The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing today on the nomination of Victoria Espinel for the position of Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. I have included video and a transcript of the hearing below.
[Hearing to consider pending nomination Part II begins, after introductions, at around 94:00]
Leahy (D-VT) [100:30:] If you were confirmed as the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, or IPEC, would you be willing to appear before the Committee and testify?
Espinel: Yes I would. As you know so well, this role was created and defined by legislation and this position is fully accountable to Congress. Among the duties that I would have if I were confirmed would be to submit an annual report to Congress that would report on the activities of the interagency committees that I would chair. If I am confirmed I look forward to working closely with this Committee, and ensuring that you receive information that is both timely and useful.
Leahy (D-VT) [102:30]: Is there anything that you would like to add to [the record]?
Espinel: I would say that I would like to thank the President. I would very much like to thank you Mr. Chairman Leahy and the members of the Committee. I am greatly humbled to be here and I would like to thank you for your leadership in creating this position and supporting the intellectual property that supports our country.
Feingold (D-WI) [121:10] Ms. Espinel, your prepared testimony is certainly a strong statement about the importance of enforcing intellectual property rights, and no one could really argue with that. You speak convincingly about the coordination among the various agencies that is needed to ensure the enforcement and protection are done efficiently. Can you give me an idea of what steps you will take to make sure that these enforcement activities do not undermine public
access to information that is so crucial for innovation and other priorities of the United States; and specifically, do you see it as part of your portfolio to coordinate with science and information library agencies on this issue?
Espinel: Thank you Senator. I think it’s part of this position to coordinate and find a consensus among all the different agencies and offices of the U.S. Government that are charged with protecting and enforcing intellectual property, and place importance on intellectual property.
I think intellectual property is a long-term strategy in many ways so that there will always be issues, as with all policy areas, where there will have to be balances found. One of the things that I think this position is poised to do is try to work with in a very open and transparent way all of the agencies and all of the stakeholders and the general public of the United States to try to develop a strategy that will protect intellectual property efficiently and effectively, but will do that taking into account the variety of views and opinions that exist.
Feingold (D-WI) [123:30]: So do you agree that overzealous enforcement of intellectual property rights could reduce our citizens’ legitimate access to information? And will you ensure transparency in policy development so that all of the ramifications of these enforcement activities can be accessed with the maximum public involvement?
Espinel: This Administration is very committed to transparency. If I am confirmed by the Senate, I will uphold that policy of transparency and take it very seriously. And I will look for the appropriate forum to do so within the office that I will head.
Franken (D-MN) [1:23:10]: The FCC recently put out a proposal for a more free and open internet. Net neutrality rules. I think what they’re doing is critically important. When Justice Sotomayor was in her hearings I raised this issue as a Constitutional issue of making sure that information flows freely on the internet. Ms. Espinel, I also want to prevent piracy, and you’ve talked about balance. So speaking of balancing, how should regulations balance the need to stop piracy with the need to protect the free flow of information on the internet?
Espinel: Thank you Senator. I think that is an excellent and very important question these days. Clearly internet piracy is a very serious problem our country is facing, and has serious ramifications for our economy. At the same time, openness on the internet is one of the reasons that the internet has been so successful and helpful to so many over the past few decades.
Openness however doesn’t apply to unlawful content. I believe there is way to ensure that the internet is open and we’re not restricting access to legitimate information to people, while trying to contain the very serious problem of internet piracy that we face. As you mention, the FCC is looking at this at this moment. If I were confirmed I would certainly be working with the FCC as well as the other relevant agencies to try to develop a strategy that would efficiently protect and try to stop internet piracy. But one that is consistent with this Administration’s policy of transparency and trying to ensure that we promote the internet.
Franken (D-MN) [125:40]: What do you see as some of the main tensions there? I would just like to get your thoughts on that because there’re all kinds of issues of maintaining your network — people trying to download enormous files — versus the free flow and no restrictions . . . What do you see as the tensions? Net neutrality and this whole issue of intellectual property?
Espinel: I don’t know that there necessarily have to be those tensions. I know that exist, but it seems to me that there has to be a way that we can find to move forward where we can ensure that the internet is open, ensure that there is reasonable management of networks, and at the same time, try to ensure that the internet is not being used as a means of distribution for all types of illegal content, including pirated content.
If I was confirmed, one of the issues that I would be grappling with in coordination with the other agencies is how we go forward in devising a strategy that accomplishes both of those goals.
Recent scholarship from the 
