| 
        
          | 
              
                | People |  
                | 4/11. Clark
                  Lackert and Keith
                  Sharkin have joined the New York City office of the
                  law firm of King &
                  Spalding as partners. They will establish a Trademark
                  Practice Group there. They both were previously at Nims, Howes,
                  Collison, Hansen & Lackert. See, release. 4/10. Edward Lentz has joined the Philadelphia office
                  of the law firm of Morgan
                  Lewis as a partner in the firm's Intellectual Property
                  Practice Group. He was previously SVP and US General Counsel
                  of SmithKline Beecham (now GlaxoSmithKline). See, release. Adi
                  Seffer will join the firm's Frankfurt, Germany, office as
                  head of its Technology Practice. See, release.
 4/13. President Bush will nominate Otto Reich to be
                  Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere.
 4/13. Amy McKennis will join the Cellular Telecommunications
                  & Internet Association (CTIA) as its Senate Director
                  for Government Affairs. See, release.
                  She previously worked for Sen. Fred Thompson
                  (R-TN). Before that she worked for Sen. Kay Hutchison (R-TX).
                  McKennis also co-authors the Fashion Police
                  column for the HillZoo.
 |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | More News |  
                | 4/9. The U.S.
                  Court of Appeals (11thCir) issue a two page opinion
                  [PDF] in Weys
                  TV v. FCC, a petition for review of a final
                  order of the FCC regarding whether the FCC erroneously
                  interpreted the Cable Act of 1992 by allowing cable companies
                  to discontinue mandatory carriage of Weys TV's signal.
                  Petition for review denied. 4/13. The NIST
                  published a notice
                  in the Federal Register regarding the availability of funds
                  under the Critical Infrastructure Protection Grants Program.
                  See, Federal Register, April 13, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 72, at
                  Pages 19139 - 19142.
 4/13. The USTR published
                  a notice
                  in the Federal Register regarding the 2001 Annual GSP Product
                  and Country Eligibility Practices Review. The deadline for
                  submitting petitions is June 13, 2001. See, Federal Register,
                  April 13, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 72, Pages 19278 - 19279.
 4/14. The ICANN
                  published a notice
                  the schedule and registration information for its next round
                  of meetings, to be held in Stockholm, Sweden, on June 1-4,
                  2001.
 4/13. The U.S. Court
                  of Appeals (DC Cir) heard oral argument in Telecom
                  Resellers v. FCC, Appeal No. 00-1144.
 4/13. The Copyright Office published in the Federal Register a
                  final
                  rule regarding service of a notice of institution of
                  action for infringement and service of complaint in an
                  infringement action where registration has been denied. See,
                  Federal Register, April 13, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 72, at Pages
                  19094 - 19095.
 |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | New Documents |  
                | USCA:
                  opinion in Trans Union v. FTC re financial privacy, 4/13
                  (HTML, USCA). USCA:
                  opinion
                  in Weys TV v. FCC re Cable Act, 4/9 (PDF, FCC).
 DOL/ETA:
                  notice
                  re availability of grant funds for training high tech workers,
                  4/13 (TXT, FedReg).
 NIST:
                  notice
                  in the re availability of grant funds under the Critical
                  Infrastructure Protection Grants Program, 4/13 (TXT, FedReg).
 CO:
                  final
                  rule re service in infringement actions where registration
                  has been denied, 4/13 (TXT, FedReg).
 |  |  |  | 
        
          | 
              
                | Financial Privacy |  
                | 4/13. The U.S.
                  Court of Appeals (DCCir) issued its opinion
                  in Trans
                  Union v. FTC, a petition for review of an FTC
                  cease and desist order
                  regarding the sale of consumer reports by credit reporting
                  agencies for marketing purposes. The Appeals Court upheld
                  the FTC's order that Trans Union must stop selling target
                  marketing lists for purposes not listed in the Fair Credit Reporting Act
                  (FRCA). The Appeals Court also upheld the constitutionality of
                  the FRCA. Trans Union (TU) is one of
                  the three large credit reporting agencies. It compiles credit
                  reports about individuals from credit information that it
                  collects from banks, credit card companies, and other lenders.
                  Its databases contain information on 190 Million people. It
                  then sells these credit reports to lenders, employers, and
                  insurance companies. This practice is not at issue. However,
                  TU also sells target marketing products to direct marketers.
                  These consist of lists of names and addresses of individuals
                  who meet specific criteria, such as possession of an auto
                  loan, a department store credit card, or two or more
                  mortgages. This practice at issue.
 The FTC has responsibility
                  for enforcing the FCRA. This statute protects the privacy of
                  credit information by prohibiting credit reporting agencies
                  from selling "consumer reports", except under the
                  circumstances enumerated in the Act. The FRCA lists whether to
                  approve an application for credit, employment, or insurance --
                  but not direct marketing. The FRCA defines a "consumer
                  report" as any information provided "by a consumer
                  reporting agency bearing on a consumer's credit worthiness,
                  credit standing, credit capacity, character, general
                  reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which
                  is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in
                  part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing
                  the consumer's eligibility for (A) credit ..."
 This is an ancient proceeding. The FTC has been endeavoring
                  for a decade to stop this practice. The FTC instituted a
                  proceeding against TU in 1992. The FTC first issued a cease
                  and desist order
                  in 1994. However, the Court of Appeals granted TU's petition
                  for review, on the grounds that the FTC had failed to provide
                  evidence that TU's target marketing products were used by
                  marketers in the issuance of credit. See, Trans Union Corp. v.
                  FTC, 81 F.3d 228 (DCCir 1996). So, the FTC conducted extensive
                  discovery, held a month long administrative trial, and
                  documented this contention. It again ordered TU to stop. TU
                  then filed this petition for review.
 The Court of Appeals denied the petition for review. First, TU
                  argued that the FTC again failed to provide substantial
                  evidence in support of its findings. The Appeals Court this
                  time held that the FTC had provided substantial evidence that
                  the target marketing lists being sold by TU to marketers were
                  being used as a factor in granting credit, and hence, are
                  "consumer reports" within the meaning of the FRCA.
                  Second, TU argued that the FRCA is unconstitutionally vague
                  under the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, and that
                  it is an unconstitutional restraint on free speech. TU sought
                  application of the strict scrutiny standard. The Appeals Court
                  upheld the FRCA's constitutionality, applying the reduced
                  constitutional protection standard for commercial speech
                  articulated by the Supreme Court in Dun & Bradstreet v. Greenmoss.
 |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | H1B Fees |  
                | 4/13. The Department of Labor's Employment and Training
                  Administration (ETA) published a notice
                  in the Federal Register regarding the availability of grant
                  funds for skill training programs financed by the H1B
                  Technical Skills Training Grant Program. This program is
                  financed out of the fees paid by employers with H1B visa
                  applications. H1B visas enable high tech companies to hire
                  highly skilled alien workers to fill positions for which there
                  is a shortage of U.S. workers. The purpose of this grant
                  program is to train U.S. workers for high tech occupations.
                  See, Federal Register, April 13, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 72, at
                  Pages 19209 - 19223. See also, ETA's H1B web page. |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | Crime |  
                | 4/9. James Yekrang plead guilty in U.S. District Court (CDCal)
                  to one count of taking kickbacks in violation of the
                  Anti-Kickback Act of 1986, and one count of tax evasion.
                  Yekrang is a former employee of defense contractor Allied
                  Signal in its Business Information Systems Division. He took
                  kickbacks from Object Foundry, a software company, in exchange
                  for recommending subcontract awards and contract extensions,
                  as well as for the approval of some inflated labor claims. On
                  April 2, Sammy Dev, the owner of Object Foundry who paid the
                  kickbacks, plead guilty to violating the Anti-Kickback Act of
                  1986 and then aiding and assisting in the filing of a false
                  corporate income tax return. See, USAO
                  release. |  |  |  | 
        
          | 
              
                | Today |  
                | 9:30 AM - 3:30 PM. The George Washington University Virginia
                  Campus will host a symposium titled "Privacy in the
                  Information Age." See, agenda.
                  Location: The George Washington University Virginia Campus
                  20101 Academic Way, Ashburn, Virginia (at University Center,
                  Route 7, one mile west of Route 28). 12:30-1:30 PM. FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott- Roth will
                  speak to an AARP group. Location: Northeastern Presbyterian
                  Church, Washington DC.
 Deadline to file comments with the FCC regarding
                  its Final
                  Report [101 pages in PDF] on the possible use of spectrum
                  in the 2500-2690 MHz band for Third Generation (3G)
                  wireless systems. See, notice
                  in Federal Register, April 11, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 70, at Pages
                  18740 - 18741. The report, dated March 30, 2001, is titled
                  "Final Report: March 30, 2001: Spectrum Study of the
                  2500-2690 MHz Band: The Potential for Accommodating Third
                  Generation Mobile Systems". See also, executive
                  summary of report.
 Deadline to file comments with the FCC in response
                  to its notice
                  requesting comments to "update and refresh the
                  record" on issues raised in its Computer III Further
                  Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, originally issued on
                  January 30, 1998. See, Federal Register, March 15, 2001, Vol.
                  66, No. 51, at Pages 15064 - 15065.
 Deadline to submit comments to the USTR
                  regarding the Antidumping Act of 1916. Following
                  complaints by Japan and the EC, WTO dispute settlement panels,
                  and the WTO Appellate Body, found that this statute is
                  inconsistent with U.S.'s obligations under the General
                  Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the Agreement on
                  Implementation of Article VI of GATT 1994. See, notice
                  in the Federal Register, March 19, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 53, at
                  Pages 15517 - 15518.
 |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | Spectrum Caps |  
                | 4/13. Friday was the deadline to submit comments to the FCC
                  in response to its Notice
                  of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in another of its
                  reexaminations of its old CMRS
                  spectrum aggregation limits (Rule
                  20.6), and restrictions on cellular cross ownership
                  (Rule 22.942). The FCC seeks comment on whether it should
                  modify its limits on the amount of spectrum that any single
                  entity may hold in a market and whether it should modify its
                  restrictions on cross-ownership between cellular telephony
                  providers located in the same market. See, In the Matter of
                  2000 Biennial Regulatory Review Spectrum Aggregation Limits
                  for Commercial Mobile Radio Services, WT Docket No. 01-14. See
                  also, notice
                  in Federal Register, February 12, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 29, Pages
                  9798 - 9806. See also, text of 47
                  CFR 20.6 and 47
                  CFR 22.942. The Rural Telecommunications Group and the OPASTCO
                  submitted a joint comment
                  in which they argued that the reasoning behind both rules is
                  outdated given the level of competition, and that both should
                  be eliminated. The National
                  Telephone Cooperative Association (NTCA), which represents
                  small and rural local telephone exchanges, stated in its comment
                  that "if the limits are removed, the public interest will
                  best be served if the Commission were to impose conditions to
                  insure that customers in rural areas will have equal access to
                  advanced services."
 Telephone and Data Systems and its subsidiary, U.S.
                  Cellular Corporation, submitted a comment
                  in which they argued that the FCC should retain the spectrum
                  cap, but revise the cellular cross interest rule to allow
                  non-controlling cross interests comparable to those permitted
                  under the spectrum cap. WorldCom, which
                  is a reseller of CMRS, stated in its comment
                  that "The Commission’s spectrum aggregation limits have
                  been critical in achieving a more competitive CMRS market,
                  with at least four facilities-based carriers and a number of
                  resale carriers serving most population centers. ... The
                  elimination of the spectrum cap at this time inevitably will
                  result in further consolidation of the wireless industry and
                  have a significant negative impact on the competitive CMRS
                  market."
 |  |  
          |  |  
          | 
              
                | About Tech Law Journal |  
                | Tech Law Journal is a free access web site
                  and e-mail alert that provides news, records, and analysis of
                  legislation, litigation, and regulation affecting the computer
                  and Internet industry. This e-mail service is offered free of
                  charge to anyone who requests it. Just provide TLJ an e-mail
                  address. 
 Number of subscribers: 1,364.
 
 Contact: 202-364-8882; E-mail.
 P.O. Box 15186, Washington DC, 20003.
 
 Privacy
                  Policy
 
 Notices
                  & Disclaimers
 
 Copyright 1998 - 2001 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All
                  rights reserved.
 |  |  |