|FCC Adopts Order Allowing Some Secondary
Leasing of Spectrum
5/15. The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, a Report and Order (R&O) and a
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) which allows certain FCC spectrum
licensees to enter into leasing arrangements with third parties.
The FCC released a
release [4 pages in PDF] announcing the R&O and FNPRM. It states that
this item "(1) authorizes spectrum leasing in a broad
array of wireless radio services, (2) adopts streamlined processing for certain
categories of license transfer and assignment applications, and (3) seeks
comment on additional steps to improve the functioning of secondary markets."
Neither the FCC release, nor the FCC
Commissioners, spoke in terms of creating "property", "rights",
The release describes the item as "a step in the Commission's evolution toward
greater reliance on the marketplace".
This item is part of WT Docket No. 00-230, which was opened in 2000, during
the tenure of former Chairman William Kennard. The FCC adopted its original
Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking [61 pages in PDF] in on November 9, 2000. See, TLJ story titled
Secondary Markets for Wireless Spectrum", and TLJ news analysis titled
Access Devices and the Internet", both dated November 10, 2000.
This R&O and FNPRM also builds upon the work of the FCC's
Task Force (SPTF), which Chairman Powell formed in June of 2002. The SPTF
solicited comments and held hearings, outside of the context of WT Docket No.
00-230, or any other rule making
proceeding. See, story titled "Powell Creates Task Force to Conduct Spectrum
Inquiry" in TLJ
Daily E-Mail Alert No. 446, June 7, 2002. The FCC announced the completion
of a SPTF report on November 7, 2002. See, story
titled "FCC Announces Report on Spectrum Policy" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 545, November 8, 2002. The SPTF released this
Report [73 pages in PDF] on November 15, 2002. One of the many topics
addressed by the report is moving towards markets for spectrum. The report recommends that
"spectrum policy must evolve towards more flexible and market oriented
Commissioners' Comments. FCC Commissioner
stated at the May 15 meeting that this item is "groundbreaking". FCC
Powell and Commissioner
Kevin Martin wrote a joint
statement [PDF] in which they stated that "Today's action is one of
the most important spectrum reform decisions by this
Commission in the last decade. For years, the Commission has rhetorically
praised the concept and possibilities created by secondary markets in spectrum.
Today that rhetoric turns into reality."
Powell and Martin also wrote that "we adopt a new
regime for spectrum leases, allowing leases for which there is no change in de
facto control to proceed without prior Commission approval and providing a
streamlined approval process for other leases. We also adopt a streamlined
approval process for transfers and assignments of licenses. Together, the rules
we adopt will create new opportunities for licensees with under-utilized
spectrum, to the benefit of consumers. A carrier with a business plan that calls
for serving only the most densely populated portions of its service area now has
every incentive to lease the balance of their spectrum to an entrepreneur.
Similarly, the cost-benefit equation for spectrum sharing has been transformed.
Where formerly the risk of interference imposed only costs, those costs must now
be weighed against the value that may be negotiated in a lease or transfer. When
cognitive radios and frequency-agile technologies are introduced to the mix, the
wrote in a
that "I believe that adoption of today’s Report and Order shepards in a
monumental shift in spectrum policy in the United States. This item recognizes
the importance of creating a market-based approach to regulation by creating a
secondary market for spectrum in the wireless radio services. In doing so, it
substantially updates the FCC’s standard for interpreting Section 310(d) of the
Communications Act set forth in the 1963 Intermountain Microwave decision for
purposes of spectrum leasing."
wrote in a
that "The Commission should encourage healthy and robust secondary markets. At
the same time, we must ensure that license obligations continue to be satisfied
and enforced. A regulatory framework for innovation should promote a secondary
market that accommodates new technologies, but does not cause the Commission to
lose or cede ultimate control over the spectrum."
Michael Copps focused on
several matters that are not in the R&O and FNPRM. For example, he wrote in his
dissenting statement [PDF] that
"I want to thank my colleagues for agreeing to eliminate several
sections of the NPRM." He continued that "Beginning the process of
allowing television and
radio broadcasters to sell to non-broadcasters access to spectrum rights that
Congress and the FCC gave them for free would have been a terrible mistake. It
would have meant that broadcasters could sell control of part or all of their
spectrum rights to others, potentially without Commission review. Broadcasters
were given these spectrum rights for free because they are engaged in work that
is critically important to our country -- the provision of free over-the-air TV
and radio. To allow them to sell these spectrum rights for other uses would have
been deeply troubling." He added that this would have undermined the digital
He also stated that "proposing to do away with traditional FCC review of
transfers of control of all licenses, including broadcast licenses, would have
been a mistake. It would have meant that the FCC would no longer need actually
to conduct a review of mergers and acquisitions involving FCC licenses."
Finally, he stated that "I appreciate eliminating the section that would have proposed
allowing licensees to mortgage their licenses as a way to raise money." He
referred to the FCC's NextWave debacle.
Highlights of the Report and Order. The R&O, as described in the FCC's
release, "authorizes most wireless radio licensees
with "exclusive" rights to their assigned spectrum to enter into spectrum
leasing arrangements. These policies and rules affect both mobile and fixed
services, including Cellular, Personal Communications Services (PCS),
Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR), Local Multipoint Distribution Service (LMDS),
fixed microwave, 24 GHz, and 39 GHz, among others."
This R&O replaces the FCC's 1963 Intermountain Microwave
decision. See, 12 FCC 2d 559 (1963). Chairman Powell
joked that that decision is as old as he is, and it is time to "put it to its
long deserved rest".
The R&O's leasing rules provide that "licensees in the covered
services may lease some or all of their spectrum-usage rights to third parties,
for any amount of spectrum and in any geographic area encompassed by the
license, and for any period of time within the term of the license."
The R&O creates two different mechanisms for spectrum leasing.
First, there is the "spectrum manager" option. This "enables parties to enter
into spectrum leasing arrangements without obtaining prior Commission approval
so long as the licensee retains both de
jure control (i.e., legal control) of the license and de facto
control (i.e., working control) over the leased spectrum pursuant to the updated
de facto control standard for leasing." (Parentheses and emphasis in original.)
Second, there is the "de facto transfer leasing" option. This
"permits parties to enter into long-term or short-term leasing arrangements
whereby the licensee retains de jure control of the license while
de facto control is transferred to the lessee for the term of
the lease. De facto transfer leases under this option will require prior
Commission approval under a streamlined approval process."
Reaction. Tom Wheeler, P/CEO of the Cellular
Telecommunications and Internet Association (CTIA), stated in a
that "Permitting secondary markets for spectrum will deliver to carriers
improved access to the airwaves, increasing their flexibility and bringing down
their costs, which should ultimately result in lower prices for consumers ... Football teams aren’t done after draft day. They continue to meet
their changing needs through trades and late season acquisitions. Wireless
carriers deserve, and will now receive, similar flexibility."
Related Proceeding. Also, there is another open proceeding related to this one. The FCC announced a Notice of
Inquiry (NOI) regarding "Additional Spectrum for Unlicensed Devices Below 900
MHz and in the 3 GHz Band" on December 11, 2002. This is OET Docket No. 02-380. The comment
period is still open. See, story titled "FCC Announces Notice of Inquiry Re More
Spectrum for Unlicensed Use" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 566, December 12, 2002.
|FCC Adopts NPRM to Increase Unlicensed
5/15. The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to make available an additional 255 MHz of spectrum
for unlicensed use. The FCC did issue a short
press release [PDF] describing the NPRM.
The proposal, which would nearly double the amount of spectrum for unlicensed
use, would not be for any exclusive use. However, the main use will likely be
802.11 (Wi-Fi) and Bluetooth devices.
The FCC stated in its release that the NPRM proposes "to make available
for unlicensed use an additional 255
megahertz of spectrum in the 5.470-5.725 GHz band". It further proposes that
"this spectrum be made available for use by unlicensed National Information
Infrastructure (U-NII) devices, including Radio Local Area Networks (RLANs),
operating under Part 15 of the FCC's rules."
The release also states that the NPRM proposes
"additional technical requirements for U-NII devices, including transition
periods for implementation of these requirements." It provides no further
(at right) wrote a
separate statement [PDF]. He stated, "Once the
backwater of baby monitors and cordless telephones, the unlicensed sector has
developed into a hotbed of growth and innovation."
He noted that "we propose to forego exclusive-use licensing,
allowing market forces to determine how the band will be used, and providing
potential users the greatest possible flexibility."
He also addressed the prospects for global harmonization. "Our
proposal does create the possibility of aligning the frequency bands used for U-NII
devices domestically with those in other parts of the world, creating the
potential for economies of scale for equipment manufacturers and a declining
cost structure for consumers. But global harmonization is not yet a reality."
FCC Commissioners Kevin
Martin and Michael Copps wrote
joint separate statement [PDF] that this NPRM will "the American delegation
to the WRC an important tool in
promoting these and other wireless applications around the globe."
wrote in a
separate statement [PDF] that "this item promotes
the deployment of broadband services via wi-fi technology". She added that "the
true key to achieving Congress’s objective of a deregulatory and procompetitive
framework lies in moving beyond duopoly towards a world where
multiple facilities-based providers compete in the broadband
Martin and Copps added that they hope that unlicensed devices "eventually
provide a last-mile application to connect
people's homes to the Internet, offering a real alternative to telephone wires,
cable, and satellite connections."
Michael Petricone, of the Consumer Electronics
Association, stated in a
that "the allocation of additional unlicensed spectrum will accelerate the
rollout of new technologies, such as wireless local area network (WLAN) devices.
The FCC's action will promote accessible and affordable high-speed wireless
broadband, and will especially benefit Americans in rural or hard to reach
This is ET Docket No. 03-122, and FCC 03-110. For more
information, contact Ahmed Lahjouji at 202 418-2061.
|FCC Unlicensed Spectrum
NPRM and the Jumpstart Broadband Act
5/15. The Federal Communications Commission's
(FCC) NPRM, announced on May 15, proposing to make available an
additional 255 MHz of spectrum for unlicensed use closely follows several bills pending
in the House and Senate which are titled the "Jumpstart Broadband Act".
are also differences.
January 14, 2003, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
(at right) and Sen. George Allen (R-VA) introduced
the "Jumpstart Broadband Act", a bill to require the FCC to allocate at least
255 megahertz of contiguous spectrum in the 5 gigahertz band for unlicensed
use by wireless broadband devices. See, story titled "Sen. Boxer and Sen. Allen
Introduce WiFi Spectrum
Bill", in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 586, January 20, 2003. See also,
TLJ copy of bill as introduced.
On January 27, 2003, Rep. Darrell Issa
also titled the "Jumpstart Broadband Act". Also on January 27,
Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA) introduced
also titled the "Jumpstart Broadband Act". Both are companion bills to S 159,
with minor differences.
Sen. Boxer stated in a
that "I commend the FCC for moving quickly to implement the allocation of
spectrum our legislation requested."
Sen. Allen also praised the FCC in a
release. He also
stated that "Today's decision is a great victory for
the technology industry, but most importantly, consumers. Now more people in
their homes, schools, colleges and businesses will be able to receive high speed
broadband on their laptop wirelessly. People will be able to carry their laptop
computer like a cordless phone around their home, dorm room or business."
The FCC has not released its NPRM, thus making it impossible to compare the
text of the NPRM to the text of the bills. However, the FCC did issue a short
press release [PDF], and the Commissioners made brief statements at the May 15
meeting, and released brief written statements.
Both the legislation and the NPRM reference 255 megahertz of spectrum. The bill
references its location as the "5 gigahertz band", while the NPRM is more
specific. It references the "5.470-5.725 GHz band".
The bill requires that the spectrum be "contiguous". The NPRM's
proposal for 255 megahertz in the 5.470-5.725 GHz band is necessarily
The bill requires the FCC to conduct an NPRM, which is just what the
FCC is doing. The Allen Boxer bill, and the Honda bill require the FCC to
allocate spectrum within 180 days; the Issa version allows 18 months. The bills
also set deadlines for adopting "technical and device rules ".
The FCC has not yet announced any timetables or deadlines.
The bill also contains a significant restriction on use not referenced so far
by the FCC. The bill requires that the spectrum be used by "wireless broadband
devices", which it defines in terms of speed, being two way, and being digital.
The FCC referenced only wireless devices. It does not contain these "broadband"
FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein
wrote in a
that this NPRM proposes that the new unlicensed spectrum may be used for "broadband
and other important services". In contrast, Sen. Allen stated that "I've
been working to make further broadband deployment and Wi-Fi adoption a reality,
without interference from microwave ovens, cordless phones, baby monitors, and
other wireless devices."
Hence, the FCC has not stated that one way, analog, and low speed devices are
excluded from using the proposed unlicensed spectrum band. Indeed, the only word
in the FCC release which qualifies the use of the spectrum is the word "use".
There is not even a restriction that the use be communications related.
On the other hand, the FCC regularly fails to disclose key provisions of the
items that it adopts, until it releases the actual text of the item. The FCC
typically takes a week to several months to release the text of its important
NPRMs and orders.
The bill also requires the FCC to "adopt minimal technical and device rules
to facilitate robust and efficient use for wireless broadband devices" and
"amend its rules to require that all wireless broadband devices manufactured
after the effective date of those rules that operate in the spectrum allocated
under paragraph (1) -- (i) be capable of 2-way digital communications; (ii) meet
the interference protection standards established under paragraph (2)."
Paragraph (2) pertains to interference. It provides that "the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration shall, after consultation with
all interested agencies and parties, including the Department of Defense,
establish standards for interference protection that is reasonably required to
enable incumbent Federal government agency users of spectrum allocated under
paragraph (1) to continue to use that spectrum, and advise the Commission of
The FCC's release states merely that its NPRM proposes
"additional technical requirements for U-NII devices, including transition
periods for implementation of these requirements."
However, the FCC released a working
paper [65 pages in PDF] on May 14 titled "Joint OET-OSP White Paper on Unlicensed
Devices and the Associated Regulatory Issues". It does address interference
associated with wireless devices, and rules that could address interference
problems. See, following story.
|FCC Releases Working Paper on Unlicensed
5/14. The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) published a
paper [65 pages in PDF] titled "Joint OET-OSP White Paper on Unlicensed
Devices and the Associated Regulatory Issues". The paper reviews the
technology of devices that use unlicensed spectrum, and interference problems.
It also recommends making available more spectrum for unlicensed devices, and
the promulgation of rules to address interference problems.
The paper states that "without a well-considered and
forward-looking approach to policy reform, much the benefit and promise of
unlicensed devices may be delayed, or unrealized. Considering the complexity of
issues involved, the FCC should promulgate rules which are as clear as
practicable, strictly enforced, and maximize utility to address the fundamental
problem of interference."
It concludes that "effective policy reform includes
enabling more unlicensed spectrum and promulgating rules to encourage
technological and market-based solutions to optimize efficient use and sharing
of spectrum. The FCC must be mindful of balancing competing interests and retain
the low entry barriers that have proven so successful for unlicensed spectrum."
It was written by Kenneth Carter of the FCC's
Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis (OSP), Ahmed Lahjouji of the FCC's
of Engineering and Technology (OET), and Neal McNeil of the OET.
Editor's Note. This working paper was published in the FCC website on May 14.
It was subsequently removed, to make corrections and revisions. FCC staff states
that it will be published again on Friday afternoon, May 16. If the above
hyperlink does not operate, the working paper will be accessible from the
OSP's Working Paper Series
|Copps Disputes FCC's Authority to Allow
Secondary Leasing of Spectrum
5/15. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner
questioned whether the FCC has legal authority to allow leasing of spectrum. He
argued that 47 U.S.C. § 310
prohibits it. Commissioner Copps raised this matter in both his oral comments at the May 15
meeting, and in a
dissenting statement [3 pages in PDF].
Section 310(d) provides: "No construction permit or
station license, or any rights thereunder, shall be transferred, assigned, or
disposed of in any manner, voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly,
or by transfer of control of any corporation holding such permit or license, to
any person except upon application to the Commission and upon finding by the
Commission that the public interest, convenience, and necessity will be served
thereby. Any such application shall be disposed of as if the proposed transferee
or assignee were making application under section 308 of this title for the
permit or license in question; but in acting thereon the Commission may not
consider whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity might be served
by the transfer, assignment, or disposal of the permit or license to a person
other than the proposed transferee or assignee."
Copps (at right)
first stated that "From a policy perspective, I could support many of the ideas
in today's Order." But then, he addressed the statutory perspective.
He wrote in his dissent, and read aloud at the meeting,
the following: "But I keep running into the same
problem and I cannot make it go away. I do not see how the law allows us to
effectuate these policies. I must therefore respectfully dissent. Congress
enacted Section 310(d) of the Communications Act and we must abide by it. That
section makes it clear that no ``station license or any rights thereunder shall be
transferred, assigned or disposed of in any manner ... except upon application
to the Commission and upon finding by the Commission that the public interest,
convenience, and necessity will be served thereby.´´ But today we allow
licensees to transfer a significant right – the right to control the spectrum on
a day-to-day basis -- without applying to the Commission and without the
requirement of any Commission public interest finding. How can this be legal
under Section 310(d)?" (Emphasis in original.)
He added, "Because Section 310(d) does not allow transfers
without FCC approval, I remain of the opinion that the Commission, if we wish to
go down this road, will have to go the Congress and seek legislative changes
before proceeding with the sweeping changes it would make today. Any other
approach puts us in conflict with the law."
Muleta (at right), Chief of the
FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, was asked about Commissioner Copps'
arguments at a press conference following the FCC meeting of May 15. He stated
that "It is open to
interpretation. Obviously, he has a different interpretation." He did not
offered a detailed statutory analysis.
Nor did Muleta state, for example, that the FCC has a long history of interpreting
statutory mandates to meet the FCC's policy objectives, even when the plain meaning of
the statute is to the contrary.
|Powell Sticks to June 2 Date for Broadcast
Ownership Biennial Review
5/15. Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) Chairman Michael
Powell responded to the request of FCC Commissioners
Michael Copps and
Jonathan Adelstein for
a delay of the June 2 consideration of media ownership rules. Powell announced in a
letter to Copps and Adelstein, and in a
[PDF], that "I must
respectfully decline to postpone the planned June 2nd consideration of the
Broadcast Ownership Biennial Review".
On May 13, Copps and Adelstein issued a
[MS Word] which states that they have requested that the FCC "postpone the
announced June 2nd consideration of changes to the Commission’s media
concentration protections. Under long-standing Commission practices, such
requests from Commissioners are traditionally honored." The two also "reiterated
a request for a public airing of the proposed rule changes." See, story
titled "Adelstein and Copps Seek Delay of FCC
Action on Media Ownership" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 661, May 14, 2003.
Powell's release further stated that the FCC "will
vote on the media ownership Biennial Review on June 2, 2003, as previously
scheduled. In addition, the sunshine period will be extended to Friday, May 30,
the last business day before the open meeting, so that Commissioners and their
staffs can continue to engage the public as the Commissioners deliberate the
Copps also responded to Powell's response: "This is really disappointing. The
Chairman's decision not to make these proposals public, nor even to grant a
short delay in voting, runs roughshod over the requests of the American people
and the precedents of this Commission. This rush to judgment means that we will
not fully understand the impact of the specific proposals on our media landscape
before we are forced to vote. We are rushing to passage of new rules without
letting the American people know who is going to own and control the public
airwaves for years to come and without gaining the benefit of their input on
what is being proposed. This is no way to do business when critical issues
affecting every American are at stake. I am disappointed that the Chairman
refuses to heed the calls of colleagues, as well as many Members of Congress, to
let the sun shine on his proposals before the Commission decides on further
|Representatives Introduce Bill to Update
Computer Professionals Exception to Overtime Pay Requirement
5/6. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) and
Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ) introduced
HR 1996, a
bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) regarding certain technology workers.
29 U.S.C. § 213
contains exceptions to the requirement that a minimum wage and overtime be paid. Subsection
(a)(17) currently states the exception for persons who are a "computer
systems analyst, computer programmer, software engineer, or other similarly
The minimum wage for computer professionals is not at issue. This bill, and
the FLSA, require that a wage far above the minimum wage be paid for this
exception to apply -- $27.63 per hour. Rather, the issue is which computer and
information workers must be paid overtime for over forty hours per week.
The bill would expand the language of the existing exception, and broaden the
number of workers covered by the exception. The bill would also bring the
language of the FLSA up to date with the changing nature of computer related
work. This exception was last amended in 1996.
For example, the FLSA now references "computer systems", but neither networks,
the internet, intranets nor databases. Similarly, the FLSA does not now reference
computer or network security.
The bill would provide an exception for the following: "any employee
who is a computer systems, network, or database
analyst, designer, developer, programmer, software engineer, or other
similarly skilled worker -- (i) whose primary duty is -- (I) the application
of systems or network or database analysis
techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine
hardware, software, systems, network, or database specifications
(including functional specifications); (II) the design, configuration, development, integration,
documentation, analysis, creation, testing, securing, or modification
of, or problem resolution for, computer systems, networks, databases, or
programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user, system,
network, or database specifications, including design specifications and
machine operating systems; (III) the management or training of employees performing duties
described in subclause (I) or (II); or (IV) a combination of duties described
in subclauses (I), (II), or
(III) the performance of which requires the same level of skills; and (ii) who,
in the case of an employee who is compensated on an hourly
basis, is compensated at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour."
This is a re-introduction of a bill introduced in the 107th Congress by Rep.
Andrews and former Rep. Lindsey Graham. See,
(107th). Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was
elected to the Senate in November, 2002. He re-introduced his bill in the Senate
in the current (108th) Congress as
S 495 on
March 3, 2003.
Association of Computer Consultant Businesses supports this legislation.
|Friday, May 16
12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar
Association's (FCBA) Diversity Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The
speakers will be Bill Bailey and Toni Cook Bush. RSVP to Harry Wingo at 202
418-1783 or firstname.lastname@example.org. Location: Room
253, Russell Building.
Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its
Notice of Inquiry (NOI) [MS Word] regarding "Additional Spectrum for
Unlicensed Devices Below 900 MHz and in the 3 GHz Band". Unlicensed devices
would include, among other things, 802.11. See,
notice in Federal Register, January 21, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 13, at Pages
2730-2733. See also, story titled "FCC Announces Notice of Inquiry Re More
Spectrum for Unlicensed Use" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 566, December 12, 2002. For more information, contact Hugh Van
Tuyl in the FCC's Office of Engineering & Technology at
email@example.com or 202 418-7506. This
is OET Docket No. 02-380. See,
notice of extension [PDF].
|Tuesday, May 20
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications
(FCBA) will host a continuing legal education (CLE) program titled "What
Every Communications Practitioner Should Know About Sarbanes Oxley and
Corporate Compliance". The speakers will include Tom Hickey (Assistant
General Counsel, Nextel), Barry Summer (Assistant Director, Division of
Corporation Finance, SEC), and Andrew Hruska (Office of the Deputy Attorney
General). Location: Dow Lohnes & Albertson, 1200 New Hampshire Avenue, NW,
Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) regarding AOL Time Warner's
petition [58 pages in PDF]
requesting relief from the FCC's January 22, 2001 Memorandum Opinion and Order
(MOO) approving the merger of AOL and Time Warner, and imposing conditions upon AOL
Time Warner regarding instant messaging services. Specifically, AOL Time Warner seeks
relief from the condition restricting its ability to offer internet users streaming
video advanced Instant Messaging based high speed services (AIHS) via AOL Time
Warner broadband facilities.
Deadline to submit requests to the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office (USPTO) to present oral testimony at it May 30 hearing
regarding its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend its regulations to
implement the Madrid Protocol Implementation Act of 2002 (MPIA). See,
notice in the Federal Register, March 28, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 60, at Pages
15119 - 15138.
|Wednesday, May 21
9:00 - 11:00 AM. The U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) and the U.S. Copyright Office (CO) will hold a
meeting to discuss the preparation of a new text of the Hague Jurisdiction and
Enforcement of Judgments Convention. See,
notice. Location: USPTO, 2121 Crystal Drive, Crystal Park 2, Suite 902,
10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary
Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of
Hewitt Pate to be
Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice's
Antitrust Division. Location: Room
226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The Senate Banking
Committee will hold a hearing titled "National Export Strategy". The
witnesses will be Donald Evans (Secretary of Commerce), Philip Merrill
(President of the Export Import Bank of the United States), Thelma Askey
(Director of theU.S. Trade and Development Agency), Peter Watson (President of
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation), Hector Barreto (Administrator of
the Small Business Administration). See,
Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.
12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar
Association's (FCBA) Transactional Practice Committee will host a brown
bag lunch. The topics will include "the purposes of opinions within the
context of various transactions and typical regulatory opinion language". The
speakers will include
Quale (Skadden Arps) and James
Rogers (Latham & Watkins). RSVP to Margery
Singleton at 202 637-2200 or
margery.singleton @lw.com Location: Latham & Watkins, 555 11th Street, NW,
12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar
Association's (FCBA) Mass Media Practice Committee will host a brown bag
lunch titled "Getting Ready for Radio Station License Renewal". The speakers
will include Roy Stewart, Chief of the of the
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
Office of Broadcast Licence
Policy, and Peter Doyle, Chief of the FCC's
Audio Division. RSVP to Wendy Parish
at firstname.lastname@example.org. Location: NAB, 1771 N
St., NW, 1st Fl. Confr. Rm.
6:00 - 8:00 PM. D.C. Bar Association's Intellectual Property Law Section
will host a continuing legal education (CLE) program titled "Recent
Developments in Technology Transfer with the Federal Government: Focus on
Intellectual Property". The speakers will be Paul Gottlieb (Assistant
General Counsel, Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, Department of
Energy), Holly Svetz (Morrison & Foerster), and Richard Litman. The prices to
attend range from $70 to $90. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1250 H
Street NW, B-1 level.
Deadline to submit comments to the
Copyright Office (CO) in response to its
notice of proposed rules that rules would "govern SoundExchange, an
unincorporated division of the Recording Industry Association of America,
Inc., when it functions as the designated agent for the purpose of receiving
royalty payments and statements of accounts from nonexempt subscription
digital transmission services which make digital transmissions of sound
recordings under a statutory license." See, Federal Register, April 21, 2003,
Vol. 68, No. 76, at Pages 19482 - 19485.
Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [MS Word] titled "In the Matter of Second
Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion
To Digital Television". This is MB Docket No. 03-15, RM 9832, and MM Docket
Nos. 99-360, 00-167, and 00-168. See also,
notice in the Federal Register, February 18, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 32, at
Pages 7737-7747. And see,
notice [PDF] extending deadlines.
Deadline to submit "white papers" to the
Office of Science and Technology Policy' (OSTP) High End Computing
Revitalization Task Force (HECRTF) regarding high end computing. See,
notice in the Federal Register, May 14, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 93, at Page
|Friday, May 23
10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) Media Security and Reliability Council will hold a
notice in Federal Register: November 19, 2002, Vol. 67, No. 223, at Page
69742. For more information, contact Barbara Kreisman at 202-418-1600.
Location: FCC, 445 12th St. SW Room TW-C305.
Deadline to submit to the Department of
Commerce (DOC) nominations for award of the
National Medal of Technology.
notice in the Federal Register, February 14, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 31, at
|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 subscribers with multiple recipients. Free one
month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free
subscriptions are available for journalists,
federal elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and
executive branch. The TLJ web site is
free access. However, copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert 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 - 2003 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All