|Supreme Court Denies Cert in
10/20. The Supreme Court denied
certiorari, without opinion, in America West
Holding v. No. 84 Employer-Teamster Joint Council Pension Trust
Fund, S.C. No. 03-250. See,
[10 pages in PDF] at page 3.
The Court passed up an opportunity to interpret (and resolve the conflict
between the various circuits) the heightened pleading requirements language of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA).
The plaintiffs filed a complaint in the
U.S. District Court (DAriz) against America West
Holding Corporation and some of its officers and directors alleging securities fraud. They alleged violation of Section
10(b) of the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. They also alleged violation of Section
20(a) of the 1934 Act. They are represented by the class action securities fraud specialists,
The District Court dismissed the complaint. The
Court of Appeals (9thCir) issued its
opinion [PDF] on February 13, 2003, reversing and remanding.
It was a split opinion.
This case is America West
Holding Corporation, et al. v. No. 84 Employer-Teamster Joint Council Pension Trust
Fund, S.C. No. 03-250, a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Appeals Court number is 01-16725.
This case arose in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, D.C. No.
|House Intellectual Property Caucus Advocates
Ending USPTO Fee Diversion
10/16. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL),
Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA), and
Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) held a press conference to
announce the formation of a Congressional Caucus on Intellectual Property, and
to advocate an end to the practice of diverting user fees collected by the
Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to fund other government programs.
Specifically, the Caucus wants the House leadership to schedule a vote on
the "United States Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act of 2003".
They were joined by
Gerald Mossinghoff, who was head of the USPTO in the
Reagan administration, and
Dickinson, who was head of the USPTO in the Clinton administration.
The USPTO is funded solely from user fees. However, since 1990 a part of the
fees collected by the USPTO have been diverted to pay for other government
programs. Companies that own intellectual property, and their trade groups, have
never liked this arrangement. They have called it a hidden tax, and a tax on
Wexler stated that "In years past, the Judiciary Committee, at different points,
has passed a bill similar to 1561. It has never, to my knowledge, been heard by
the full House. And we are making a prominent effort in trying to get the House
leadership to advance the bill to the House floor so that we can get a debate
and a vote."
He added that "the bill enjoys a strong degree of support from both small businesses and
larger corporations. I think there is a growing understanding that the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office is one of the few agencies that actually brings more
money into the Treasury than is allocated in terms of expenditures on it."
Rep. Inslee stated that "we are right now in one of the biggest periods of
job loss in American history, and we need an economic policy. Everybody knows
that our economy will blossom, and we will create new jobs, only when we create
new technologies, because that is the way America creates new jobs."
Inslee continued that "it is the single best economic investment that the United States can make,
and the full House needs to seize a little destiny, even though a particular
committee may not like this issue. But, I believe that ultimately, we are going
to get this done, because I believe that people are starting to understand."
He added that "the U.S. Congress is throwing sand in the gears of
technological development" and "it is really a national embarrassment".
Feeney (at left) stated that "the truth of the matter is the patent process takes
too long. We have lost the entire reason that the founding fathers set -- the
importance of protecting intellectual property."
He also argued that "If you are willing to provide a short, concise and reasonable application,
you ought to, number one, get hurried up treatment."
Mossinghoff stated that "the fact is the Office is not keeping up with its
workload" and that "pendency might go up as high as four years". He said that
"that is unacceptable to U.S. industry. It is unacceptable to high technology
inventors. And, we have got to do something to address that, and bring us back
to something like the 18 months which we established when we established the fee
funding in the first place".
Dickinson (at right) said Mossinghoff's projection (of
four year pendency) is "valid" and "likely to be borne out if the revenue does
not arrive. And it would be a disaster for the vending community, a disaster for
the investment community, the high technology community in this country, and for
the public at large. Because, what it does, if you are not able to get your
patents out of the Office soon enough, or your trademark registration, for that
matter, the patent in particular, people will stop using the system. It will
atrophy. People will keep their inventions secret. The public disclosure
function of the patent system will be undermined, and in that, undermining the
incentive to move forward. Invention and technology will be undermined."
There have been many attempts to end the diversion of USPTO fees over the
years. All have
failed. The proposals are strongly supported by the members of the
Judiciary Committee, and its Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and
Intellectual Property (CIIP), as well as by many members of the Senate Judiciary
However, the House Appropriations
Committee and the
Committee continue to pass annual appropriations bills for the Departments of
Commerce, Justice and State (CJS) that continue the practice of fee diversion.
(Rep. Wexler and Rep. Feeney are members of the Committee.)
The Clinton and current Bush administrations have expressed support for ending
the diversion of fees, but have continued to submit annual budgets that perpetuate
There has been one vote in the full House on this issue. In June of 2000,
Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC), who was then
the Chairman of the CIIP Subcommittee, offered an amendment to the CJS
appropriations bill that would have reduced the size of the diversion. It failed
on a role call vote of 145-223. See,
titled "House Rejects Coble Amendment on USPTO Funding", June 25, 2000.
The Coble amendment was supported more by Republicans (48% voted yes) than by
Democrats (18% vote yes). The Judiciary Committee members voted 20 yes, and 6
no. The Appropriations Committee members voted 8 yes and 41 no. There was also
disproportionate support for the Coble amendment from Representatives from
California and other western states. See,
TLJ story titled "Analysis of House Vote on Coble Amendment", June 25, 2003.
|Ashcroft Addresses Roving Wiretaps
10/16. Attorney General
John Ashcroft gave a
speech to the Defense Research Institute
in Washington DC in which he addressed roving wiretaps under the PATRIOT Act.
He stated in his prepared text that "In the days after September 11, we did
not have to look far to find investigative tactics to prevent additional acts of
terrorism. The answer was simple: use the same tools to prevent terrorism that
we use to prevent other crimes. For example, for years we have used roving
wiretaps in organized crime and drug cases. If a drug trafficker is working on a
big haul of contraband and moves from his home phone to his office phone and
then to his cell phone, the FBI can use the same wiretap to listen to all his
conversations, instead of having to get a warrant for each phone the trafficker
"If tools like this work against gangsters, drug king pins and murderers,
then why shouldn't we use them against terrorists? We should. And that is why
Congress passed the PATRIOT Act by a wide, bipartisan margin. It gives law
enforcement the same tools and the same capabilities to prevent terrorism that
we have used to combat other forms of crime", said Ashcroft.
|CDT Releases Report on Broadcast Flag
10/20. The Center for Democracy and Technology
(CDT) released a report
[31 pages in PDF] titled "Implications of the Broadcast Flag: A Public Interest
Primer". It pertains to the Federal Communications
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [15 pages in PDF] in its proceeding
titled "In the Matter of Digital Broadcast Copy Protection".
This NPRM proposed that the FCC promulgate a broadcast flag rule, and seeks
comment on this, and related questions. This is MB Docket No. 02-230. While the
FCC adopted this NPRM on August 8, 2002, it remains an open proceeding. However,
the FCC stated in its report and order containing digital plug and play cable
compatibility rules (announced on September 10) that the FCC "will address
Digital Broadcast Copy Protection issues in the near future." See, stories
"FCC Adopts Digital Plug and Play Cable Compatibility Rules" and "FCC States
That It Will Act On Broadcast Flag" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 737, September 11, 2003.
The Copyright Act gives rule making authority for implementing the Copyright
Act to the Library of Congress, not the FCC. Moreover, there is no specific
grant of authority to the FCC in the Communications Act to promulgate copyright
Nevertheless, the FCC is involved in this issue because it seeks to promote a
transition to DTV. That is, programming that is in digital format is more
susceptible to copying and copyright infringement than analog programming,
because it is easier to make and distribute exact copies of digital content.
Thus, content providers have a disincentive to make their works available in
digital format. To the extent that less content is made available in digital
format, consumers have less incentive to purchase DTV receivers and equipment.
So, the FCC, which seeks a conversion to DTV, has involved itself in copy
See also, stories titled "FCC Issues NPRM on Broadcast Flag" and "FCC
Debates Its Authority to Promulgate Broadcast Flag Rule" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 489, August 12, 2002. See also,
The CDT report states that "Proposed broadcast flag regulations, currently before the FCC,
create many legitimate concerns for television viewers, Internet users, and
industry groups. As drafted they may restrict reasonable uses of content by
viewers, hinder future technology innovation, and impose costs that are not
worth the limited copy protection provided."
The CDT continues that "Better versions of the broadcast flag proposal could be created
to deal with many of these concerns, primarily by creating more clearly
objective and focused functional standards for the devices and uses that will be
permitted by flag regulations, and by creating a more open and accountable
process for certifying permitted technologies."
It adds that "Even with those improvements, the flag proposal poses unresolved
issues regarding technical regulation of computers and the Internet by the
government, the impact of the flag itself on innovation and future consumer uses, and the
definition of "fair use" and other copyright doctrines in the digital age. It also leaves
other serious copy protection problems for television content unresolved."
The CDT also submitted a shorter
comment [4 pages in PDF] to the FCC on December 6, 2002.
10/20. The House Rules Committee adopted
a closed rule for
consideration of HJRes 73, making continuing appropriations for FY 2004.
The House is scheduled to consider the resolution on Tuesday, October 21.
10/20. The Supreme Court denied
certiorari, without opinion, in Richard Hodges v. Sprint Spectrum, No. 03-5996.
See, Order List
[10 pages in PDF] at page 5.
10/17. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC),
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and
U.S.A. filed their
consolidated opening brief [120 pages in PDF] with the
U.S. Court of Appeals (10thCir) in
Mainstream Marketing v. FTC. They argue that the FTC's
telemarketing do not call registry does not violate the First Amendment of the
10/20. Novell announced that the
U.S. District Court (CDCal) entered
judgment of copyright and trademark infringement against Keynet Corporation.
10/15. The California Court of Appeal issued its
in Barrett v. Rosenthal, an internet defamation case involving
California's strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) statute and
47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1),
regarding interactive computer service immunity. This case is Stephen
Barrett, et al. v. Ilena Rosenthal, California
Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Two, Case No. A096451, an
appeal from the Superior Court for Alameda County, Super. Ct. No.
10/19. President Bush announced that he intends to negotiate a free trade
agreement with Thailand. See, White House
10/20. The Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) announced in a release that Robert Zoellick will
visit the People's Republic of China on October 19-21 after attending the
Ministerial Meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in
Bangkok, Thailand. He will discuss, among other topics, "increasing protection
for U.S. intellectual property".
10/17. Hewitt Pate,
Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice's (DOJ)
Antitrust Division, wrote a
business review letter
for the National Cable Television Cooperative
(NCTC). He wrote that,
based upon the information provided to it by the NCTC, "the Department does not
believe that NCTC's proposed joint purchasing procedures will have
anticompetitive effects", and "the Department has no current intention to
challenge the NCTC's proposed procedures for jointly negotiating national cable
programming contracts for its active members". This letter clears the way for
this consortium of primarily independent and smaller owners of cable television
systems to jointly purchase national cable network programming. See also, DOJ
10/20. The Brookings Institute
report [53 pages in PDF] titled "Spreading the Wealth: Building a Tech
Economy in Small and Medium-Sized Regions", by Paul Sommers and Deena Heg.
The report offers recommendations on how to enhance technology-based economic
development. See also,
|Microsoft and DOJ Submit Joint Status Report
on Compliance with Antitrust Judgment
10/17. Microsoft, the Department of
Justice, and the state plaintiffs, filed their
"Interim Joint Status Report on Microsoft's Compliance with Final Judgments"
with the U.S. District Court (DC) in
v. Microsoft, D.C. No. 98-1232 (CKK), the government antitrust case against Microsoft.
The report focuses on the requirement that Microsoft make available for
license certain communications protocols used by Windows, and on complaints
regarding a feature of Windows XP named "Shop for Music Online".
The Report states that this feature "allows a user to go online to purchase
compact discs from retailers". It continues that the DOJ and state plaintiffs
"are concerned that the feature invokes Microsoft's Internet Explorer, rather
than the user's chosen default browser, in a manner that may be inconsistent
with Section III.H.2(b). Plaintiffs and Microsoft have conferred extensively on
this issue, and the Technical Committee has also been engaged on the issue. If
Plaintiffs and Microsoft are unable to resolve this issue, the parties may seek
assistance from the Court."
The District Court, Judge Colleen Kotelly presiding, will hold a status
conference on Friday, October 24, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 11 of the U.S.
Courthouse at 333 Constitution Ave., NW.
|Tuesday, October 21
The House will meet at 9:00 AM for morning hour and
at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider HJRes 73, making
further continuing appropriations for FY 2004. See,
Republican Whip notice.
7:30 AM - 12:45 PM. The Cato Institute
will host a half day conference titled "Who Rules the Net? Debating
Internet Jurisdiction and Governance". The speakers will include
Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA) (Chairman of
the Republican House Policy Committee),
(University of Virginia Law School),
(Temple University Law School), Bruce
Kobayashi (George Mason University School of Law),
(Covington & Burling), Gary Jackson (Quova),
Corn-Revere (Davis Wright Tremaine),
(Covington & Burling),
(American Enterprise Institute),
Jonathan Band (Morrison & Foerster), Marc Pearl (IT Policy Solutions),
and Jeffrey Kovar (Deptartment of State). See,
notice. To register,
contact Krystal Brand at 202 789-5229 of
firstname.lastname@example.org. Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.
10:00 AM. The
Senate Judiciary Committee will hold
a hearing to examine criminal terrorism investigations and prosecutions
relating to national security. See, story titled "Senate Judiciary
Committee to Hold Hearings on Combatting Terrorism and Protecting Liberties"
in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 757, October 14, 2003. Press contact: Margarita Tapia
(Hatch) at 202 224-5225 or David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242. Location: Room 226,
11:00 AM. The House
Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and
Capabilities Subcommittee will hold a hearing on Command, Control,
Communications, Computer, & Intelligence (C41) Interoperability. The
witnesses will be Lt. Gen. William Wallace (Commanding General, U.S. Combined
Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth), Maj. Gen. Keith Stadler (USMC), Brig. Gen.
Walter Jones (Joint Staff), Brig. Gen. Dennis Moran (Director of Information
Operations, Networks and Space, Office of the Chief Information Officer/G-6,
U.S. Army), and Lt. Gen. Daniel Leaf (Air Force Space Command). Location: Room
2212, Rayburn Building.
11:00 AM. Rep. Bob
Goodlatte (R-VA), Rep. Adam Schiff
(D-CA), Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) and
Gordon Smith (R-OR), will hold a press conference to announce the formation of the
International Anti-Piracy Caucus. They will also announce a "2003
International Piracy Watch List". They will be joined by Jack Valenti
(MPAA), Mitch Bainwol
(RIAA), Robert Holleyman
(BSA), and Douglas Lowenstein (ESA). Press
contact: Elyse Bauer (Goodlatte) at 202 225-5431. Location: Room H-144, U.S. Capitol.
Day two of a two day conference hosted by the Department of Commerce's
(DOC) Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)
titled "16th Annual Update Conference on Export Controls and Policy".
The price to attend ranges from $625 to $700. Location: Renaissance Hotel, 999
9th Street, NW.
Day three of a three day conference titled "Networked Economy Summit".
Bond, Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology, will speak at 9:00 AM. See,
agenda. Press information: the summit is open to all media -- print, radio, Internet
and TV. For day-of coverage
at the event, please sign up at
www.publicforuminstitute.org or call Mark Marich at Public Forum Institute
at 202 467-2776. Location: Hyatt Regency Reston, Reston, VA.
|Wednesday, October 22
10:00 AM. The
Senate Judiciary Committee
will hold a hearing on the nomination of Janice Brown to be a Judge of
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit. Press contact: Margarita Tapia
(Hatch) at 202 224-5225 or David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242.
Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
8:00 AM - 1:30PM. The U.S.
Chamber of Commerce will host a seminar titled "Immigration -- Access,
Security and the American Economy". At 9:00 AM,
Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) will speak. At 9:30 AM,
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) will speak. At 12:30 PM, Asa Hutchinson, Under
Secretary of Homeland Security, will deliver the keynote speech. See,
Location: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1615 H Street, NW.
6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a continuing legal
education (CLE) seminar titled "Nuts and Bolts of the Triennial Review Order".
The price to attend is $75 for members, $125 for non-members, $50 for
government, academic, and student members. RSVP to Wendy Parish at
email@example.com. Location: ?
|Thursday, October 23
8:15 AM. The George Washington Law Review at the
George Washington University Law School
(GWULS) will host a day long conference titled "Internet Surveillance,
Privacy & USA PATRIOT Act". To register, contact Amanda Johnson at
firstname.lastname@example.org. Location, GWULS, 2000
H Street, NW.
8:30 AM - 3:30 PM. The Association for Maximum Service Television will
host an event titled "MSTV 17th Annual Fall Conference: Digital Covalence".
The speakers will include Sen. Conrad Burns
(R-MT), Will Nordwind (House Commerce Committee), Greg Rothschild (HCC), Bruce
Franca (Deput Chief of the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology), Paul
Galante (Advisor to FCC Chairman Michael Powell), Johanna Mikes (Advisor to
FCC Commissioners Adelstein), and Catherine Bohigian (Advisor to FCC
Commissioner Kevin Martin). The price to attend is $300. Location: Park Hyatt
Hotel, 24th & M Streets, NW.
9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir)
will hear oral argument in AT&T v. FCC, No. 02-1221. Judges
Ginsburg, Edwards, and Garland will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave.
11:45 AM. The Cato
Institute will host a panel discussion titled "Online Gambling: Lessons
from the Internet and Illegal Bookmakers". The speakers will be
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), Mike
Knesevitch (Tradesports.com), Koleman Strumpf (UNC Chapel Hill), Raymond Sauer
(Clemson University), and Justin Wolfers (Stanford Business School). See,
notice and registration
page. The event will be webcast. Lunch will be served after the program.
Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.
12:15 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cable Practice Committee will host
a brown bag lunch. The speaker will be Jordan Goldstein, Senior Legal Advisor
to FCC Commissioner Michael Copps. For more information, contact Catherine
Bohigian at email@example.com.
RSVP to: firstname.lastname@example.org Location: NCTA,
1724 Massachusetts Ave, NW.
Roberta Kwall (DePaul University College of Law) will present a paper titled
"In the Beginning ... The Impact of Genesis on Innovation". See,
more information, contact
Robert Brauneis at 202 994-6138 or
Washington University Law School, Faculty Conference Center, Burns Building,
5th Floor, 716 20th Street, NW.
Joseph Liu (Boston College of Law) will give a lecture titled "Rationalizing
Trademark Defenses". This is a part of
Georgetown University Law Center's
on Intellectual Property & Technology Law Series. For more information,
Julie Cohen at 202 662-9871. Location: GULC,
600 New Jersey Ave., NW.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding its notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) pertaining to its rules governing the provision of air
ground telecommunications services on commercial airplanes in order to enhance
the options available to the public. The FCC adopted this NPRM on April 17,
2003, and released it on April 28, 2003. This is WT Docket No. 03-103. See,
notice in the Federal Register, July 25, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 143, at Pages
44003 - 44011.
Deadline to submit requests to the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) to speak at its October 23, 2003 hearing regarding
its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding computation and allocation
of the credit for increasing research activities for members of a controlled
group of corporations or a group of trades or businesses under common control.
The rules implement the research and development tax credit codified at
26 U.S.C. § 41.
notice in the Federal Register, July 29, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 145, at Pages
44499 - 44506.
|Friday, October 24
7:30 AM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) will host a breakfast titled "New
Horizons in the Digital Migration". The speaker will be FCC Chief of Staff
Bryan Tramont. The price to attend is $35.00. Register by Tuesday, October 21,
2003. See, registration page.
Location: J.W. Marriott Hotel, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
8:00 AM - 3:30 PM. The National Science
Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science
and Engineering will hold a meeting. See,
notice in the Federal Register, September 22, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 183, at
Page 55067. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Room 1235, Arlington, VA.
9:00 AM. The U.S.
District Court (DC) will hold a status conference in U.S. v. Microsoft, D.C.
No. 98 cv 1232. Location: Courtroom 11, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.
Deadline for the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to submit comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in
response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding
telecommunication relay services (TRS) and speech-to-speech services for
individuals with hearing and speech disabilities. This is CG Docket No.
in the Federal Register, August 25, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 164, at Pages 50993 -
|Monday, October 27
6:00 - 8:15 PM. Intellectual Property Section of the D.C. Bar Association
will host a CLE course titled "Transactions Involving Intellectual
Property, Part II: Intellectual Property in Financings and Bankruptcy".
Prices vary. For more information, call 202 626-3488. Location: D.C. Bar
Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 level.
12:00 NOON. Deadline to submit comments to the
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
regarding countries that deny adequate and effective protection of
intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S.
persons who rely on intellectual property protection. Section 182 of the Trade
Act of 1974 requires the USTR to prepare a report. Section 182, which is
codified at 19
U.S.C. § 2242, is also referred to as "Special 301". This is an out of
cycle review. The USTR announced that this review will focus on Korea.
However, it added that "Additional countries may also be reviewed as a result
of the comments received pursuant to this notice, or as warranted by events."
notice in the Federal Register, October 3, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 192, at Page
2:00 PM. The House
Ways and Means Committee will meet to mark up
the "American Jobs Creation Act of 2003". This bill would, among other
things, replace the FSC & ETI tax regimes that the WTO held to be
illegal export subsidies. Location: Room 1100, Longworth Building.
5:30 - 7:30 PM. The American
Enterprise Institute (AEI) will
host a book forum. Charles Murray will discuss his book (due for release on
October 21) titled Human Accomplishment : The Pursuit of Excellence in the
Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950. See,
Amazon page. See also,
Location: AEI, Twelfth floor, 1150 17th St., NW.
Deadline to submit nominations to the
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
Wireline Competition Bureau for positions
on the Board of Directors of its
Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). See, FCC
Deadline to submit written comments to the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regarding its notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) regarding computation and allocation of the credit for increasing
research activities for members of a controlled group of corporations or a
group of trades or businesses under common control. The rules implement the
research and development tax credit codified at
26 U.S.C. § 41. See,
notice in the Federal Register, July 29, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 145, at Pages
44499 - 44506.
|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