Recent Blog Posts
-
Cybersecurity Czar Steps Down
May 17 20122:41 pm EDT -
House Passes Controversial Cybersecurity Bill With Surprise Vote
Apr 27 201212:09 pm EDT -
Generation Startup Gets SBA Encouragement
Apr 24 20125:25 pm EDT -
Google Spends Big in Washington
Apr 24 201212:30 pm EDT -
Young Entrepreneurs Call for More Congressional Encouragement
Apr 18 20124:06 pm EDT -
A Nation Divided on Taxes
Apr 16 201211:37 am EDT -
Are Intellectual Property and National Security Really Linked?
Apr 13 20124:40 pm EDT -
Netflix Starts PAC
Apr 09 20122:27 pm EDT -
JOBS Act Changes Game for Startups
Apr 05 20124:39 pm EDT -
Investors (and Liberals) Beware! Here Comes JOBS Act
Apr 04 201210:06 am EDT
Links
- Tapped: The American Prospect

- Marc Ambinder

- National Review

- KausFiles

- firedoglake

- The Politico

- The Daily Dish

- Blogging Heads

- Swampland

- Freakonomics

- Atrios

- Daily Kos

- Real Clear Politics

- The Political Animal

- Power Line

- Instapundit

- Matthew Yglesias

- Drudge Report

- Talking Points Memo

- Huffington Post

- Red State.org

Everyone's a Venture Capital Lobbyist
Last month, we wondered which venture capitalists were involved in a lobbying effort against Internet-piracy legislation that the industry believed could hurt social-media startups.
The real question, however, appears to be: "Who didn't lobby?"
A recently released letter (I found it through a Twitter link by Union Square Ventures) shows that a whopping 53 venture capital firms signed a letter to Congress, opposing the Protect IP Act.
Here are just a few of the investors involved in lobbying against the legislation: Marc Andreessen (Andreessen Horowitz), Ron Conway (SV Angel), Reid Hoffman (Greylock Partners), Fred Wilson (Union Square Ventures), and Vinod Khosla (Khosla Ventures).
If anything, the unusual lobbying by an industry that's absolutely not known for its political sway has only grown more heated recently. A slew of big-name tech companies—Yahoo, Zynga, Google, and Twitter among them—also recently signed a letter to Congress arguing against the legislation. (You can access it through this blog post.)
From the companies' letter:
"We support the bills' stated goals—providing additional enforcement tools to combat foreign 'rogue' websites that are dedicated to copyright infringement or counterfeiting. Unfortunately, the bills as drafted would expose law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to new uncertain liabilities, private rights of action, and technology mandates that would require monitoring of websites."
In a recent blog post, Union Square Ventures criticized Congress for choosing to hear just one opposing side of the legislation versus five testimonies in support of it. It's unclear when the issue will be resolved, but it's already made history.
After all, when was the last time the VC industry spent this much time dealing with Washington?
Kirsten Grind covers venture capital, private equity and money matters for Portfolio.com.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





