Brian Fung

Analyst: A Sprint and T-Mobile merger has a 10 percent chance of approval

That Sprint wants to buy T-Mobile is pretty much the telecommunications industry's worst-kept secret right now. The two companies reportedly turned a corner in their negotiations: Reports suggest the two companies have settled on general terms for a deal, around $40 a share -- or about $32 billion -- with a $1 billion break-up fee if the merger doesn't go through.

The feds seem largely skeptical of yet another tech merger on top of Comcast-Time Warner Cable and AT&T-DirecTV. In fact, it's such a long shot that a top telecom analyst thinks there's only a 10 percent chance that the Justice Department and the Federal Communications Commission will give Sprint-T-Mobile a green light.

"Softbank has apparently concluded that its odds of success are greater now -- while the FCC and DOJ are simultaneously reviewing Comcast/TWC and AT&T/DTV -- than they would be later," New York-based Moffett Nathanson wrote in a research note. "But realpolitik says otherwise. Approving all three would be untenable for the left. Rejecting all three would be untenable for the right. At least one of the three would have to be rejected. And it's easy to see which one of the three it would be."

Why liberals are singling out Harry Reid over net neutrality

Net neutrality advocates are ramping up pressure on a top Democrat to support stronger regulations on Internet providers. National progressive groups urged Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to get behind reclassifying broadband as a utility -- a move that would give regulators at the Federal Communications Commission much greater authority to ban Internet fast lanes.

The liberal groups argued in a letter that allowing the FCC's current net neutrality proposal to move forward would make it harder for activists, artists and journalists to do their jobs.

"We urge you to -- as soon as possible -- publicly call on Chairman [Tom] Wheeler and his FCC to reclassify Internet service as a telecommunications service under Title II and implement strong net neutrality regulations that will ban all unreasonable technical discrimination (and define pay-to-play arrangements as inherently unreasonable)," according to the letter, which was signed by groups including MoveOn, CREDO, SumofUS and Daily Kos.

Altogether, the letter's signatories claim to represent 10 million people -- and 100,000 of Reid's own Nevada constituents. It's not hard to see why they'd target Sen Reid. As the head of his party in the Senate, Reid has the power to set the body's agenda, and pressuring the Senate leadership might counter other lawmakers who've been openly resisted the idea of reclassification.

Google will now name and shame e-mail providers that don’t support encryption

Security obsessives will know that although Google has begun encrypting the links between its own servers -- so the National Security Agency can't hack our e-mails as they're traveling across the company's systems -- we risk losing those protections as soon as our messages leave Google's walled garden.

The trouble is that encryption only works if both your e-mail program and your recipient's support it. So if, for example, you're on Gmail, but your friend uses a Comcast.net e-mail address, chances are your messages will show up unencrypted at the other end, because Comcast doesn't have encryption enabled.

Google estimates that up to half of the e-mail sent between Gmail and other sites are not encrypted -- a situation that could be easily fixed with the right investments, according to a Google employee who declined to be named because he wasn't authorized to speak publicly.

"As my engineer colleague said, it's not rocket science — it's elbow grease," the employee said. To draw more attention to the issue, Google intends to start publicly identifying which other companies support e-mail encryption, and which don't, as part of its periodic transparency reports.

The company said that it's creating a new section in the report that explains which domains support Transport Layer Security (TLS) -- the encryption protocol that automatically shields e-mail from prying eyes if both the sender's and the receiver's providers have it switched on. Since December, the share of encrypted e-mails sent from Google to other providers has risen from 30 percent to 65 percent, according to the company.

How hard should it be for cops to track your location? A new lawsuit revives the debate.

Privacy advocates sued a Florida police department over a controversial surveillance technology that, they say, improperly lets authorities track the movements of thousands of cellphone users without a warrant.

The suit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and obtained by The Washington Post, revives a perennial debate about the judicial standards law enforcement officials must meet to gather geolocation information -- and once they receive a court's permission, how much of that data they can collect and store.

It also implicates decades-old privacy legislation that was written in the age of the telephone but has been liberally interpreted to allow much greater surveillance in the Internet era, according to the law's critics.

The ACLU alleges in the suit that law enforcement officials in Sarasota (FL), acting on behalf of the US Marshals Service, obtained judicial approval to use a type of surveillance tool known as a "stingray." Used in an investigation, stingray equipment can help police identify which cellphones may be operating in an area by establishing a fake cell tower; nearby devices then automatically try to connect with the stingray device, which logs the connections for forensic analysis unbeknownst to the cellphone users.

Is Apple finally relaxing its stance on Bitcoin apps?

In a potential course correction, Apple is opening to the idea of letting iPhone users make payments with bitcoins and other alternate currencies.

The company's updated its developer guidelines to allow apps that "facilitate" transactions made with "approved" cryptocurrencies: “Apps may facilitate transmission of approved virtual currencies provided that they do so in compliance with all state and federal laws for the territories in which the app functions.”

That Apple is addressing virtual currencies explicitly is another indication that Bitcoin and the like are becoming increasingly mainstream, even if the company is reserving a huge amount of say over what it'll allow on the app store. It's also possible that Apple will continue to keep Bitcoin apps off-limits, as it requires developers to be legally compliant in "all territories" -- which, considering how many regulators are still struggling to understand the technology, might restrict developers for a long time.

WWDC: Three awesome new Apple features that also protect your privacy

Apple critics are already bummed that the company didn't release a new TV or shiny iDevice during its 2014 keynote at the World Wide Developers' Conference. But WWDC has always been mainly about the software, and for fans of iOS and Mac OS X, there's actually a lot to like.
Some of the biggest changes take place under the hood.

And this time, Apple has released a handful of software features that promise to improve security without sacrificing ease of use, which is often the tradeoff when it comes to protecting your data. Here's a sampling.

  • Mindblowingly huge e-mail attachments. The next version of Apple's operating system, Yosemite, will support attachments that are up to 5 GB in size.
  • A fingerprint sensor API. Apple introduced a hardware update to the iPhone that let users sign into their Apple accounts and unlock their devices just by pressing their thumb to the built-in sensor. Now, Apple's making that same hardware available to developers, meaning you'll soon be able to log in and make purchases with your fingerprint on third-party apps, too.
  • Support for third-party keyboards. After years of forcing people to use the keyboard that came with the iPhone, Apple is allowing other keyboards onto iOS.

The FCC may consider a stricter definition of broadband in the Netflix age

What is high-speed Internet? Believe it or not, there is a technical definition. Currently, it's set at 4 megabits per second. Anything less, and in the government's view, you're not actually getting broadband-level speeds.

These days, 4 Mbps may not get you very much anymore. The rise of streaming music and video means that all the things we do online now require a lot more bandwidth compared to even five years ago.

So the Federal Communications Commission is beginning to consider whether to raise the definition of broadband -- a change that might have big implications for the way we regulate Internet providers.

The FCC soon intends to solicit public comments on whether broadband should be redefined as 10 Mbps and up, or even as high as 25 Mbps and up, according to an agency official who asked not to be named because the draft request was not yet public.

The new threshold would likely increase the number of people in the United States that statistically lack broadband, which in 2012 amounted to 6 percent of the population. Depending on the responses, the FCC may decide that broadband must be defined as being at least 10 Mbps, or even 25 Mbps.

Where to get Hachette books now (other than Amazon)

For the first time, Amazon is publicly acknowledging a long-simmering dispute between it and a major publishing company, Hachette Book Group.

At the heart of the fight is how much money will flow to Hachette from Amazon sales of e-books. But because of the disagreement, Amazon is now playing hardball with the French-based publisher by stocking fewer print copies in its warehouses, ending support for Hachette pre-orders and making it generally more difficult for consumers to read Hachette-linked authors, such as J.K. Rowling.

For titles where there are no copies on hand, customers can still place orders through Amazon, the company said, but they will take longer since Amazon must first order the inventory from Hachette.

"If you do need one of the affected titles quickly, we regret the inconvenience and encourage you to purchase a new or used version from one of our third-party sellers or from one of our competitors," Amazon said. (Amazon chief executive Jeffrey P. Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

What is Google’s endgame for broadband?

Marc Andreessen, the Silicon Valley investor and the creator of the first widely used Web browser, thinks it won't be long until most places have three, four or even five ways to connect to the Internet.

You've got your traditional broadband providers in the cable companies. Then you've got your other traditional providers in the telecom industry. You've got your wireless companies, some of whom envision serving mobile data to you at speeds comparable to fixed wireline cable.

And then you've got new entrants like Google Fiber, which has the luxury of having seen how all the other providers approached the problem and can now think of ways to do it differently. In fact, Google Fiber could become so good at rethinking the broadband industry that it winds up being a global phenomenon, says Andreessen. Still, despite the prospect of Google someday becoming another connectivity behemoth like Comcast or Verizon, one thing sets it apart.

For now, at least, it has no interest in creating Internet "fast lanes" or signing paid interconnection agreements with companies like Netflix. As Google Fiber spreads, chances are it will try to promote those values as a way of standing out from the crowd.

Marc Andreessen: In 20 years, we’ll talk about Bitcoin like we talk about the Internet today

A Q&A with Marc Andreessen, cofounder of Netscape. The investor and Web browser pioneer thinks we'll all look back in 20 years and conclude that Bitcoin was as influential a platform for innovation as the Internet itself was.

He says that tech companies think their meetings with President Barack Obama on privacy are a waste of time. And he calls net neutrality a "lose-lose."

In a wide-ranging interview with The Washington Post, Andreessen painted a picture of a future that's distributed, messy and fraught with tension and the “balkanization of the Internet.” He added that Bitcoin originally came from the fringes, but is being mainstreamed today. And regulators are still trying to catalog it. “You've got people at the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury Department and IRS that are figuring it out,” he said.

Marc Andreessen: Tech companies are still fuming over the NSA

Almost a year after he released a flurry of documents showing the National Security Agency was collecting data on everyone from foreign leaders to US citizens, Edward Snowden is still the predominant Washington story in the minds of tech executives who believe the controversy has caused damage to their businesses.

That's according to the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who said in a wide-ranging interview that Silicon Valley's repeated meetings with the Obama administration were mostly for show and have produced "not even a little" progress on privacy and surveillance issues. Chief executives from leading companies including Netflix, Google and Facebook met with senior White House officials in December, and again in March. While the Obama Administration said at the time that the meetings helped clear the air on intelligence reforms, Andreessen argued that the White House has not done enough to mitigate the NSA's impact on tech companies' reputations, particularly overseas.

"The level of trust in US companies has been seriously damaged, especially but not exclusively outside the US," said Andreessen. "Every time a new shoe drops -- and there are 10,000 of them -- it serves a blow to the US." Some estimates suggest the news about the NSA's surveillance practices may have cost tech companies tens of billions of dollars in lost revenue.

In Wi-Fi, Comcast sees an opportunity to kneecap wireless providers

In what seems certain to become a wider battle, Comcast is eyeing the wireless industry as a possible market for expansion.

Someday soon, Comcast might be counted among the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile, the businesses that now provide millions of Americans with mobile voice and data services. Thanks to a growing network of Wi-Fi hotspots, Comcast is arguing that it, or another company piggybacking off of its technology, could shake up the wireless industry by delivering cheaper cellular service to consumers and introducing another competitor to the market.

Comcast is already rolling out the infrastructure it would need for such a push; it operates 1 million Wi-Fi hotspots around the country and plans to expand that to 8 million by the end of 2014.

Comcast says that it has no imminent intention to launch a cellular service. But in April, the cable company raised that possibility as one of several arguments to support its Time Warner Cable purchase. "A ubiquitous Wi-Fi network built by Comcast could make a 'Wi-Fi-first' service, which combines commercial mobile radio service with Wi-Fi, a more viable alternative," Comcast wrote in its public interest filing to federal regulators.

The morning after: What do we do about net neutrality now?

[Commentary] The Federal Communications Commission just agreed to consider a set of proposed rules that would tacitly allow Internet providers to speed up some types of Web traffic at the expense of other types.

If adopted, it could fundamentally change how the Web works at a basic level.

Naturally, people have a lot of questions about what's going to happen. For one thing, Netflix could become more expensive. If it keeps signing deals with broadband companies like Comcast, just so that it can provide you with smoother service, it might consider jacking up your subscription fee to cover any extra expense it incurs.

The longer analysis is that the Netflix deal is not exactly the same as the types of deals we might see under the FCC's proposed rule, because its agreement with Comcast is about bringing data to Comcast's door -- not how Comcast routes that traffic to the end user over "last-mile" pipes.

As for how the Internet itself could change, it seems inevitable that Internet providers could speed up some traffic. However, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler did say that under the proposal (which is just a proposal!) broadband providers would not be allowed to slow down traffic to below what a user has bought and paid for. So if you have a 75 Mbps connection at home, for example, services should always be delivered at that speed.

Because of the potentially higher costs to Web-based businesses that may arise from the proposed rules, some smaller companies may languish in the slow lane because they can't afford to pay the fees assessed on large companies to reach broadband providers' subscribers. So, yes, small startups could be harmed by this outcome.

And while Chairman Wheeler has a connection to cable industry and brings an industry perspective into his thinking, it's probably unfair to say that he's been bought and paid for.

As for municipal networks, there are about 20 states with laws on the books that hinder cities from competing with big Internet providers by offering their own, public Internet service. The FCC has indicated, along with its net neutrality proposal that it wants to start preempting some of these state laws.

George Takei’s take on net neutrality, Edward Snowden and the future of ‘Star Trek’

Q&A with George Takei, famous for playing Captain Hikaru Sulu on "Star Trek," now host for the award-winning Web series "Takei's Take," a show underwritten by AARP meant to help introduce technology to seniors, youngsters and everyone in between.

Asked if there policy debates that he's into, such as network neutrality, he said that issues like policy and privacy are complex.

Takei also said that his audience was not built by Internet service providers. Instead, it came about “by our efforts, by our creativity. And once we have that audience built, they want to charge us for it? […] They can't unilaterally say, 'All right, it's our platform, we're going to charge you for it.'”

There’s nothing neutral about the FCC’s partisan politics

The Federal Communications Commission split along partisan lines in its vote on net neutrality rules: All three Democrats voted for the proposal, while the two Republicans opposed it.

That may be not be surprising, considering the issue at hand pits large businesses against grass-roots consumer advocates. But the vote is also evidence of the internal frictions between the FCC's Democratic majority and Republican minority.

The nation's top telecommunications regulator is composed of five members, each nominated by the president and approved by Congress.

Generally, the only time we get to see those members interact is when they appear before the public at the commission's monthly open meeting. In recent weeks, though, we've had brief glimpses of their behind-the-scenes relationship, thanks to unusually public statements about the inner workings of the agency.

Republican commissioner Ajit Pai complained that the Democrats recently sent him a revised draft of a proposal at the last minute, forcing him to compare both drafts in the wee hours of the night to see what had changed. There apparently are divisions within the majority party, too. Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel opened her remarks by flatly: "I support the open Internet, but I would've done this differently."

Big Cable threatens to create Internet fast lanes even if the FCC beefs up net neutrality

Broadband providers could still create Internet fast lanes even if federal regulators adopt stronger rules for the Web, as net neutrality advocates are hoping.

That's what the cable industry is arguing in a letter to the Federal Communications Commission. The letter, filed by the National Cable Television Association, opposes the labeling of broadband companies as utilities -- a move that would give the FCC much greater authority over Internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon.

At issue is whether the FCC should regulate those firms like phone companies under Title II of the Communications Act, the law that serves as the commission's charter. The FCC's current proposal would regulate broadband companies under Title I, Section 706 -- a part of the law with murkier implications.

"Subjecting broadband access providers to regulation under Title II would not even accomplish the goal that reclassification proponents apparently seek," the letter reads. "Reclassification would not support a categorical prohibition on Internet 'fast lanes' any more than Section 706 would."

Net neutrality protesters are literally camped outside the FCC. And the agency is hearing them out.

Demonstrators are calling on Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler to abandon a proposal that allows broadband providers to charge content companies like Dropbox and Google extra for speedy and reliable service.

They set up shop on a small strip of concrete and grass outside the FCC building on Maine Avenue in Southwest. Orange and white tents from REI dotted the perimeter. It was hard to see whether anyone was inside them taking refuge from the heat. Drawing inspiration from the Occupy Wall Street protests, the demonstrators are asking the agency to reclassify broadband providers as utility companies, which would allow the government to issue a ban on speeding up or slowing down types of Internet traffic. The FCC is considering rules that would prohibit companies from blocking traffic but could give them the freedom to offer faster service to Internet companies like Netflix and Google that chose to pay a fee.

A new lawsuit takes aim at British spies’ alleged hacking of phones, Web cams and PCs

Privacy International, an international nonprofit is suing the British counterpart to the National Security Agency in what the group says is the country's first-ever legal challenge to device-hacking by intelligence services.

The watchdog says that while former NSA contractor Edward Snowden drew a great deal of attention to the Government Communications Headquarters' (GCHQ) attempts to eavesdrop on people's communications, the spy agency's efforts to break into electronic devices is far more pernicious.

In a 21-page complaint filed to a British special court and obtained by The Washington Post, Privacy International has accused GCHQ of installing malware on unsuspecting targets' mobile phones, computers and Web cams that can capture keystrokes, secretly activate microphones and obtain sensitive information such as usernames and passwords and even the content of communications, such as text messages and e-mails stored on a device.

"If the interception of communications is the modern equivalent of wiretapping," according to the complaint, "then the activity at issue in this complaint is the modern equivalent of entering someone’s house, searching through his filing cabinets, diaries and correspondence, and planting devices to permit constant surveillance in future, and, if mobile devices are involved, obtaining historical information including every location he visited in the past year."

The filing invokes the European Convention on Human Rights. If a private citizen were to try doing what GCHQ does routinely, Privacy International alleges, it would run afoul of British cybercrime law.

FCC chair responds to net neutrality backlash: ‘I could not agree with you more’

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler responded to some of the most vocal critics of his proposal to allow Internet providers to charge content providers like Netflix for faster access to customers. In a letter to a tech coalition that includes Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and nearly 150 other companies, Chairman Wheeler said he will regulate broadband companies more heavily if the situation called for it.

Chairman Wheeler added that as an entrepreneur, he has also been "subject to being blocked from access to cable networks." "It is an experience that made me especially wary of the power of closed networks to innovate on their own agenda to the detriment of small entrepreneurs," Chairman Wheeler wrote. He also said his proposal is an attempt to adhere to the roadmap laid out by a federal court when it struck down the FCC's old net neutrality rules in January.

The FCC's newest proposal, which will be outlined to the public May 15, has drawn criticism from high-tech start-ups and consumer groups that fear that only the richest companies will be able to afford tolls exacted by Internet service providers.

Why Apple is so interested in Beats: It’s not about the headphones

Apple is reportedly buying Beats Electronics for $3.2 billion -- a whopping sum for a brand that, although popular, tends to be scoffed at by audiophiles.

So everyone wants to know: Why is Apple buying Beats when it could be investing in practically any other company?

One answer floating around is that Beats gives Apple valuable street cred among the cool kids. While Beats is undeniably cool, this theory seems hard to swallow. It's not like Apple is uncool. More compelling is the idea that Apple wants to get its hands on Beats's technology.

Some see the potential acquisition as play for Beats Music, Beats Electronics’ streaming music service. More broadly, Apple faces a long-term challenge. People turn to Apple for hardware -- iPhones, iPads, and the like -- but the future is all in online services.

Ninety percent of Americans have a cellphone these days, and more than 60 percent own a smartphone. Sales of mobile devices are flagging. Wearable technology is still being refined. Apple needs to find a winning formula in the cloud. And soon.

On network neutrality, the FCC’s chairman increasingly stands alone

First came the tech companies, almost 150 of them. Then it was the investor class, clamoring that the Federal Communications Commission's plan for net neutrality would create an uneven playing field between established companies and young startups.

Protesters -- usually more common on the National Mall than at the FCC's secluded offices in Southwest Washington -- camped out at the commission's front doors.

To outsiders, the FCC may seem like a black box: We haven't even seen a draft of the proposed rules that have critics so alarmed. But on the inside of the commission, a charged political battle is playing out that could set the tone for the commission's future. And the fault lines are mostly leaving the agency's head, Tom Wheeler, cut off from the rest of his colleagues.

Chairman Wheeler has pushed back against claims that his draft rules on net neutrality would allow for an Internet fast lane. At a recent speech in Los Angeles, he told cable industry executives that he would not hesitate to regulate broadband companies more heavily if the situation called for it. That hasn't stopped a more recent rush of criticism -- including from within the FCC itself.

While it is less surprising to see Commissioner Ajit Pai criticize Chairman Wheeler, using the moment to undermine the Chairman’s early tenure, to see Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel break so publicly from Chairman Wheeler is unusual. The widening rifts suggest internal deliberations on net neutrality may either have broken down or never took place.

Some say the revolt -- not to mention the chairman's decision, for the most part, to ignore it -- is evidence of Chairman Wheeler’s isolation.

Now dozens of high-profile VCs are protesting the FCC’s net neutrality rules, too

Mere hours after a group of top tech companies wrote to the Federal Communications Commission to oppose the agency's proposed rules for net neutrality, nearly 50 venture capitalists are doing the same.

The letter -- which is signed by high-profile investor Ron Conway, GigaOm founder Om Malik and reddit co-founder Alex Ohanian -- argues that small startups would be harmed by the FCC rules, which would allow broadband providers to charge Web companies for better access to consumers.

"If established companies are able to pay for better access speeds or lower latency, the Internet will no longer be a level playing field," the letter addressed to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler reads. "Entrepreneurs will need to raise money to buy fast lane services before they have proven that consumers want their product. Investors will extract more equity from entrepreneurs to compensate for the risk."

What's more, the letter warned, investors themselves might be deterred from backing new projects if they believe Internet providers see a threat in a new company. "They will use the same technical infrastructure to advantage their own services or use network management as an excuse to disadvantage competitive offerings," the VCs wrote.

Google, Netflix lead nearly 150 tech companies in protest of FCC net neutrality plan

Nearly 150 Internet firms are banding together to call for more stringent net neutrality regulations on broadband providers. In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, the companies asked federal regulators to reconsider a proposal that critics fear would allow Internet providers to charge for faster, better access to consumers.

The list includes Amazon, Facebook, Google and Microsoft, along with dozens of other firms that called the prospect of paid fast lanes "a threat to the Internet."

With just a week to go before the Federal Communications Commission meets to consider its proposed new rules for ISPs, the letter represents a late attempt by Silicon Valley to take a stance on the open Internet.

"Instead of permitting individualized bargaining and discrimination," the companies wrote, "the commission's rules should protect users and Internet companies on both fixed and mobile platforms against blocking, discrimination and paid prioritization, and should make the market for Internet services more transparent."

The companies have not gone so far as to demand the FCC "reclassify" Internet providers under Title II of the Communications Act -- a move that would allow the commission to regulate ISPs more heavily, as it does with phone companies. The letter does not offer an alternative proposal. Even as the companies were writing to the commission, however, some at the agency were suggesting that the May 15 meeting be delayed.

A House committee has voted unanimously to rein in the NSA

A key House committee has approved a package of National Security Agency reforms that would end the spy agency's bulk collection of Americans' phone records, nearly a year after former NSA contractor Edward Snowden disclosed the program's existence.

The House Judiciary Committee voted 32-0 to rein in the NSA with the USA FREEDOM Act, a measure that places new requirements on the government when it comes to gathering, targeting and searching telephone metadata for intelligence purposes. In addition to prohibiting the NSA from engaging in what the bill's sponsors have called "dragnet surveillance," the bill would also require authorities to get permission from the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on a case-by-case basis.

It would establish a panel of privacy experts and other officials to serve as a public advocate at the court. And it would also give businesses more latitude to tell the public about requests it receives from the government for user data.

The bill represents "the best chance in a decade" to correct an imbalance between national security and privacy, said co-sponsor Rep Jerry Nadler (D-NY) It is the first surveillance reform bill to proceed to the House floor.

Sen Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who helped write the bill and introduced a version of it in the Senate in October, vowed to bring up the measure there this summer. "The committee’s overwhelming, bipartisan vote makes clear that there is broad support in Congress, after years of debate, to recalibrate the nation’s surveillance authorities and put a real oversight structure in place," Sen Leahy said.

Civil liberties advocates are calling the measure a modest step; a number of amendments by Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) to strengthen the bill failed to pass.