Contact Us

Disruptive Competition Project

655 15th St., NW

Suite 410

Washington, D.C. 20005

Phone: (202) 783-0070
Fax: (202) 783-0534

Contact Us

Please fill out this form and we will get in touch with you shortly.

Months Later, Spotify is Back in the House


A few months ago, I wrote about the House of Representatives blocking Spotify under its longstanding P2P regulations, and the diverse backlash which ranged from the RIAA to Eric Cantor.  I suggested that the reason these overbroad regulations exist — which are intended for data protection, filesharing prevention, and virus preemption — is a series of unbalanced hearings from 2007 to 2009 that may have “caused technophobic Congressmen to panic, leading to a regulation that is now mindlessly enforced as a part of House IT policy.”  The rules appear to have been written and codified without adequately consulting people who understand the technology, and particularly what developments may emerge in the future.  Thus, there is an inherent bias against new, often disruptive, technologies, which are essentially blocked and disadvantaged by default.

Roll Call reported last night that Spotify is now accessible on the House network again.  According to a staffer, Spotify “modified some of their technology so the program no longer utilizes peer-to-peer technology.”  (Roll Call also noted that something similar had happened with Skype being blocked in 2011, but then reinstated after “member outcry and security modifications.”)

It’s good that Congress was responsive and listened to feedback.  Congress should continually monitor regulations and review existing and emerging technology, not just when a conflict arises, and also ensure that staffers who write legislation that impacts technology have access to the latest innovative products and services.

Plenty of institutions and businesses have inadequate internal IT policies, so this problem is not unique to Congress.  However, Congress is unique, for several reasons.  First of all, Congress is the entity that is responsible for shaping technology policy for the nation.  Thus, they should be more open minded and should avoid banning new technologies for unreasonable purposes.  Additionally, Congress does not face the same disciplinary mechanism that other organizations would face from competitors, who might lose market share as a consequence of not understanding technology.  That’s why it is critical to ‘bring in the nerds’ when the Internet and technology are involved — not just when making national legislation, but apparently for internal Congressional regulations as well.

UPDATE: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (@GOPLeader), who had tweeted about the initial controversy, celebrated Spotify’s return:

Rep. Darrell Issa did, too:


New technologies are constantly emerging that promise to change our lives for the better. These disruptive technologies give us an increase in choice, make technologies more accessible, make things more affordable, and give consumers a voice. And the pace of innovation has only quickened in recent years, as the Internet has enabled a wave of new, inter-connected devices that have benefited consumers around the world, seemingly in all aspects of their lives. Preserving an innovation-friendly market is, therefore, tantamount not only to businesses but society at large.

Intellectual Property

The Internet enables the free exchange of ideas and content that, in turn, promote creativity, commerce, and innovation. However, a balanced approach to copyright, trademarks, and patents is critical to this creative and entrepreneurial spirit the Internet has fostered. Consequently, it is our belief that the intellectual property system should encourage innovation, while not impeding new business models and open-source developments.