Europe

Early Days of the New U.S. Administration

Covington attorney Holly Fechner and Covington public policy authority Bill Wichterman addressed how the incoming administration has signaled a shift in technology policy, with heightened scrutiny on Big Tech, AI, cryptocurrency, and privacy regulations. A new Executive Order on AI aims to remove barriers to American leadership in AI, while trade controls and outbound investment restrictions seek to strengthen national security in technology-related transactions. Meanwhile, the administration’s approach to decoupling from China is evolving, with stricter protectionist measures replacing prior subsidy-based initiatives.

Cross-Border Investment

Covington attorney Jonathan Wakely discussed the role of ongoing geopolitical tensions in shaping cross-border investment policies, particularly in technology-related transactions. He noted that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) remains aggressive in reviewing deals that could pose China-related risks. The new Outbound Investment Rule introduces restrictions on U.S. persons investing in Chinese companies engaged in certain AI, quantum computing, and semiconductor activities.

Updates on European Tech Regulation

Covington attorneys Sam Choi and Bart Szewczyk explained how, in light of the Draghi Report on European competitiveness and growing geopolitical pressures, the European Commission is planning to focus on “European competitiveness” in this term. The European Commission has announced plans to increase investments into its tech sectors, and find ways to ease the regulatory burden on companies. It is expected that the EU will focus on implementing, and potentially streamlining, its existing tech regulatory regime – rather than adopting new tech regulations that will impose added obligations on companies. The EU already has in place a robust regulatory regime covering privacy, cybersecurity, competition, data sharing, online platforms, and AI. In 2025, the recently adopted AI Act and the Data Act will start to apply, so companies should prepare for their implementation.  Continue Reading Covington Technology Forum Spotlight – The Great Race: Keeping Up as Technology and Regulation Rapidly Evolve

U.S. Secretary of Commerce nominee Howard Lutnick delivered a detailed preview of what to expect from the Trump Administration on key issues around technology, trade, and intellectual property.  At his nomination hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on Wednesday, January 29, Lutnick faced questions from senators about the future of the CHIPS and Science Act, global trade, and particularly U.S. technological competition with China, including export controls and artificial intelligence after the release of China’s AI model “DeepSeek.”  Lutnick, who was introduced by Vice President J.D. Vance, committed to implementing the Trump Administration’s America First agenda. 

If confirmed, Lutnick will lead the Commerce Department’s vast policy portfolio, including export controls for emerging technologies, broadband spectrum access and deployment, AI innovation, and climate and weather issues through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”).  In his responses to senators’ questions, Lutnick emphasized his pro-business approach and his intent to implement President Trump’s policy objectives including bringing manufacturing—particularly of semiconductors—back to the United States and establishing “reciprocity” with China in response to what he called “unfair” treatment of U.S. businesses.

Technology Competition with China, Export Controls, and Intellectual Property

Senators on both sides of the aisle asked Lutnick about the threat of Chinese competition in emerging technologies, such as AI.  Lutnick stated that it is evident the Chinese used “stolen” and “leveraged” U.S. technologies to develop DeepSeek and that the United States needs to stop China from “using our tools to compete with us.” 

Lutnick noted that China has found ways to evade U.S. export controls and that, under his direction, the Commerce Department will reinforce these controls with punitive tariffs to ensure compliance.  Lutnick also criticized the Chinese for refusing to respect U.S. innovators’ IP in China, stating that the Chinese should expect the same treatment in the United States under a new policy of “reciprocity.”  As Commerce Secretary, Lutnick will oversee the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), which he noted will carry out the Trump Administration’s America First agenda, including by preventing the Chinese from “abusing” the U.S. patent system.  In response to questioning from Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Lutnick also stated that he would work to reduce the backlog of patent applications pending at the USPTO. Continue Reading What Commerce Secretary Nominee Howard Lutnick’s Confirmation Hearing Tells us about Technology Policy in the Trump Administration

On 15 January 2025, the European Commission recommended that EU Member States review outbound investment in three critical technologies—semiconductors, AI, and quantum—with the aim of potentially creating an EU–wide regime to regulate such investment. EU Member States should report to the Commission on their findings and risk assessment within 18 months. These findings would inform a future policy proposal, so any introduction of outbound investment rules in the EU is likely to be several years away.

How did we get here?

Outbound investment mechanisms aim to regulate domestic companies making outward investments of capital, expertise, and knowledge that could contribute to the ‘leakage’ of critical and sensitive  technologies to third countries. Outbound investments typically take the form of EU firms purchasing equity in non-EU entities (e.g.  through joint ventures, greenfield investments), but can also take place through less structured arrangements such as R&D cooperation or transfer of employees.

The focus on outbound investment screening has its roots in transatlantic cooperation on China policy, and specifically the desire to minimize Western technology leakage to China. In particular, the U.S. Treasury Department issued new regulation prohibiting or otherwise requiring disclosure of outbound investment—in semiconductors, AI, and quantum—in Chinese entities as well as entities in other jurisdictions that hold certain interests in Chinese companies. The regulations entered into force on 2 January 2025.

Within the EU, outbound investment control was put on agenda with the European Economic Security Strategy and a subsequent white paper on outbound investment. Before then, only a few EU countries, such as Austria and Spain would screen outbound investment, and there had been no EU-wide approach on this topic.

What does it mean?

EU Member States are requested to monitor outbound investments in three critical technologies: semiconductors, AI, and quantum. The original white paper proposal also named biotechnologies amongst suggested critical technologies to be covered by the review, but this has been dropped in the new recommendation. The recommended scope of the monitoring exercise is as follows:Continue Reading Toward EU Outbound Investment Regulation

The new European Commission, which took office in December 2024, will likely rebalance its policy priorities, putting greater emphasis on competitiveness and innovation and less on risk-prevention and regulation. Over the past five years, the EU adopted several sweeping tech regulations, such as the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), and the AI Act. For the next five years, the focus is likely to be on implementing and streamlining these rules, rather than adopting new overarching tech regulatory frameworks. The Commission will also seek to facilitate greater public and private investment in technology, a sector in which the EU has lagged over the past 20 years, as noted by Mario Draghi in his report on Europe’s competitiveness.

Tech Policy Central to the EU

For the 2024-2029 term, Henna Virkkunen has been appointed as the Executive Vice-President (EVP) for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy. Virkkunen’s portfolio places tech policy at the heart of the new Commission’s agenda, reflecting its strategic importance for EU competitiveness.

Virkkunen, a former Member of the European Parliament from Finland with a robust track record in tech policy, assumes leadership of the Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CNECT). In contrast to the often-aggressive stance of her predecessor, Thierry Breton, towards industry leaders, Virkkunen is expected to be more collaborative. Virkkunen’s alignment with von der Leyen’s vision is anticipated to bring coherence to the Commission’s tech agenda. DG CNECT no longer reports to two Commissioners (Vestager and Breton in the last Commission), which will simplify its management. Placing it under EVP Virkkunen, who is relatively senior in the College of Commissioners, underscores that digital policy is a priority for this Commission.

Virkkunen will need to coordinate closely with other Commissioners, such as Stéphane Séjourné (EVP for Prosperity and Industrial Strategy), who will oversee the development of a European competitiveness fund to support emerging technologies. This initiative should align with Virkkunen’s efforts to strengthen EU capabilities in AI and semiconductors through Important Projects of Common European Interest. Virkkunen also effectively oversees four other Commissioners, including Ekaterina Zaharieva (Startups, Research and Innovation), who has been mandated to set up a European AI Research Council in order to bolster innovation, and Michael McGrath (Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection), who will revise data retention rules to address potential privacy and security concerns.

Virkkunen’s Ambitious Policy Agenda

Henna Virkkunen’s mission is both expansive and strategically aligned with the EU’s overarching goals of digital sovereignty and competitiveness. She has three core priorities: artificial intelligence (AI), cloud computing, and quantum technologies.Continue Reading What Does the New European Commission Mean for EU Tech Policy?

A Pennsylvania court recently dismissed a wiretapping complaint filed against a trio of defendants for lack of Article III standing, lack of personal jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim in Ingrao v. Addshoppers, Inc., 2024 WL 4892514 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 25, 2024).

The two plaintiffs in this case…

Continue Reading Pennsylvania Court Dismisses A Trio of Defendants in Website Wiretapping Suit Challenging Email Marketing Program

On December 27, 2024,  the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) issued a Request for Comment (“RFC”)that seeks public input on the potential impacts on the Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) L1 signal by the growth of satellite-based direct-to-device (D2D) operations that use frequencies between 1610-1660.5 MHz (the “L-band”).   As the lead spectrum advisor to the Executive Branch on spectrum issues, NTIA serves as the advocate for other agencies including the Department of Transportation (DOT) before the FCC.  NTIA issued its Request for Comment (RFC) in response to analysis prepared by DOT and states that its interest in D2D usage stems from the increasing deployment of services in which mobile devices like smartphones and Internet of Things (IoT) devices connect directly to satellite systems in the L-band, a portion of which is located near spectrum allocated to GPS.  NTIA invited comments to be filed by February 10, 2025. 

In its RFC, NTIA asked parties to discuss the DOT technical analysis as well as options for mitigating any potential impacts on GPS systems while “facilitating the potential benefits” of a growing D2D ecosystem.  The FCC has exclusive authority over requirements on L-band operators and their devices, but NTIA could use information gleaned from the comment process to make recommendations to the FCC on whether new spectrum rules are needed.  As such, satellite industry stakeholders, device manufacturers, and wireless network providers may want to share their views and educate NTIA about how this band is (and will be) used as well as its potential for coexistence with GPS devices. 

The DOT technical analysis included in the RFC builds on a study conducted by DOT in 2018 to analyze Ligado Network’s proposed terrestrial system.  In 2020, after receiving comments on the 2018 study, the FCC unanimously concluded that sufficient conditions – such as limited power levels and guard bands – were in place to protect against interference between GPS signals in the 1559-1610 MHz band and a terrestrial wireless network.  The technical analysis recently prepared by DOT and included in the NTIA RFC borrows heavily from the 2018 study and largely extrapolates from that study to conclude that D2D operations using the 1610-1660.5 MHz band may cause changes to the carrier-to-noise ratio (e.g., a 1 dB C/No) that could impair GPS receivers operating in the adjacent 1559-1610 MHz band.  (It bears mention that DOT for many years has urged the FCC to protect GPS devices from a 1 dB change in the carrier-to-noise ratio, but the FCC has not agreed with that recommendation and instead has applied its rules on harmful interference.  See generally In the Matter of Lightsquared Technical Working Group Report et al., 35 FCC Rcd. 3772 ¶¶ 37-59 (2020).The RFC seeks comment on this DOT analysis and encourages stakeholders to file any alternative technical analyses relevant to D2D operations in the L-band and the potential effects on the GPS L1 signal.Continue Reading NTIA Seeks Comment on Potential Effects of Satellite Direct-to-Device Operations in the L-band on GPS L1 Signal

From January to June 2025, Poland will hold the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, presenting an ambitious agenda organized around the concept of security to tackle some of the EU’s most pressing challenges. This blog outlines the announced focus areas for technology, trade, defense, and ESG. Each of these topics is pivotal to ensuring the EU’s competitiveness, resilience, and sustainability in an increasingly complex global landscape.

Technology: Driving Innovation and Digital Transformation

The EU’s technological landscape is at a crossroads, driven by competition with the U.S. and China, and regulatory reforms such as the Digital Markets Act and the AI Act. The Polish Presidency will advance digital resilience by focusing on cybersecurity and AI governance. It commits to “promote the strengthening of European AI research, development and competence centres across the EU and support EU activities for entrepreneurs implementing disruptive technologies.” Poland also pledges to develop a “a comprehensive and horizontal approach to cybersecurity” by holding “a discussion on best practices in Member States on investing in cybersecurity” and creating a “new EU cybersecurity strategy.”

The EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council (TTC), which has facilitated transatlantic cooperation, faces uncertain prospects under evolving political landscapes. If disbanded, new bilateral arrangements like a UK-EU TTC may emerge. In technology diplomacy, the EU will likely prioritize collaborations on export control, investment screening, and dual-use technologies with allies​, including the U.S.

Trade: Enhancing Competitiveness and Reducing Dependencies

The EU’s trade policy faces heightened complexities in balancing openness with economic security. Amidst Russia’s destabilizing actions and the economic decoupling from China, the Polish Presidency prioritizes reinforcing the EU’s economic sovereignty. Enhancements to the EU Customs Union and trade components of the Association Agreements with Ukraine and Moldova are expected, aligning economic cooperation with strategic resilience.Continue Reading “Security, Europe!” Priorities of the Polish Presidency of the EU Council

As the world anticipates the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the European Union (“EU”) braces for significant impacts in various sectors. The first Trump administration’s approach to transatlantic relations was characterized by unpredictability, tariffs on imported goods, a strained NATO relationship, and withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate agreement. If past is prologue, the EU must prepare for a renewed era of uncertainty and potential adversarial policies.

Trade Relations

Trump’s self-proclaimed identity as a “tariff man” suggests that trade policies would once again be at the forefront of his administration’s priorities. His campaign promises, which include imposing global tariffs on all goods from all countries in the range of 10 % to 20%, signal a departure from traditional U.S. trade policies. Such measures could have severe repercussions for the EU, both directly through increased tariffs on its exports and indirectly via an influx of dumped products from other affected nations, particularly China. Broad-based tariffs of this nature would likely provoke retaliatory measures from the EU.

The EU’s response toolkit would likely mirror many of the actions it employed between 2018 and 2020 in reaction to U.S. tariffs imposed during the first Trump administration. These measures would include retaliation on U.S. products to maximize political pressure by targeting Trump-supporting constituencies, pursuing chosen legal challenges against the U.S. at the World Trade Organization, and implementing safeguards to shield the EU market from an influx of Chinese and other diverted goods following U.S. tariff hikes. Very practically, the EU has suspended tariffs on US exports of steel and aluminum to its market worth €2.8 billion. The suspension expires on 1 March 2025, requiring an active decision on whether to reintroduce them or not.

In executing these measures, the EU is expected to collaborate with allies such as the UK, Canada, Japan, Australia, and South Korea to amplify its response. The EU may also explore smaller trade agreements or informal “packages” with the U.S. as part of a negotiated tariff truce. Broader protective measures could also be pursued, focusing on subsidies and industrial policies aimed at strengthening Europe’s strategic sectors, beyond actions specific to the U.S. Some cooperation with the U.S. on China may also be possible in areas like export control, investment control, and dual-use technologies.Continue Reading Policy Implications for Europe Under a Second Trump Administration

This quarterly update highlights key legislative, regulatory, and litigation developments in the third quarter of 2024 related to artificial intelligence (“AI”) and connected and automated vehicles (“CAVs”).  As noted below, some of these developments provide industry with the opportunity for participation and comment.

I.      Artificial Intelligence

Federal Legislative Developments

There continued to be strong bipartisan interest in passing federal legislation related to AI.  While it has been challenging to pass legislation through this Congress, there remains the possibility that one or more of the more targeted bills that have bipartisan support and Committee approval could advance during the lame duck period.

  • Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee: Lawmakers in the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee moved forward with nearly a dozen AI-related bills, including legislation focused on developing voluntary technical guidelines for AI systems and establishing AI testing and risk assessment frameworks. 
    • In July, the Committee voted to advance the Validation and Evaluation for Trustworthy (VET) Artificial Intelligence Act (S.4769), which was introduced by Senators John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV).  The Act would require the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) to develop voluntary guidelines and specifications for internal and external assurances of AI systems, in collaboration with public and private sector organizations. 
    • In August, the Promoting United States Leadership in Standards Act of 2024 (S.3849) was placed on the Senate legislative calendar after advancing out of the Committee in July.  Introduced in February 2024 by Senators Mark Warner (D-VA) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), the Act would require NIST to support U.S. involvement in the development of AI technical standards through briefings, pilot programs, and other activities.  
    • In July, the Future of Artificial Intelligence Innovation Act of 2024 (S.4178)— introduced in April by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-CA), Todd Young (R-IN), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)—was ordered to be reported out of the Committee and gained three additional co-sponsors: Senators Roger F. Wicker (R-MS), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ).  The Act would codify the AI Safety Institute, which would be required to develop voluntary guidelines and standards for promoting AI innovation through public-private partnerships and international alliances.  
    • In July, the Artificial Intelligence Research, Innovation, and Accountability Act of 2023 (S.3312), passed out of the Committee, as amended.  Introduced in November 2023 by Senators John Thune (R-SD), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Roger Wicker (R-MS), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), and Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), the Act would establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for “high-impact” AI systems, including testing and evaluation standards, risk assessment requirements, and transparency report requirements.  The Act would also require NIST to develop sector-specific recommendations for agency oversight of high-impact AI, and to research and develop means for distinguishing between content created by humans and AI systems.
  • Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee:  In July, the Senate Homeland Security Committee voted to advance the PREPARED for AI Act (S.4495).  Introduced in June by Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Thomas Tillis (R-NC), the Act would establish a risk-based framework for the procurement and use of AI by federal agencies and create a Chief AI Officers Council and agency AI Governance Board to ensure that federal agencies benefit from advancements in AI.
  • National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025:  In August, Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Mike Braun (R-IN) proposed an amendment (S.Amdt.3232) to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (S.4638) (“NDAA”).  The amendment would add the Transparent Automated Governance Act and the AI Leadership Training Act to the NDAA.  The Transparent Automated Governance Act would require the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) to issue guidance to agencies to implement transparency practices relating to the use of AI and other automated systems.  The AI Leadership Training Act would require OMB to establish a training program for federal procurement officials on the operational benefits and privacy risks of AI.  The Act would also require the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) to establish a training program on AI for federal management officials and supervisors.   

Continue Reading U.S. Tech Legislative, Regulatory & Litigation Update – Third Quarter 2024