|NTIA to Hold Spectrum
|2/7. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (NTIA) announced that it
will host an event titled "Spectrum Summit" in
Washington DC on April 4-5. The DOC stated in a release
that the summit "will address spectrum allocation and
efficiency, the spectrum requirements of new technologies, and
The DOC stated further that "The first day of the Summit
will feature industry and government spectrum users,
economists, analysts and technologists; the second day will be
devoted to working sessions focused on the commercial,
international and federal government perspectives. Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) Chairman Michael Powell
is scheduled to participate, as is David Gross, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State."
Commerce Secretary Donald
Evans called spectrum a "national resource".
|Cato Scholar Decries
Thierer, Director of Telecommunications Studies at the Cato Institute, stated that
the current spectrum regulatory regime constitutes
"spectrum socialism". He spoke at a press breakfast
in Washington DC.
"Something has to be done about spectrum. Spectrum
socialism that we have lived under for seven decades plus now
is creating a real crisis in America. And there is always
going to be this problem of how to get enough spectrum in the
hands of entrepreneurs for the things we need so long as we
have an allocation mechanism process that is so political in
character. And, of course, you have a problem with the
Department of Defense and other long time incumbent users of
spectrum, trying to free up a lot of the holdings that they
"The broadcasters are the biggest sinners," said
Thierer. He referenced the "squatter right mentality that
they have of holding on to spectrum."
The problem, said Thierer, "is basically the fact that we
have no property rights in wireless ether -- in wireless
spectrum -- in America. We only have a regulatory allocation
mechanism which licenses out parcels of spectrum for specific
uses, to specific users, conditioned upon fulfilling certain
types of public interest requirements. All that is a mouthful
for saying that we could have property in wireless
"We did not choose that regulatory model. It was an
option at the time that spectrum started to become
commercialized. But they choose not to go that way. That has
had some very serious and adverse consequences. And there are
some questions about how the telecommunications and technology
sector would have evolved absent that sort of regulatory
Negroponte at MIT
Media Labs posits that there might have been a switch
between technologies, where you would have had nearly all of
our voice and other types of services going -- our
communications system -- going through the air. You would have
had data and other types of high intensity bandwidth uses
going through pipes -- and television. Instead we have got
television, this bandwidth hog, up there. And, you have got
voice wires, wires that do basic voice data."
|FCC Releases Annual 706
|2/7. The Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) released its third annual report
[118 pages in PDF] on the "deployment of advanced
telecommunications capability". It concludes that
broadband is being deployed in a reasonable and timely manner.
The report states that "we will use the terms ``advanced
telecommunications capability´´ and ``advanced services´´
to describe services and facilities with an upstream (customer
to provider) and downstream (provider to customer)
transmission speed of more than 200 kbps in this Report."
The report finds that "there has been appreciable growth
in the deployment of high speed services to residential and
small business consumers in the past eighteen months.
Moreover, these figures reveal that high speed services are
available in many parts of the country and suggest that
certain factors -- such as population density and income --
continue to be highly correlated with the availability of high
speed services at this time."
The report also finds that "there were a total of
approximately 7.8 million high speed (including advanced
services) residential and small business subscribers, as of
June 2001. Approximately 4.3 million of these residential and
small business customers subscribed to services that meet the
Commission’s definition of advanced services."
The report concludes that "the deployment of advanced
telecommunications capability to all Americans is reasonable
All four Commissioners also wrote separate statements.
Powell wrote in his statement
that "I agree with the Report’s finding that broadband
is being deployed in a reasonable and timely manner,
notwithstanding my firm belief that the Commission’s central
policymaking focus is and should remain the promotion of
efficient broadband deployment."
Abernathy wrote in her statement
that she concurred with the conclusion of the report. She also
wrote that "I recognize that subscription rates lag far
behind our estimates of infrastructure investment and
facilities deployment. Many commenters are discouraged that
the ``take rate´´ for broadband remains less than 10
percent, even as estimates of availability approach 80
percent. But we must keep in mind the Commission's role under
the 1996 Act. Section 706 directs us to encourage the
deployment of advanced telecommunications capability
-- not to ensure that consumers purchase particular
Commissioner Kevin Martin
wrote a statement
in which he concurred with the result. He also commented on
the minimal definition of "advanced telecommunications
services" and advocated removal of regulatory barriers.
He wrote that "I am concerned about the transmission
speed of the services that are available to most subscribers.
In making our determinations of the availability of ``advanced
telecommunications capability,´´ we measure the deployment
of services that offer transmission speeds of at least 200
kbps. Many argue that Internet access services at such speeds
are merely transitional and that true broadband services
should be defined at a much higher speed."
He also argued that "government can, and should, focus on
removing barriers to infrastructure investment and eliminating
disincentives to deployment, both financial and regulatory.
For example, I believe the government should commit to
exercising self restraint in placing financial burdens on
broadband. Currently, at every level, government too often
sees broadband deployment as a potential revenue stream.
Telecommunications services are subject to federal and state
excise taxes -- the kind of taxes traditionally reserved for decreasing
demand for products such as alcohol and tobacco. New
entrants to the broadband market face federal, state, and
local rights of way management fees and franchise fees, which
are sometimes intended to generate revenue rather than recover
legitimate costs. All of these financial burdens discourage
deployment and should be minimized. Government should also
endeavor to remove regulatory underbrush".
Finally, Martin argued that the FCC needs to change its own
regulatory environment, and that the FCC should focus on
facilities based competition.
Copps wrote a dissent.
He wrote that "I am unable to determine whether the
deployment of advanced telecommunications capability to all
Americans is or is not reasonable and timely. This is because
we have not gathered data of adequate quality or granularity
to fulfill our statutory responsibility under Section 706. I
cannot therefore endorse the conclusions of the majority and
must respectfully dissent from this Report."
Section 706. This report is required by Section 706 of
the Telecom Act of 1996. See, 47 U.S.C.
§ 157. It provides that "The Commission and each
State commission with regulatory jurisdiction over
telecommunications services shall encourage the deployment on
a reasonable and timely basis of advanced telecommunications
capability to all Americans (including, in particular,
elementary and secondary schools and classrooms) by utilizing,
in a manner consistent with the public interest, convenience,
and necessity, price cap regulation, regulatory forbearance,
measures that promote competition in the local
telecommunications market, or other regulating methods that
remove barriers to infrastructure investment."
The Act also requires the FCC regular report on "whether
advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to
all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion." The
Act also provided that "The term 'advanced
telecommunications capability' is defined, without regard to
any transmission media or technology, as high speed, switched,
broadband telecommunications capability that enables users to
originate and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and
video telecommunications using any technology."
See also, FCC
release [PDF]. This is Docket No. CC 98-146.
|DOJ Receives Over 30,000
Comments on Microsoft Settlement
|2/7. The Department of
Justice (DOJ) and Microsoft filed a Joint
Status Report (JSR) with the U.S. District Court (DC)
in the DOJ's antitrust case. The report summarizes the public
comments on the Revised
Proposed Final Judgment (RPFJ).
The JSR states that "over 30,000 public comments"
were received. However, this was largely the result of e-mail
campaigns waged by interested parties. The JSR states that of
the 30,000 submissions, "Approximately 1,250 comments are
unrelated in substance" to the RPFJ. "Roughly 2,800
comments are ``form´´ letters or emails - essentially
identical text submitted by different persons".
The JSR continues that "Approximately 19,500 comments
express an overall view of the RPFJ but do not contain any
further discussion of it". In addition,
"Approximately 2,900 of the comments can be characterized
as containing a degree of detailed substance concerning the
RPFJ. These substantive comments range from brief, one- or
two-page discussions of some aspect of the RPFJ to 100- or
more-page, detailed discussions of numerous of its provisions
or alternatives. The essence of many of these substantive
comments overlaps with other comments; that is, numerous
comments address at least some of the same issues or raise
similar arguments. Of the above substantive comments,
approximately 45 can be characterized as ``major´´ comments
based on their length and the detail with which they analyze
significant issues relating to the RPFJ."
The JSR also provides a breakdown of supporters and opponents
of the RPFJ. "Of the total comments received, roughly
7,500 are in favor or urge entry of the RPFJ, roughly 15,000
are opposed, and roughly 7,000 do not directly express a view
in favor or against entry. For example, a significant number
of comments contain opinions concerning Microsoft generally, e.g.,
``I hate Microsoft,´´ or concerning this antitrust case
generally, e.g., ``This case should never have been
brought,´´ but do not state whether they support or oppose
entry of the RPFJ."
The JSR goes on to suggest that, contrary to the requirement
of the Tunney Act, that the DOJ not be required to publish all
of the comments in the Federal Register. It states that the
cost would be about $4 Million, which would have to be paid
for by the DOJ.
U.S.C. § 16(b), which is also known as the Tunney Act,
requires the DOJ to publish any proposed settlement of a civil
antitrust case brought by the U.S. It also requires the DOJ to
file and publish a competitive impact statement. Finally, it
provides for a public comment process.
|House Passes Cyber Security
Research & Education Bill
|2/7. The House passed HR 3394,
Cyber Security Research and Development Act, by a vote of 400
to 12. See, Roll
Call No. 13. The bill, which is sponsored by Rep. Sherwood Boehlert
(R-NY) and other members of the House Science Committee,
would authorize the funding of new research and education
programs pertaining to cyber security.
Rep. Ralph Hall
(D-TX), the ranking Democrat on the Committee, stated that
this bill "will generate the basic knowledge needed to
develop technologies to protect networked information systems,
and will help train the kinds of computer security
professionals who are in short supply today."
The money would go to a variety of research and education
projects. The bill contains new or additional funding for five
National Science Foundation
(NSF) programs. It would authorize appropriations of $233
Million over 5 years to the NSF to make "network security
research grants". It would authorize $144 Million over 5
years to the NSF to award to universities "to establish
multi disciplinary Centers for Computer and Network Security
Research." These programs would fund research regarding
"authentication and cryptography; ... computer forensics
and intrusion detection; ... reliability of computer and
network applications, middleware, operating systems, and
communications infrastructure; and ...privacy and
The bill would also authorize funding to be administered by
the NSF for training undergraduate university students ($95
Million), community college students ($6 Million), and
doctoral students ($90 Million) in cyber security fields.
The bill also authorizes funding for programs at the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST). One item authorizes $275 Million
for NIST to assist universities that partner with for profit
entities in long term, high risk, cyber security research.
Another item authorizes $32 Million for in house research at
Rep. Boehlert stated that "I am convinced that, over
time, HR 3394 will come to be seen as a fundamental turning
point in the nation's approach to cyber security. This bill is
the equivalent of legislation the Congress passed in the wake
of the Sputnik launch in the late 1950s."
Technology industry groups supported passage of the bill. Business Software Alliance (BSA)
P/CEO Robert Holleyman stated after passage that "While
we cannot fully know the threats of tomorrow, we must do what
we can to prepare for them through well planned basic cyber
security R&D carried out in close partnership with
industry. Chairman Boehlert's bill is a much needed boost in
this direction". See, BSA
Association of America (ITAA) P/CEO Harris Miller stated
that the bill "is critical to increasing cyber security
research, to building a larger base of information security
professionals, and to improving information sharing and
collaboration among industry, government and academic research
projects. ... I urge the Senate to pass the bill soon and the
Congressional Appropriators to fund the activities." See,
There is no companion bill now to HR 3394 in the Senate.
However, there are other cyber security R&D bills. See,
for example, S
1900, the Cyberterrorism Preparedness Act of 2002, and S
1901, the Cybersecurity Research and Education Act of
2002, both sponsored by Sen.
John Edwards (D-NC). See also, HR
3162, the USA PATRIOT ACT, which was signed into law last
year. It authorizes funding of $20 Million for the National
Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC). See,
Section 1016. Also, Sen.
Ron Wyden (D-OR) may introduce legislation soon.
|PPI Advocates State Issued
Smart ID Cards
|2/7. The Progressive
Policy Institute (PPI), a Democratic think tank, released
[PDF] titled "Modernizing the State Identification
System: An Action Agenda". It concludes that "our
identification system is broken" and that Congress should
require states to modernize, through such technologies as
smart ID cards.
The report first identifies the problem. It states that the
"Sept. 11 hijackings illuminated many holes in our
domestic defense. Four of the five hijackers who crashed into
the Pentagon, for example, had fraudulent ID cards obtained in
Virginia." It adds that "The industries that rely on
the wildly unreliable identification system we have today have
watched identity theft grow into a major industry."
The report states that "If done properly, a new
identification system can not only reduce the threat of
terrorism as well as more common crimes, but also lead to
significant economic benefits. Placing 21st century technology
on our driver’s licenses and ID cards will jump start the
New Economy, making offline and online transactions more
convenient and more secure than ever before."
The report opposes a national ID card. Rather, it proposes
"Modernizing the current system, in which the primary
form of identification is issued by the Department of Motor
Vehicles in each state".
The PPI report recommends that Congress "require states
to issue ``smart ID cards´´ containing a standardized
hologram and digitally encoded biometric data specific to each
holder; set standards for initial identity verification;
accelerate the linking of state DMV databases; provide grants
and loans for additional state smart card applications;
upgrade the system for foreign visitors to incorporate a
similar ``smart visa´´ program; and create strict controls
to protect privacy and prevent abuses."
The report was written by Shane Ham and Robert Atkinson. The
PPI also announced that Rep.
James Moran (D-VA) will introduce legislation based on the
recommendations in the report. See, PPI
|Comments on the 6th
Anniversary of the Telecom Act of 1996
|2/8. Former President Clinton signed the Telecom Act on
February 8, 1996. Many groups, companies and individuals used
the occasion of the sixth anniversary of the Act to comment
upon the Act, industry participants, and the state of
competition and services.
Robert Sachs, P/CEO of the National
Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), wrote a
[PDF] to Members of Congress. He wrote that "Since
passage of the ‘96 Act, and spurred largely by the stable
regulatory environment it fostered, the cable industry has
invested more than $55 billion to provide consumers advanced
broadband services including high speed Internet access,
digital video, residential phone service, and interactive
television. This amounts to an average capital expenditure of
nearly $1,000 per cable customer in those cable systems which
have been upgraded since the '96 Act. And to date, cable
systems serving approximately 80 percent of the cable
customers in the U.S. have been upgraded."
Walter McCormick, P/CEO of the United
States Telecom Association (USTA), used the occasion to
advocate passage of the Tauzin Dingell bill. See, USTA
The Consumers Union
and the Consumer
Federation of America condemned the Act, and various
industries, in a statement.
They wrote that "Now, six years later, consumers are left
wondering, ``Where is all the competition?´´ The vast
majority of Americans continue to have only one choice of
cable company and phone company. Bills are more expensive and
harder to understand. Advertisements for ``cheap´´ long
distance plans hide the monthly fees that erase the supposed
savings for many consumers. Complaints about service problems
continue to stack up. The Telecommunications Act was based on
a faulty premise. It called for the deregulation of the
telecommunications industry before competition existed or
competitive forces had developed. It was based on the naive
assumption that firms wanted to enter each other's markets and
compete. Relaxing the government oversight of cable and phone
monopolies has allowed them to merge, consolidate their
control of core markets, and begin to expand their monopoly
power into adjacent markets."
|FCC Announces Agenda for
February 14 Meeting
|The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) announced the agenda for its open meeting
of Thursday, February 14. See, FCC
The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rule Making
initiating an examination of the legal and policy framework
under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, for
broadband access to the Internet provided over domestic
The FCC will consider a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
and Order concerning the system for assessment and recovery of
universal service contributions.
The FCC will consider a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule
Making to adopt new procedures for licensing spectrum in which
both commercial and noncommercial educational entities have an
interest. (MM Docket No. 95-31, and motion for stay of LPTV
auction No. 81.)
The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rule Making and
First Report and Order inviting comments on revising the
procedures for considering satellite license applications. (IB
Docket No. 00-248.)
The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to
establish a uniform consumer complaint process applicable to
all services regulated by the FCC which are not currently
covered by the common carrier informal complaint rules. (CC
Docket No. 94-93.)
The FCC will consider a First Report and Order to provide for
new ultra-wideband devices. (ET Docket No. 98-153.)
The FCC will consider a Second Report and Order regarding the
allocation and designation of the 4940-4990 MHZ band; and a
Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making concerning the service
rules for this band. (WT Docket No. 00-32.)
|People and Appointments
|2/5. President Bush nominated Read Admiral Michael Lohr
to be Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy.
|2/6. Sen. George
Voinovich (R-OH) introduced S 1913, a bill to establish an
exchange program between the Federal government and the
private sector to develop expertise in information technology
management. It was referred to the Senate Committee on
2/7. The FCC stated that it released its annual report on
telephone subscribership rates. It found that 95.1% of all
households in the U.S. had telephone service in July 2001, up
.7% from July 2000. See, FCC
2/7. The Copyright
Office published a notice
in the Federal Register that it is issuing a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on "the requirements for
giving copyright owners reasonable notice of the use of their
works for sound recordings under statutory license and for how
records of such use shall be kept and made available to
copyright owners." Comments are due by March 11, 2002.
Reply comments are due by April 8, 2002. See, Federal
Register, February 7, 2002, Vol. 67, No. 26, at Pages 5761 -
|Rogan Speaks on Capitol
Rogan, the new Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO), spoke at a luncheon on Capitol Hill hosted by the Congressional Economic Leadership
Institute. He stated that patent pendency and quality is
going to be his primary focus. Intellectual property, said
Rogan, "is the number one export of the United States
He stated that currently there are about 3,200 patent
examiners to handle about 300,000 applications per year.
"Trying to just move through the technical backlog in
that area presents a real challenge. Now, right now we don't
have a problem on the trademark side. We do have a big problem
on the patent side. Much of that is a result of our
technological increase in know how."
He pointed out that many early patent applications were one
page long, but that has changed. "Particularly, in the
biotechnology area, in computer software, and so forth, the
patents that we get are so sophisticated and so complex that
we sometimes get them on CD-ROM. We got one recently that came
in on six CD-ROMs that has the equivalent of twelve million
pages of data."
He also addressed funding. "As Chairman Coble said,
funding becomes an important issue in all of that because the
fees, theoretically, for the PTO are adjusted so that we are a
performance based organization. Ideally, I think that what the
Chairman was trying to say is he has been a supporter, and
many in Congress have been supporters, of the notion that the
PTO would be run by the user community through its fees, and
that we would set the fees according to our needs. And that
has been what we have tried to do over the last several years.
But when those monies are diverted, it precludes us from being
able to do things, such as be able to hire examiners, and make
the changes that we need. The good news ... is that in the
President's budget, that he just sent up to Congress, there is
a whopping 21% increase in the PTO's budget for the purpose,
almost exclusively for the purpose, of hiring new
examiners." He said that the increase, if approved by the
Congress, would enable the USPTO to hire 950 additional patent
Several Representatives attended, including Rep. Howard Coble
(R-NC), the Chairman of the House Courts, Internet and
Intellectual Property Subcommittee, who asked Rogan about
consolidation of the USPTO from 19 buildings to one building.
Rogan said that "we are spread all over Timbuktu out
there," but should be moved into the Old Towne Alexandria
facility by the end of 2003. Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA)
pressed Rogan about protecting intellectual property rights in
Columbia. Rep. Ron Kind
(D-WI) asked Rogan about China. Rogan acknowledged that
"piracy has been a longstanding problem in the People's
Republic of China".
Rep. Lamar Smith
(R-TX) asked if the President's budget request would enable
the USPTO to reduce patent pendency. Smith added that "a
lot of patents are out of date by the time they are
approved." Rogan responded that he hoped that it would
reduce pendency, but added, "I don't know." Rogan
elaborated that "there are some things that are out of
our control." For example, he said that pharmaceutical
companies are not in hurry, because of delays in obtaining
other government permits. He added that "the real problem
right now is in the engineering arts" because the USPTO
has to compete with the private sector to hire from a small
pool of graduates.
Rep. Bob Goodlatte
(R-VA), Rep. Vernon
Ehlers (R-MI), and Rep.
Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) also attended. Tech Law Journal spoke
with Rep. Kolbe after the luncheon about the House
Appropriations Committee and the President's proposed
budget for FY 2003 for the USPTO. Rep. Kolbe is a member of
the Committee, and its Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice,
State and the Judiciary. He stated "I think that there is
general support", but added that it is a "tough
budget year" because of national defense and homeland
security needs. He added that the USPTO may not get everything
that it wants.
|Friday, Feb 8
|The House will not be in session.
9:00 AM - 12:30 PM. The Federal
Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the
Department of Justice (DOJ) will hold the second in a series
of joint hearings on antitrust and intellectual property.
There will be two concurrent sessions, titled "Patent Law
for Antitrust Lawyers" and "Antitrust Law for Patent
Lawyers". See, FTC
release and DOJ
release. Location: Rooms 432 and 332, respectively, of the
FTC, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
TO BE DECIDED ON THE BRIEFS.
9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals
(DCCir) will hear oral argument in Chameleon Radio Corp
v. FCC, No. 00-1546. Judges Edwards, Sentelle and
Silberman will preside.
10:00 AM. Chris Murck, Chairman of the American Chamber of
Commerce in China, will speak on the U.S. relationship
with China after the September 11 events, and in advance of
President Bush's trip to Beijing on February 21. He will also
comment on China's membership into the WTO and its likely
impact on the global marketplace. For more information,
contact Micaela de Leon Vivero at mdeleon
@apcoworldwide.com or 202 778-1024. Location: Murrow Room,
National Press Club, 529
14th St. NW, 13th Floor.
AM - 12:00 NOON. The American
Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion
titled "Should the Government Promote Open Source
10:30 AM. The Department of
Commerce (DOC) will host a homeland security technology
fair. Location: Main Lobby, DOC, 14th St. and Constitution
12:15 PM. The FCBA's
Wireless Telecommunications Practice Committee will host a
lunch. The topic will be "Hot Wireless Issues on the
Hill". The price to attend is $15.00. RSVP to Wendy
Parish at firstname.lastname@example.org
by 12:00 NOON on February 6. Location: Sidley & Austin,
Room 6-E, 1501 K Street, NW.
|Tuesday, Feb 12
|9:30 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in WorldCom
v. FCC, No. 01-1218. Judges Tatel, Garland and Williams
9:30 AM. The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee's
Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation and
Federal Services will hold a hearing to examine multilateral
non-proliferation regimes, weapons of mass destruction
technologies, and the war on terrorism. Location: Room 342,
10:00 AM. The Senate
Banking Committee will hold a hearing on accounting and
investor protection issues surrounding the problems with Enron
and other public companies. The witnesses will be five former
Chairmen of the SEC, Roderick
Hills, Harold Williams, David Ruder, Richard Breeden, and
Arthur Levitt. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.
12:15 PM. The FCBA's
Common Carrier Committee will host a brown bag lunch. Kathleen
Abernathy (FCC Commissioner) and Nanette
Thompson (Chair of the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska) will speak about universal service. RSVP to
Rhe Brighthaupt at rbrighth
@wrf.com. Location: Wiley
Rein & Fielding, 1750 K St., NW, 10th Floor.
12:15 PM. The FCBA's
Transactional Practice Brown Committee will host a brown bag
lunch on wireless transactions. RSVP to Tina Screven at 202
383-3337. Location: Wilkinson
Barker & Knauer, 2300 N Street NW.
2:30 PM. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold a
hearing to examine the theft of American intellectual property
at home and abroad. Location: Room 419, Dirksen Building.
|Wednesday, Feb 13
|Day one of a three day conference titled Biometric
Consortium Conference. The sponsors include the
Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) and the Advanced
Technology Program (ATP) of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), the National Security Agency
(NSA), the Department of Defense's Biometric Management Office
(BMO), the General Services Administration (GSA), and the
Federal Technology Service (FTS) Center for Smart Card
Solutions. See, conference
web site. Location: Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington,
10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Science Committee
will hold a hearing titled "R&D Budget for Fiscal
Year 2003: An Evaluation". Location: Room 2318, Rayburn
11:00 AM. The Cato Institute
will host a panel discussion titled "Trade War or Tax
Reform? The WTO Ruling on Tax Breaks for U.S. Exporters".
The panelists will be Rep.
Phil Crane (R-IL), Chairman of the Trade Subcommittee of
the House Ways and
Means Committee, William Reinsch, National
Foreign Trade Council, John Meagher, Price Waterhouse Coopers,
and Chris Edwards, Cato Institute. Cato will web cast the
event. A luncheon will follow the program. See, Cato event
summary. Location: Cato Inst., 1000 Mass. Ave., NW.
2:00 PM. The Senate
Judiciary Committee's Administrative Oversight and the
Courts Subcommittee will hold a hearing titled
"Administrative Oversight: Are We Ready For A Cyber
Terror Attack?". Sen.
Charles Schumer (D-NY) will preside. Location: Room 226,
5:00 - 7:00 PM. The Congressional
Internet Caucus Advisory Committee will host an event
titled "Reception and Technology Fair". Each of the
Co-chairs of the Internet Caucus, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT),
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT), Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Rep.
Rick Boucher (D-VA), is likely to speak. The Co-chairs of the
Wireless Task Force, Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) and Rep. Mike
Honda (D-CA), are likely to speak also. Location: Room 902,
|Thursday, Feb 14
|Day two of a three day conference titled Biometric
Consortium Conference. See, conference
web site. Location: Hyatt Regency Crystal City, Arlington,
The Forum on Technology and Innovation (Tech Forum) will hold
a event relating to cyber security. The speakers will
be Richard Clarke (Special Advisor to the President for
Cyberspace Security), Vint Cerf (WorldCom), and Bruce
Schneier (CTO of Counterpane
Internet Security). The Tech Forum was founded by Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN), Sen. Jay Rockefeller
(D-WV), and the Council on
9:30 AM. The Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a meeting. See, FCC
release. Location: Commission Meeting Room, Room TW-C305,
445 12th St., SW.
2:30 PM. The Senate
Judiciary Committee's Technology, Terrorism, and
Government Information Subcommittee will hold a hearing on privacy,
identity theft, and protection of personal information. Sen. Dianne Feinstein
(D-CA) will preside. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
|About Tech Law Journal
|Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and
subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription
to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year. However, there
are discounts for entities with multiple subscribers. Free one
month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free
subscriptions are available for law students, journalists,
elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and
executive branch, and state officials. The TLJ web site is
free access. However, copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert and
news items are not published in the web site until one month
after writing. See, subscription
Contact: 202-364-8882; E-mail.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.
Copyright 1998 - 2002 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All