Go ahead. Click on CNET's news.com. Anytime. There you'll find more than a few items about legislation, regulation and industry advocacy efforts that affect the bottom line of technology companies today. Any technology policy expert (like former FCC Chairman Powell) will tell you that the impact of these issues will only grow.

Yet, compared to more mature industries, many technology companies are not yet effective in driving debate on policy issues.

This shouldn't be a surprise. Technology public policy is still in its first significant decade of development. Yet the time is now to learn from tech policy's short history and prepare for its long future.

Tech policy's modern era began in 1996. That year, industry organized itself for the first time to fend off a rash of shareholder lawsuits; Microsoft became the Justice Department's favorite target; Congress passed the 1996 Telecom Act; and, the anti-Internet pornography Communications Decency Act (CDA) made headlines.

Since then, the industry has engaged with Washington in fits and starts. In the late-nineties, nearly every politician tried to connect to the sector, and some forward-thinking companies reciprocated (and benefited). Still, many others considered policy discussions too ethereal or as "politics"—something that countered their libertarian ethos.

The bursting of the Internet bubble didn't help. Companies went into survival mode, and public policy seemed further from the bottom line than ever.

Fast forward a few years.

Now, myriad critical issues face the industry, and technology CEOs—no longer feted in Washington like rock stars—are coming to realize that bad laws can happen to cool companies.

Regardless, effective policy efforts are now more important than ever. Not because the industry needs to catch up on its politicking, but because the industry delivered on many of its longstanding promises to integrate technologies into social and business fabrics. With both the average person and the economy increasingly reliant on technology, policy debates become exceedingly relevant to the real issues affecting constituents today.

These debates are being framed and amplified by traditional industries that have historically retained legions of credible lobbyists and activists to further their agendas. They will do much to determine how quickly new technologies will be deployed and who will reap the benefits.

Consider these hot issues:

• Digital Content Distribution. By the time you read this, the Supreme Court will have likely shaped the next round of P2P legislative fights by deciding the MGM v. Grokster case. And, while current debates between activists and entertainment companies are focused on traditional computer-to-computer distribution, future stakes will grow exponentially as wireless devices have the capacity to carry considerable amounts of entertainment content. These legislative battles will not only have an impact on the narrow consideration of whether a P2P company is liable for the illegal distribution of content on its networks, but, as the entertainment industry hopes to ensure maximum control for the next era, they could have a massive precedent-setting impact on the types of services and technologies that respectable companies can offer.

• Cybercrime. Spam, spyware, phishing and pharming are universally regarded as scourges, and industry is active in creating technology to fight them. Yet, some legislation could place some of the burden of preventing cybercrime on technology companies and network providers.

• eHealth. One of the biggest tech policy issues in the next decade will focus on how technology will be utilized to store and share (between healthcare providers) vital patient information. Becoming a key part of the dated healthcare industry could be a huge boon for the technology sector. However, legislation and the concerns of privacy advocates will do much to determine how soon benefits will be reaped.

• Telecom Act Round II. When the 1996 act was passed, it failed to deeply consider the Internet. Whoops. Now, the massive piece of legislation is likely to be reopened or, at least, significantly modified. This will have considerable impact on the balance of power between phone, cable, technology and even electricity companies as they all try to provide diverse and competitive services to consumers. Technologies like VoIP and IPTV hang in the balance.

• Radio Frequency Identity (RFID) Deployment. RFID microchips on pallets and products promise to revolutionize the supply chain, increase productivity, minimize theft and provide cost savings to consumers. Yet, early perceptions of the technology are being shaped by privacy issues focused on chips being used to track the location of humans. Already, California has proposed legislation to minimize the use of RFID. Currently, coordinated efforts by technology vendors to focus on the benefits of RFID are minimal.

• National Competitiveness. R&D investment, quality of education, federal incentives for innovation and trade policy will all shape which countries will be the leaders in a world "flattened" by technology. The technology industry has much to gain and lose from these policies.

From a communications perspective, the above issues represent both challenges and, more likely, opportunities for smart companies. Just as corporate communications teams build sales, IR, business development and competitive factors into messaging, strategy and tactics, they need to add policy matters into the mix. This means working closely with and complementing the strategies of those in the organization responsible for government affairs issues. And, if no one in the company currently "owns" government affairs, management should strongly consider at least having the corporate communications team take the first step of carving out the company's position on key issues that either currently or potentially affect the business.

We've found that through this process, many companies find new opportunities to position themselves and their executives as thought leaders on highly relevant issues covered in the media today and tomorrow. Not only do companies then reap the benefits of industry leadership, but they also begin to build the foundation for well-formed and credible public-policy strategy.