| Posner Opinion Provides
Economic Analysis of Trademark, Dilution & Cybersquatting |
10/4. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (7thCir) issued its opinion
[PDF] in Ty,
Inc. v. Perryman, a case regarding the
application of the law of trademark dilution to an Internet
based merchant who used the words "bargain beanies"
in her web site and domain name over the objections of the
company which manufactures, and holds the trademark for,
"Beanie Babies". Bottom line: there is no dilution
-- she gets to keep her business name and domain name.
This is not an ordinary trademark infringement case, because
that would entail the marketing of a competing product in a
manner that is likely to cause confusion with the product with
the trademarked name. Here, the issue is not the use of a
trademark in the context of the sale of a competing product,
but rather, the use of the trademark in a secondary market,
that is, resale over the Internet. This is a trademark
dilution case, which involves the notion that, even in the
absence of the use of a trademark that will cause a likelihood
of confusion, or in the absence of competition with the owner
of a trademark, someone may nevertheless lessen the capacity
of a famous mark to identify goods or services.
This opinion contains a thorough review of both the legal and
economic bases for the law of dilution. The opinion may be
significant for anyone who sells or auctions the trademarked
products of others over the Internet, as well as the holders
of the relevant trademarks.
Background. Ty Inc.
makes Beanie Babies, which are plush toy animals that consist
of plastic bean pellets inside of stitched fabric. Ty has
obtained a U.S. trademark registration for the mark
"Beanie Babies". Ty aggressively asserts its
intellectual property rights. Ruth Perryman sells second hand
beanbag stuffed animals over the Internet. About 80% of her
sales are Ty Beanie Baby products. Her web site, where she
disclaims any affiliation with Ty, was located
bargainbeanies.com. This URL is still active, but now contains
only the text "ERROR, Page Not Available".
District Court. Ty filed a complaint in U.S.
District Court (NDIll) against Perryman alleging trademark
infringement. The appellate opinion does not list the claims
in the complaint, or the issues on appeal. However, the
opinion deals with the issue of trademark dilution. The
District Court granted summary judgment to Ty, and enjoined
Perryman from using "BEANIE or BEANIES or any colorable
imitation thereof (whether alone or in connection with other
terms) within any business name, Internet domain name, or
trademark, or in connection with any non-Ty products."
(Parentheses in original.) Perryman appealed.
Dilution Statute. 15
U.S.C. § 1125(c) provides, in part, that "The owner
of a famous mark shall be entitled, subject to the principles
of equity and upon such terms as the court deems reasonable,
to an injunction against another person's commercial use in
commerce of a mark or trade name, if such use begins after the
mark has become famous and causes dilution of the distinctive
quality of the mark ..."
Appeals Court. Judge
Richard Posner wrote the opinion for the three judge panel
vacating and remanding. He reviewed the purpose of trademark
law, and the nature of consumer confusion and various forms of
dilution, in an opinion laced with economic analysis.
He began by noting that the "fundamental purpose of a
trademark is to reduce consumer search costs by providing a
concise and unequivocal identifier of the particular source of
particular goods. The consumer who knows at a glance whose
brand he is being asked to buy knows whom to hold responsible
if the brand disappoints and whose product to buy in the
future if the brand pleases. This in turn gives producers an
incentive to maintain high and uniform quality, since
otherwise the investment in their trademark may be lost as
customers turn away in disappointment from the brand."
Posner continued that "A successful brand, however,
creates an incentive in unsuccessful competitors to pass off
their inferior brand as the successful brand by adopting a
confusingly similar trademark, in effect appropriating the
goodwill created by the producer of the successful brand. The
traditional and still central concern of trademark law is to
provide remedies against this practice."
Posner then wrote that there is no confusion in this case,
because Perryman sells few competing products, and clearly
disclaims affiliation with Ty. Hence, Ty's case must rest upon
dilution of its mark.
Posner then reviewed three theories of dilution -- blurring,
tarnishment, and free riding -- but concluded none are
applicable in this case. He wrote "But what is
``dilution´´? There are (at least) three possibilities
relevant to this case, each defined by a different underlying
concern. First, there is concern that consumer search costs
will rise if a trademark becomes associated with a variety of
unrelated products." This is Posner's economic definition
of blurring. (Parentheses in original. All parenthetical
statements within quotes are in the original.)
Second, wrote Posner, there is tarnishment, where,
"because of the inveterate tendency of the human mind to
proceed by association" a mark may be "tarnished by
the association of the word" with its use by someone who
is selling a non-competing product.
Posner then suggested a third type of dilution -- free riding.
"Third, and most far reaching in its implications for the
scope of the concept of dilution, there is a possible concern
with situations in which, though there is neither blurring nor
tarnishment, someone is still taking a free ride on the
investment of the trademark owner in the trademark." In
this situation, "the efficacy of the trademark as an
identifier will not be impaired."
Posner offered a possible rationale for such a theory. If the
trademark owner has a dilution claim, then the
"investment in creating a famous name will be, as
economists say, ``internalized´´" That is, the owner
"will realize the full benefits of the investment rather
than sharing those benefits with others -- and as a result the
amount of investing in creating a prestigious name will
rise." Although, he added that the rationale "has
not yet been articulated in or even implied by the case
law". Posner also questioned the validity of the
rationale.
Then, having set out three rationales for dilution, Posner
concluded that none apply in the present case. "Perryman
is not producing a product, or a service, ... that is distinct
from any specific product; rather, she is selling the very
product to which the trademark sought to be defended against
her ``infringement´´ is attached. You can't sell a branded
product without using its brand name, that is, its trademark.
Supposing that Perryman sold only Beanie Babies (a
potentially relevant qualification, as we'll see), we would
find it impossible to understand how she could be thought to
be blurring, tarnishing, or otherwise free riding to any
significant extent on Ty's investment in its mark."
Cybersquatting. The appellate opinion does not review a
District Court judgment rendered pursuant to the Anti-
Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA). However, Judge
Posner discussed this statute, because it was relevant to his
analysis of secondary markets, or aftermarkets.
Posner wrote that there is a secondary market for beanie
babies. In fact, Ty employs a marketing strategy that seeks
the creation of a secondary market. And, wrote Posner,
Perryman is a middleman in this secondary market, or
aftermarket.
He then wrote that "we know from the events that led up
to the passage in 1999 of the Anticybersquatting Consumer
Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), that many firms value
having a domain name or Web address that signals their
product. (The ``cybersquatters´´ were individuals or firms
that would register domain names for the purpose of selling
them to companies that wanted a domain name that would be the
name of their company or of their principal product.) After
all, many consumers search by typing the name of a company in
the Web address space (browser) on their home page rather than
by use of a search engine."
Posner continued that "We do not think that by virtue of
trademark law producers own their aftermarkets and can impede
sellers in the aftermarket from marketing the trademarked
product. In this respect the case parallels our most recent
decision dealing with Ty's intellectual property, in which we
found that Ty was attempting to control the market in
collectors' guides to Beanie Babies by an overly expansive
interpretation of its copyrights." See, story titled
"7th Circuit Rules in Copyright and Fair Use Case"
in TLJ
Daily E-Mail Alert No. 444, June 5, 2002. See also, May
30, 2002, opinion
in Ty
v. Publications International.
Posner concluded that "We surmise that what Ty is seeking
in this case is an extension of antidilution law to forbid
commercial uses that accelerate the transition from trademarks
(brand names) to generic names (product names)."
He added that "Although there is a social cost when a
mark becomes generic -- the trademark owner has to invest in a
new trademark to identify his brand -- there is also a social
benefit, namely an addition to ordinary language." In
addition, "An interpretation of antidilution law as
arming trademark owners to enjoin uses of their mark that,
while not confusing, threaten to render the mark generic may
therefore not be in the public interest. Moreover, the vistas
of litigation that such a theory of dilution opens up are
staggering."
And hence, the Appeals Court vacated and remanded to the
District. However, since 20% of Perryman's sales are not
Beanie Babies, the summary judgment and injunction as to use
of the trademark in connection with the sale of that 20% might
stand on remand. However, the Appeals Court all but instructed
the District Court to allow Perryman to keep and use the
domain name: "we cannot imagine a state of facts
consistent with the extensive record compiled in the summary
judgment proceeding that could possibly justify an injunction
against Perryman’s representing in her business name and
Internet and Web addresses that she is doing what she has a
perfect right to do, namely sell Beanie Babies."
Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Judge Posner also
suggested in obiter dictum that use of a web site to sell
something constitutes both interstate and foreign commerce. He
wrote: "And Perryman's use of these words was commercial
in nature and took place in interstate commerce, and
doubtless, given the reach of the aptly named World Wide Web,
in foreign commerce as well."
Related Cases. Ty has been up to the Seventh Circuit on
several prior occasions in intellectual property cases. For
example, on January 23, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals
(7thCir) issued its opinion in Ty
v. Jones Group, another trademark infringement
case involving the "Beanie Babies" trademark. The
Jones Group made "Beanie Racers", bean filled toy
NASCAR racing cars. Ty filed a complaint in U.S. District
Court (NDIll). Ty also sought a preliminary injunction, which
the trial court granted. The Jones Group brought an
interlocutory appeal. The Appeals Court affirmed. Judge Flaum
wrote that opinion.
On May 30, 2002, the 7th Circuit issued its opinion
in Ty
v. Publications International, a copyright
infringement and fair use case. Ty holds copyrights to its
Beanie Babies as "sculptural works". Publications
International, Ltd. (PIL) publishes books, including For
the Love of Beanie Babies and Beanie Babies Collector's
Guide, which contain pictures of Beanie Babies. Ty filed a
complaint in U.S. District Court (NDIll) against PIL alleging
copyright and trademark infringement. PIL conceded that the
Beanie Babies are copyrighted, and that its books are
derivative works, but asserted the affirmative defense of fair
use. The District Court ruled on summary judgment that the
copying was not fair use, and granted Ty an injunction on the
copyright claim. The Appeals Court reversed and remanded. The
Appeals Court concluded that the issue was not appropriate for
summary judgment, reversed, and remanded for further
proceedings in light of its opinion. |
|
|
|
| Rep. Israel Introduces Bill
to Expand Tax Deduction for Computer Contributions |
10/3. Rep. Steve
Israel (D-NY) introduced HR
5551, a bill to amend the Section 170(e)(6)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to qualified computer
contributions to allow corporations to claim a charitable
deduction for the donation of services related to
contributions of computer technology or equipment.
Section 170 pertains to deductions for charitable
contributions. Subsection 170(e) pertains to "Certain
contributions of ordinary income and capital gain
property". Subsection 170(e)(6), in turn, is the
"Special rule for contributions of computer technology
and equipment for educational purposes". Currently, 26 U.S.C.
§ 170(e)(6)(B) defines ''qualified computer
contribution'' as "a charitable contribution by a
corporation of any computer technology or equipment".
This bill would add the phrase "or any services related
to computer design or to computer technology or
equipment".
The bill further provides that "The value of such a
contribution of services related to computer design or to
computer technology or equipment shall be calculated at a rate
not to exceed $65 an hour".
Moreover, the bill would add a very broad definition of the
phrase "services related to computer design or to
computer technology or equipment". It would include such
things as "Computer repair", "Computer
programming and software design", and "Network
designing, installation, and support services". However,
it would also include "photo retouching", banner
design, and "scanning services".
The bill was referred to the House Ways and Means
Committee. |
|
|
| NIST Publishes Computer
Security Guides |
10/2. The National Institute
of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Resource Center
(CSRC) published four computer security guides [all large PDF
and ZIP files] to provide the federal government with
information in countering cyber attacks. They are as follows:
Security Guide for Interconnecting Information Technology
Systems (NIST Special Publication 800-47) in PDF
or ZIP.
Procedures for Handling Security Ppatches (NIST Special
Publication 800-40) in PDF
or ZIP.
Security for Telecommuting and Broadband Communications (NIST
Special Publication 800-46) in PDF
or ZIP.
Use of the Common Vulnerability and Exposures (CVE)
Vulnerability Naming Scheme (NIST Special Publication 800-51)
in PDF
or ZIP. |
|
|
| New Bills |
10/3. The Digital
Media Consumers’ Rights Act of 2002, introduced by Rep. Rep. Rick Boucher
(D-VA) and Rep. John
Doolittle (R-CA) on October 3, has been assigned number HR 5544.
See also, stories in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 523, October
4, 2002.
10/2. The Digital
Choice and Freedom Act of 2002, introduced by Rep. Zoe Lofgren
(D-CA) and Rep. Mike
Honda (D-CA) on October 2, 2002, has been assigned number HR 5522.
See also, story in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 522, October 3,
2002. |
|
|
| People and Appointments |
10/4. Suzy DeFrancis joined the Executive Office of
the President as Deputy Assistant to the President for
Communications. She replaces, in part, Karen Hughes,
who has left the White House staff, in part. She was
previously a SVP and Director of Public Affairs at the public
relations firm Porter
Novelli. Before that, she was Deputy Director of
Communications and Congressional Affairs at the Republican National Committee.
See, White
House release.
10/4. Doug Badger joined the Executive Office of the
President as Special Assistant to the President for Economic
Policy. He replaces Mark McClellan as health policy
coordinator for the National Economic Council. McClellan has
been nominated to be Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). Badger previously worked at Ernst & Young. Before that,
he worked for Sen. Don
Nickles (R-OK). See, White
House release. |
|
|
| More News |
10/2. The Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers' (ICANN)
Committee on ICANN Evolution and Reform published its proposed
new bylaws.
10/4. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (4thCir) issued its
"unpublished" per curiam opinion
[4 pages in PDF] in Neurotron
v. AAEM, a Lanham Act case brought by a
manufacturer (Neurotron) against a publisher (AAEM) of an
unfavorable technical review of a product. The Appeals Court
affirmed the District Court's grant of summary judgment to the
publisher. The product review was not commercial speech with
the meaning of the Lanham Act.
10/2. Apple Computer
announced that it settled its lawsuit against Sorenson Media. Apple
filed a complaint on April 30, 2002 in U.S. District Court
(NDCal) against Sorenson alleging breach of contract in
connection with the licensing to Macromedia of a compression
codec used in Apple's QuickTime. Sorenson counterclaimed.
Apple stated in a release
only that "The settlement provides for the dismissal of
all claims and counterclaims." Sorenson issued a similar release.
10/2. Dell announced that the U.S. Marine Corps will buy about
30,000 desktop computers and 30,000 notebook systems. Dell
stated that the "notebooks are planned for use by Marine
Corps combat troops" and that "Dell will repair or
replace the notebook if it has been accidentally
damaged". See, Dell
release. |
|
|
| 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
information page.
Contact: 202-364-8882; E-mail.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.
Privacy
Policy
Notices
& Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2002 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All
rights reserved. |
|
|
|
| Monday, October 7 |
The House will meet at 9:30 AM for morning hour and at 11:00
AM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until
6:30 PM. The House will consider a number of measures under
suspension of the rules, including HR
4561, the Federal Agency Protection of Privacy Act.
The bill, which is sponsored by Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA)
would require that rules noticed for public comment by federal
agencies must be accompanied by an initial assessment of the
rule's impact on personal privacy interests.
The Senate will meet at 12:00 NOON for morning business, and
at 1:00 PM to consider SJRes 45,
a Joint Resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq.
The Supreme Court will return from its recess, which it began
on June 28, 2002.
9:30 - 11:00 AM. The Markle
Foundation will hold a panel discussion, and will release
a report, titled "Protecting America's Freedom in the
Information Age". The scheduled speakers are Zoe
Baird (Markle Co-Chair), James Barksdale (Markle Co-Chairs),
Gov. Michael Leavitt (R-UT), Philip Zelikow (Miller Center for
Public Affairs), William Crowell (former Deputy Director
of the National Security Agency),
Esther Dyson (EDVenture
Holdings), Jerry Berman (CDT), and
Frank Sesno (former CNN Washington Bureau Chief). Press
contact: Kristine Gager at 202 326-1747 or Kristine.Gager
@edelman.com. Location: National
Press Club, 13th Floor, Holeman Lounge, 529 14th Street,
NW.
11:00 AM. Steve DelBianco, Executive Director of the NetChoice Coalition, will
hold a conference call for reporters regarding a NetChoice
report titled "The State of eCommerce: Beyond the
Bubble, Beware the Barriers". The members of
NetChoice include ACT, ITAA,
Electronic Commerce
Association, Electronic
Retailing Association, Wine Institute, American Vintners
Association, eBay, Orbitz, eRealty.com, and 1-800-Contacts. The call in
number is 866 854-2496. The passcode is 2445480. For more
information, call Mark Blafkin at 202 331-2130 x104.
12:00 NOON. The FCBA's
Engineering and Technical Practice Committee will hold a brown
bag lunch to discuss committee planning and priorities for the
rest of the year. Location: Paul Hastings, 1299 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW, 10th floor.
2:00 PM. The Senate
Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing to examine pending
judicial nominations, including: Rosemary Collyer (to be a
Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia), Mark Fuller (U.S.D.C., MD Alabama), Robert Klausner
(U.S.D.C., CD California), Robert Kugler (U.S.D.C., New
Jersey), Ronald Leighton (U.S.D.C., WD Washington), Jose Luis
Linares (U.S.D.C. New Jersey), William Smith (U.S.D.C., Rhode
Island). See, notice.
Press contact: Blythe McCormick at 202 224-9437. Location:
Room 226, Dirksen Building.
2:00 - 4:00 PM. The FCC will hold
an en banc hearing on "the current state of the
telecommunications sector and to discuss steps needed to
restore its financial health". The participants will
include Simon Wilkie (FCC Chief Economist), Rob Gensler (T.
Rowe Price), Robert Konefal (Moody's Investors Service), Barry
Nalebuff (Yale University School of Management), Hal Varian (School of Information
Management and Systems, UC Berkeley), Kim Wallace (Lehman
Brothers), Lara Warner (Credit Suisse First Boston), Larry
White (NYU School of Business). Web cast. See, notice
[PDF]. Location: FCC, TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.
Extended deadline for the USITC to
complete its investigation titled "Certain Integrated
Circuits, Processes for Making Same, and Products Containing
Same". This is the USITC's Investigation No. 337-TA-450.
See, notice
in the Federal Register. |
|
|
| Tuesday, October 8 |
The House will meet at 9:00 AM for morning hour and at 10:00
AM for legislative business.
The Supreme Court
will hear oral argument in FCC v. Nextwave, Case No. 01-653,
and Arctic Slope Corp. v. Nextwave, Case No. 01-657.
Day one of a three day public workshop hosted by the FTC
to "explore how certain state regulations and private
business practices may be having significantly anticompetitive
effects on e-commerce". See, FTC release.
Location: FTC, 600 Penn. Ave., NW.
10:00 AM. The Senate
Judiciary Committee will hold a business meeting. See, notice.
Press contact: Blythe McCormick at 202 224-9437. Location:
Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The Copyright
Office (CO) will hold a status conference regarding data
format and delivery for record keeping requirements to be
established by the CO for the Section 112
and 114
statutory licenses. See, notice
[PDF].
12:15 PM. The FCBA's
Professional Responsibility Committee will hold a brown bag
lunch to discuss the scheduling of committee events and
activities for the upcoming year. For More Information: Frank
Montero. No RSVP is required. Location: Arnold &
Porter, 555 12th Street, NW.
12:30 PM. Tom Donahue, P/CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
will give a luncheon address. Location: National Press Club,
Ballroom, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.
3:00 PM. Kozo Yabe will give an address titled "Protecting
Intellectual Property Rights in Cyberspace: A Japanese
Perspective". Yabe is a partner in the Tokyo based
law firm of Yuasa
& Hara, which focuses on intellectual property law.
The lecture is sponsored by the George Washington University
(GWU) Law School's Dean Dinwooodey Center for Intellectual
Property Studies. For more information, contact Prof. Robert
Brauneis at 202 994-6138 or by email. Location: GWU
Law School, Burns Building, 5th Floor, Faculty Conference
Center, 720 20th St., NW.
6:10 - 7:30 PM. The George Washington University (GWU) Cyberspace Security and
Policy Research Institute and the GWU Law School will host a
panel discussion titled "The Music Wars over Digital
Intellectual Property". The speakers will be James
Boyle (Duke Law School), Stanley Pierre-Louis (RIAA),
and Lance Hoffman (GWU Computer Science Department). Location:
GWU Law School, Room LL 102, 2000 H St., NW. |
|
|
| Wednesday, October 9 |
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business.
The Supreme Court
will hear oral argument in Eldred v. Ashcroft, Case No.
01-618.
Day one of a two day symposium titled "The Rule of Law in
the Information Age: Reconciling Private Rights and Public
Interest" hosted by the Catholic
University of America School of Law. See, schedule.
Location: CUA, Walter Slowinski Court Room.
10:00 AM. The House
Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and
Consumer Protection will hold a hearing titled
"Telecommunications and Trade Promotion Authority:
Meaningful Market Access Goals for Telecommunications Services
in International Trade Agreements". Web cast. See, notice.
Location: Room 2322, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM. The Senate
Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Technology,
Terrorism, and Government Information will hold a hearing on
new laws implemented by the Administration in the fight
against terrorism. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of
Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Northrop
Grumman v. Intel, No. 02-1024. Location: Courtroom 402,
717 Madison Place, NW.
Day two of a three day public workshop hosted by the FTC
to "explore how certain state regulations and private
business practices may be having significantly anticompetitive
effects on e-commerce". See, FTC release.
Location: FTC, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
TIME? The Federal Accounting
Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) will meet to "obtain
information from interested individuals, organizations, and
groups about potential future projects". For more
information, contact Charles Jackson at 202 512-7352. See, notice
in Federal Register.
Deadline to submit comments to the FCC regarding SBC's Section 271 application
with the FCC to provide in region interLATA service in the
state of California. This is WC Docket No. 02-306. See, FCC
notice [PDF]. |
|
|
| Thursday, October 10 |
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business.
9:00 AM. The House
Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution
will hold an oversight hearing titled "A Judiciary
Diminished is Justice Denied: the Constitution, the Senate,
and the Vacancy Crisis in the Federal Judiciary". Web
cast. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
9:30 AM. The FCC will hold a
meeting. The agenda
includes four items. First, the FCC will consider a NPRM
concerning the reform of the International Settlements Policy,
its international simple resale and benchmarks policy, and the
issue of foreign mobile termination rates. (IB Docket No.
96-261). Second, the FCC will consider a First Report and
Order regarding digital operation by terrestrial radio
broadcasters. (MM Docket No. 99-325). Third, the FCC will a
Forefeiture Order concerning compliance with the shared
transport condition of the SBC Ameritech merger order.
Finally, the FCC's Enforcement Bureau will report on recent
enforcement activities. Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW,
Room TW-C05 (Commission Meeting Room).
12:00 PM. The Cato Institute
will host a book forum. Jagdish Bhagwati
(Columbia University) will discuss his book, Free
Trade Today, and a collection which he edited, Going
Alone: The Case for Relaxed Reciprocity in Freeing Trade.
Robert
Litan (Brookings) will comment. Webcast. Lunch will follow
the program. See, notice.
Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.
Day two of a two day symposium titled "The Rule of Law in
the Information Age: Reconciling Private Rights and Public
Interest" hosted by the Catholic University of America
School of Law. See, schedule.
Location: CUA, Walter Slowinski Court Room.
Day three of a three day public workshop hosted by the FTC
to "explore how certain state regulations and private
business practices may be having significantly anticompetitive
effects on e-commerce". See, FTC release.
Location: FTC, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
Day one of a two day Annual Update Conference on Export
Controls and Policy hosted by the Department of Commerce's
Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS). See, agenda.
Location: to be announced.
Deadline to submit comments to the FCC regarding BellSouth's Section 271
application with the FCC to provide in region interLATA
service in the states of Florida and Tennessee. This is WC
Docket No. 02-307. See, FCC
notice [PDF]. |
|
|
| Friday, October 11 |
The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business.
Day two of a two day Annual Update Conference on Export
Controls and Policy hosted by the Department of Commerce's
Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS). See, agenda.
Location: to be announced. |
|
|