January Highlights: Defending American IP on the Global Stage
America’s intellectual property system increasingly faces challenges that come not from within the United States but from outside it. Historically, the largest foreign threat to American IP has been outright theft by companies and governments. But while U.S. policymakers have made strides in combating IP theft by foreign actors in recent years, subtler and more sophisticated threats have also begun to emerge. Foreign governments are using procedural and regulatory tools to weaken U.S. companies’ IP rights abroad, harming American innovators and our nation’s competitiveness on the global stage.
In the life sciences, for example, the European Union’s recently finalized General Pharmaceutical Legislation threatens to undermine medical innovation by reducing baseline periods of regulatory data protection and expanding patent infringement exemptions to cover commercial activities. In the technology sector, foreign jurisdictions including the United Kingdom and China have proposed or implemented policies that allow courts or governments to unilaterally dictate global licensing terms for standard-essential patents, overriding fair licensing rates set by the market. Furthermore, the continued influx of counterfeit goods into the United States poses serious risks to consumer safety and robs American innovators of rightfully earned revenue. These practices all undermine U.S. companies’ ability to invest in future research, manufacturing, and American jobs.
In January, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu appeared before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade to testify on how these foreign actions, left unchecked, will undermine U.S. competitiveness. To fortify U.S. innovation leadership, Iancu urged lawmakers to ensure strong IP enforcement in agreements such as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, crack down on harmful foreign practices through the U.S. Trade Representative’s Special 301 Report, and pass domestic reforms like the RESTORE Act, Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, and PREVAIL Act to strengthen patent protections here at home.
-
-
C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu testified before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, advising lawmakers on how to strengthen American IP rights and curb IP abuses abroad.
-
Read It Now: Testimony of Andrei Iancu, Hearing on Maintaining American Innovation and Technology Leadership
- Iancu’s comments on troubling foreign policies such as the European Union’s General Pharmaceutical Legislation, China’s unilateral SEP rate-setting, and Canadian and Mexican free-riding on U.S. drug innovation were the subject of an article in IPWatchdog.
- Iancu’s support for specific domestic reforms, including the RESTORE Act, the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, and the PREVAIL Act, was covered extensively in an article in VitalLaw.
- Iancu’s testimony was also featured in MeriTalk’s coverage of the hearing and in JDSupra’s weekly roundup of health care news.
-
Additional Coalition Updates
- On January 29, C4IP, the University of California, Irvine (UCI), and the Orange County Business Council (OCBC) hosted Members of Congress, academics, local policymakers, business leaders, and innovation experts for a discussion on the state of innovation in Orange County.
- On January 28, C4IP submitted public comments to the U.S. Trade Representative in response to its Request for Comments and Notice of Public Hearing Regarding the 2026 Special 301 Review.
- On January 28, C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson was a featured panelist in a USC Gould School of Law webinar on the relationship between patents, innovation, and technology leadership.
- On January 21, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen was interviewed by Fox 13 Now in Salt Lake City, Utah, about the physical and economic dangers posed by fake sports merchandise and other counterfeit products.
- Cullen’s interview also aired across 13 additional stations in Michigan, California, Missouri, Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, Maryland, Oklahoma, and Florida.
- On January 13, C4IP’s 2024 public comment critiquing the USPTO’s proposed framework for patent eligibility of AI-assisted inventions was quoted in a Eurasia Review article analyzing the evolution of USPTO guidance and case law on inventions related to artificial intelligence.
- On January 8, C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos published an opinion essay in Fortune elaborating on the work of the researchers who were awarded the 2025 Nobel Prize in Economics and explaining how their conclusions underscore the importance of strong IP protections to scientific progress and economic growth.
“[A] strong IP system prohibits companies from merely pushing each other off an existing rung of the ladder, in a zero-sum struggle. It forces them to climb higher than incumbents.”
-
- On January 8, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement responding to the European Union’s newly finalized General Pharmaceutical Legislation, which threatens to undermine medical innovation and encourage continued free-riding on American research unless it is swiftly amended to include stronger IP standards.
Government Rundown
House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Subcommittee on Research and Technology Hearing:
Advancing America’s AI Action Plan: On January 14, the House Space, Science, and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Technology held a hearing to speak with Michael Kratsios, Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, about the Trump administration’s plan to support artificial intelligence innovation. Kratsios’s testimony discussed the administration’s intent to remove regulatory barriers to AI innovation, promote the export of American AI technologies abroad, and harness AI to bolster America’s energy sector. (House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, 1/14)
House Committee on Ways and Means Hearing, Subcommittee on Trade Hearing:
Maintaining American Innovation and Technology Leadership: On January 13, the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade held a hearing to discuss how trade policymakers can best support American innovation and technology leadership. C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu testified as one of four witnesses, cautioning that discriminatory foreign regulations and weak IP enforcement abroad threaten American technological supremacy and economic security and urging U.S. policymakers to respond with strong trade enforcement and legislative reform to strengthen patents. (House Ways and Means Committee, 1/13)
Fact Check
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has given creators and inventors new technological tools to enhance their work — but it has also made it increasingly challenging for Americans to safeguard their intellectual property, identities, and reputations. AI “deepfake” technology has enabled scammers and bad actors to digitally clone the voices and likenesses of all individuals — including creators, artists, and everyday Americans — which they can then exploit illegally for profit without consent or knowledge. This predatory strategy threatens innovation and creative output, as it harms creators’ ability to receive fair compensation from their IP and exposes anyone to reputational and economic harm from unauthorized digital replicas.
A bipartisan coalition in Congress is seeking to address this growing problem through the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act, which would establish a federal right to control digital replicas and protect against exploitation. Unfortunately, some vocal opponents of IP rights are pushing back. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) published an article arguing that the NO FAKES Act is not necessary and would lead to over-censorship of creators and harm innovation.
EFF’s claims about the NO FAKES Act mischaracterize the bill and its likely effects. In reality, the NO FAKES Act is an urgently needed reform that establishes common-sense protections and would benefit all Americans — not just creators. Below, we set the record straight:
| Claim: NO FAKES will inevitably lead to over-censorship. |
| In reality: EFF’s claim that the NO FAKES Act will lead to over-censorship of real creativity and free speech is speculation that overlooks the already-observable real harm being inflicted on creators and others alike. The bill contains numerous safeguards specifically to ensure that non-infringing content is protected from wrongful takedowns. It includes penalties for false or deceptive notices, meaning that anyone who knowingly and falsely reports that a replica is unauthorized will be liable for $5,000 or more in damages. Furthermore, the bill explicitly protects First Amendment activities by ensuring AI replicas used in news, documentaries, satire, and parody are exempted from liability. These provisions ensure that unauthorized commercial exploitation will be curtailed while legitimate public discourse and creative expression remain unhindered. In all of EFF’s hypotheticals, people whose content or AI tools are wrongly flagged for violating other individuals’ IP rights will have clear legal recourse to defend themselves. But under the status quo, many individuals and creators whose likenesses are copied by AI have no recourse — the extent of their rights depends on a patchwork of uneven and often outdated state laws. The NO FAKES Act levels the playing field and ensures that creators have the minimum legal tools needed to enforce their IP rights against theft. |
| Claim: NO FAKES will be a “disaster” for innovation. |
| In reality: The opposite is true. The NO FAKES Act is a vital reform to ensure that innovators can thrive, especially within the creative industries. Creators’ control over their IP, including their likenesses and voices, is what creates the essential incentive for artists to take creative risks, develop their craft, and publish their work. But if creators of AI “deepfakes” are allowed to infringe these rights — such as by copying a musical artist’s voice — and profit off that infringement, it can harm demand for the artist’s genuine work, undermining their ability to earn a living from their creativity and talent. The proliferation of AI “deepfakes” could also undermine artists’ and creators’ public image and reputation. This risk creates an incentive for creators not to create and publish new works that could be used to fuel future AI copycats. By defending individuals across the country from unauthorized AI copying, the NO FAKES Act would protect against these risks, ensuring that all kinds of artists and creators remain encouraged to produce innovative art, music, and other creative works. It would also strengthen the U.S. economy. As of 2023, the creative industries contributed $1.2 trillion to the U.S. economy and supported 5.4 million jobs. The stable federal protections created by the NO FAKES Act would ensure these industries remain stable and can thrive for years to come while AI technology advances. |
| Claim: The NO FAKES Act is made redundant by the 2025 “Take It Down” Act. |
| In reality: The “Take It Down” Act and the NO FAKES Act are both vital and serve entirely different purposes. The “Take It Down” Act was specifically designed to combat non-consensual intimate imagery and sexual deepfakes created by AI. However, it was not designed to protect an individual’s professional identity or the economic value of their likeness in other contexts, such as music, film, or advertisements. The NO FAKES Act would fill that gap by establishing a clear, enforceable, federally protected right for all individuals to have control over their own voice and likeness, regardless of the context in which it is used. EFF’s argument that lawmakers should “wait to see” whether the “Take It Down” Act succeeds at its goals before passing the NO FAKES Act misses the point. Nothing about the “Take It Down” Act — or any other bill focusing on combating harmful AI replicas that has been enacted to date — makes NO FAKES obsolete. However, waiting to pass the NO FAKES Act until AI exploitation of hardworking creators has grown impossible to ignore could allow IP thieves to severely damage the U.S. economy and the output of our world-leading creative industries. |
Celebrating American Innovation
Inventor Spotlight
This month, C4IP is recognizing Stephanie Kwolek (1923-2014), a pioneering chemist who revolutionized materials science and saved lives through her invention of Kevlar.
- Kwolek joined chemical manufacturer DuPont in 1946 as a researcher, intending to earn money for medical school, but instead discovered a passion for polymer chemistry that reshaped her entire career.
- In 1964, while working to create a fuel-efficient material for car tires, Kwolek discovered a new material that could be spun into fibers five times stronger than steel — what we now know as Kevlar.
- Kwolek patented her invention in 1974 and ultimately earned 17 patents in her career.
- Kwolek later earned the National Medal of Technology and the USPTO’s American Innovator Award for her pioneering work.
- Kwolek’s invention is perhaps best known for its impact-absorbent and heat-resistant properties; today, Kevlar is used in lifesaving equipment for soldiers, firefighters, and even professional racecar drivers.
- But the material also has numerous other applications, including being used in tires, fiber-optic cables, bicycles, boats, aircraft, and International Space Station modules.
- Today, the global market for Kevlar is estimated at over $1.6 billion
[PHOTO: American Chemical Society]
What’s Happening in Congress
Democratic and Republican lawmakers continue to weigh legislation to prioritize strengthening IP protections, including the reintroduction of several significant bills from the previous Congress:
- The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), which would revitalize innovation and investment in crucial high-tech sectors by reversing arbitrary, judicially created exceptions to patent eligibility.
- The Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act, which would level the legal playing field for inventors and give them a fair chance to defend their patents from unauthorized infringement by larger competitors.
- The Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act, which was reintroduced in both the House and Senate. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would reestablish injunctive relief as the primary legal remedy for patent infringement, reaffirming innovators’ constitutional rights to the exclusive ownership of their inventions.
- The Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act, which would protect all individuals from having their voice and visual likeness copied by generative AI without consent.
We will continue to track movement on these bills and provide updates on legislative developments in upcoming editions. In the interim, you can find resources on these key issues here.