Washington, D.C. — TechNet, the national, bipartisan network of tech CEOs and senior executives, submitted comments from President and CEO Linda Moore in support of the U.S. International Trade Commission’s (ITC) proposed rulemaking under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The rulemaking would strengthen the integrity of Section 337 investigations, a key tool U.S. technology companies use to defend their intellectual property against unfair foreign trade practices. If adopted, it would require parties alleging harms associated with Section 337 cases and related proceedings to disclose ownership, financial, or controlling interests.

In the letter, Moore argued that these transparency requirements will combat foreign adversaries that attempt to undermine America’s technology leadership by anonymously funding litigation to slow the domestic production of semiconductors, artificial intelligence (AI) hardware such as chips and memory units, and 5G infrastructure, among other products. Moore stated:

“The private sector and federal policymakers together have invested heavily in bolstering our homegrown production of the hardware needed to power the next wave of American innovation. The ITC was created precisely to protect domestic industries from anti-competitive foreign practices, and its proposed rules for strengthening disclosure requirements in intellectual property disputes will better equip it to carry out its mission. Shining a light on the opaque funders of Section 337 litigation is key to protecting our critical technology supply chains and our economy.”

TechNet also made recommendations to strengthen the proposed rulemaking, arguing that the final rule should also require disclosure of:

  • Any entity that stands to benefit, financially or otherwise, from any agreement that contemplates the outcome of the investigation;
  • Any entity with a material interest in the outcome of the investigation, whether that interest arises from a direct agreement with the party or from an agreement with the party’s counsel;
  • Any entity with a financial interest in the outcome of the investigation, including those with an ownership interest above a 10 percent threshold, traced up the chain of ownership until a party has been identified;
  • A statement with a brief description of any funding arrangement; and
  • Funding or necessary approval in related litigation, given that Section 337 proceedings are typically part of larger patent litigation campaigns that include district court actions.

Read the full comment letter here.