Technology

On April 3, the White House Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) released two memoranda with AI guidance and requirements for federal agencies, Memorandum M-25-21 on Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust (“OMB AI Use Memo“) and Memorandum M-25-22 on Driving Efficient Acquisition of Artificial Intelligence in Government (“OMB AI Procurement Memo”).  According to the White House’s fact sheet, the OMB AI Use and AI Procurement Memos (collectively, the “new OMB AI Memos”), which rescind and replace OMB memos on AI use and procurement issued under President Biden’s Executive Order 14110 (“Biden OMB AI Memos”), shift U.S. AI policy to a “forward-leaning, pro-innovation, and pro-competition mindset” that will make agencies “more agile, cost-effective, and efficient.”  The new OMB AI Memos implement President Trump’s January 23 Executive Order 14179 on “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence” (the “AI EO”), which directs the OMB to revise the Biden OMB AI Memos to make them consistent with the AI EO’s policy of “sustain[ing] and enhance[ing] America’s global AI dominance.” 

Overall, the new OMB AI Memos build on the frameworks established under President Trump’s 2020 Executive Order 13960 on “Promoting the Use of Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in the Federal Government” and the Biden OMB AI Memos.  This is consistent with the AI EO, which noted that the Administration would “revise” the Biden AI Memos “as necessary.”  At the same time, the new OMB AI Memos include some significant differences from the Biden OMB’s approach in the areas discussed below (as well as other areas).Continue Reading OMB Issues First Trump 2.0-Era Requirements for AI Use and Procurement by Federal Agencies

Today the White House released an executive summary of the policy reviews President Trump ordered in his America First Trade Policy (AFTP) memorandum, issued on January 20.  Although the full report to the President is nonpublic, according to the executive summary it contains twenty-four chapters, organized into three main pillars: (1) Addressing Unfair and Unbalanced Trade, (2) Economic and Trade Relations with the People’s Republic of China, and (3) Additional Economic Security measures, which includes reviews of export control programs, outbound investment, and other national security policies.

Several of these reviews directly affect the technology industry broadly.  Although the executive summary contains little specific policy detail on these key issues, it does provide an overview of the Administration’s findings and next steps:Continue Reading Agencies Deliver America First Trade Policy Recommendations to White House

On March 24, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution held a hearing on the “Censorship Industrial Complex,” where senators and witnesses expressed divergent views on risks to First Amendment rights.  Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO), the Subcommittee Chair, began the hearing by warning that the “vast censorship enterprise that the Biden Administration built” has expanded into an “alliance of activists, academics, journalists, big tech companies, and federal bureaucrats” that uses “novel tools and technologies of the 21st century” to silence critics.  Senator Peter Welch (D-VT), the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, expressed skepticism about alleged censorship by the Biden Administration and social media companies, citing the Supreme Court’s 2024 opinion in Murthy v. Missouri, and accused the Trump Administration of causing “real suppression of free speech.”

The witnesses at the hearing, including law professors, journalists, and an attorney from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, expressed contrasting views on the state of free expression and risks of censorship.  Mollie Hemingway, the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist, argued that federal and state governments “fund and promote censorship and blacklisting technology” to undermine free speech in coordination with universities, non-profit entities, and technology companies.  Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor, and Benjamin Weingarten, an investigative journalist, raised similar censorship concerns, with Turley arguing that a “cottage industry of disinformation experts” had “monetized censorship” and adding that the EU’s Digital Services Act presents a “new, emerging threat” to First Amendment rights.Continue Reading Senate Judiciary Subcommittee Holds Hearing on the “Censorship Industrial Complex”

On March 12, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation advanced two nominations key to the Trump Administration’s technology policy: Mark Meador as a Commissioner for the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), and Michael Kratsios as Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (“OSTP”).  Both nominees previously had their nomination hearings in front of the Committee on February 25, described below.

Mark Meador

Meador started his career in the healthcare division of the FTC.  In his opening statement, he discussed the importance of the FTC in protecting consumers and free market competition. He specifically referenced the need to protect children in the digital environment and stated that the FTC should use its consumer protection powers to safeguard families.

During the nomination hearing, Meador faced questions about consumer protection enforcement mechanisms, “Big Tech” regulation, pharmacracy benefit managers (“PBMs”), antitrust concerns, and the agency’s direction under the new administration.Continue Reading Senate Commerce Committee Questions Trump Tech Nominees

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.Continue Reading Covington Technology Forum Spotlight – The Great Race: Keeping Up as Technology and Regulation Rapidly Evolve

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. Continue Reading NTIA Seeks Comment on Potential Effects of Satellite Direct-to-Device Operations in the L-band on GPS L1 Signal

With U.S. President Trump returning to the White House, we expect the regulatory landscape facing technology and communications companies to shift significantly, if not uniformly. 

On the one hand, media and telecommunications companies that have long been regulated heavily by the FCC can likely expect a more deregulatory environment than they have experienced under the Biden Administration (with potential caveats).  On the other, large technology companies, which have largely avoided heavy-handed regulation, can expect to face a more active regulatory environment aimed at limiting or preventing content moderation decisions that the incoming Administration has characterized as “censorship” of conservative viewpoints.  Meanwhile, bipartisan priorities—such as the commitment to ensuring national security in the telecommunications sector—will likely continue to be a major focus of regulatory agencies.  While the assessments of regulatory risks and opportunities will continue to be refined and updated as the next Trump administration takes shape, we highlight here a few trends that are likely to influence policy and regulation at the FCC over the next four years.Continue Reading Likely Trends in U.S. Tech and Media Regulation Under the New Trump Administration

On July 18, 2024, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, was reconfirmed by the European Parliament for a second five-year term. As part of the process, she delivered a speech before the Parliament, complemented by a 30-page program, which outlines the Commission’s political guidelines and priorities for the next five years. The guidelines introduce a series of forthcoming legislative proposals across many policy areas, including on defence and technology security.Continue Reading The Future of EU Defence Policy and a Renewed Focus on Technology Security

This update focuses on how growing quantum sector investment in the UK and US is leading to the development and commercialization of quantum computing technologies with the potential to revolutionize and disrupt key sectors.  This is a fast-growing area that is seeing significant levels of public and private investment activity.  We take a look at how approaches differ in the UK and US, and discuss how a concerted, international effort is needed both to realize the full potential of quantum technologies and to mitigate new risks that may arise as the technology matures.

Quantum Computing

Quantum computing uses quantum mechanics principles to solve certain complex mathematical problems faster than classical computers.  Whilst classical computers use binary “bits” to perform calculations, quantum computers use quantum bits (“qubits”).  The value of a bit can only be zero or one, whereas a qubit can exist as zero, one, or a combination of both states (a phenomenon known as superposition) allowing quantum computers to solve certain problems exponentially faster than classical computers. 

The applications of quantum technologies are wide-ranging and quantum computing has the potential to revolutionize many sectors, including life-sciences, climate and weather modelling, financial portfolio management and artificial intelligence (“AI”).  However, advances in quantum computing may also lead to some risks, the most significant being to data protection.  Hackers could exploit the ability of quantum computing to solve complex mathematical problems at high speeds to break currently used cryptography methods and access personal and sensitive data. 

This is a rapidly developing area that governments are only just turning their attention to.  Governments are focusing not just on “quantum-readiness” and countering the emerging threats that quantum computing will present in the hands of bad actors (the US, for instance, is planning the migration of sensitive data to post-quantum encryption), but also on ramping up investment and growth in quantum technologies. Continue Reading Quantum Computing: Developments in the UK and US

Although the final text of the EU AI Act should enter into force in the next few months, many of its obligations will only start to apply two or more years after that (for further details, see our earlier blog here). To address this gap, the Commission is encouraging industry to take early, voluntary steps to implement the Act’s requirements through an initiative it is calling the AI Pact. With the upcoming European elections on the horizon, the Commission on 6 May 2024 published additional details on the AI Pact and encouraged organizations to implement measures addressing “critical aspects of the imminent AI Act, with the aim of curbing potential misuse” and contributing “to a safe use of AI in the run-up to the election.”Continue Reading European Commission Calls on Industry to Commit to the AI Pact in the Run-Up to the European Elections