|House Approves Satellite Home Viewer
Extension Reauthorization Act
10/6. The House approved
the "Satellite Home Viewer Extension Reauthorization Act", or SHVERA, by voice
vote. The Senate has yet to pass this bill.
The bill just approved by the House combines
HR 4501, the House Commerce
Committee bill, and HR 4518, the
House Judiciary Committee bill. It allows satellite providers to continue
providing local and network broadcasts to viewers otherwise unable to receive
local programming in their area. It also allows satellite operators to carry
certain out of market signals, to provide parity with cable service providers.
Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) (at right), the
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, stated that
"by extending expiring provisions, increasing parity between satellite television
and cable operators, and promoting competition between satellite television and cable,
this bill will significantly enhance consumer choice and service".
S 2013, the
"Satellite Home Viewer Extension Act of 2004 ", sponsored by
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and others. The
Senate Judiciary Committee amended
and approved this bill on June 17, 2004.
|Senate Approves Bill Regarding Certification
10/6. The Senate passed
an untitled bill related to certification marks, collective marks, and service marks.
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) and
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) introduced
this bill on September 13, 2004 to address the July 11, 2003
[26 pages in PDF] of the U.S. Court of
Appeals (2ndCir) in Idaho Potato Commission v. M&M Produce Farm and Sales
(also reported at 335 F.3d 130.)
In that case the Court held that the defendant could challenge the validity
of Idaho's certification mark, even though it had entered into a licensing
contract that included a no challenge clause.
See, story titled "Senators Introduce Bill Pertaining to Certification
Marks" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 980, September 21, 2004.
Sen. Craig is concerned about potatoes grown in Idaho. He stated that "We
need to protect our potatoes from rogue distributors trying to sell inferior
potatoes as Idaho potatoes -- tarnishing Idaho's long-standing reputation".
However, certification marks are also used in other sectors, including the
The House has yet to approve the bill.
Bill Summary. S 2796 makes two changes to the Trademark Act of 1946,
which is codified at
15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq. First, it provides that the Trademark Act is
amended "in section 3 (15 U.S.C. 1053) in the first sentence, by striking
``protection´´ and inserting ``protections, rights, and privileges´´". Second,
it provides that the Trademark Act is amended "in section 4 (15 U.S.C. 1054) in
the first sentence, by striking ``protection´´ and inserting ``protections,
rights, and privileges´´''.
15 U.S.C. § 1053
currently provides, in full, that "Subject to the provisions relating to the registration
of trademarks, so far as they are applicable, service marks shall be registrable,
in the same manner and with the same effect as are trademarks, and when
registered they shall be entitled to the protection provided in this chapter in
the case of trademarks. Applications and procedure under this section shall
conform as nearly as practicable to those prescribed for the registration of
trademarks". (Emphasis added.)
15 U.S.C. § 1054
currently provides, in part, that "Subject to the provisions relating to the
registration of trademarks, so far as they are applicable, collective and
certification marks, including indications of regional origin, shall be
registrable under this chapter, in the same manner and with the same effect as
are trademarks, by persons, and nations, States, municipalities, and the like,
exercising legitimate control over the use of the marks sought to be registered,
even though not possessing an industrial or commercial establishment, and when
registered they shall be entitled to the protection provided in this
chapter in the case of trademarks, except in the case of certification marks
when used so as to represent falsely that the owner or a user thereof makes or
sells the goods or performs the services on or in connection with which such
mark is used. ..." (Emphasis added.)
|Senate Approves Copyright Royalty and
Distribution Reform Act
10/6. The Senate approved
HR 1417, the
"Copyright Royalty and Distribution
Reform Act of 2004". This bill would replace copyright arbitration royalty
panels (CARPs) with a Copyright Royalty Judge.
The version just approved by the Senate is a substitute amendment. Hence, it
must also be approved by the House before it can go the the President for his
The House approved its version of the bill on March 3, 2004. See, story
titled "House Passes Copyright Royalty and Distribution Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert
No. 849, March 4, 2004.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) stated on the
floor of the Senate that "the Hatch-Leahy substitute to H.R. 1417 retains
most of the House-passed bill, but does contain a few important changes that are the
product of several months of negotiations and discussions between the Hatch and
Leahy offices and various stakeholders. The most significant substantive change
involves the scope of available discovery in ratemaking proceedings."
|House Approves Bill to Create New Judgeships
and Split the 9th Circuit
10/5. The House approved
S 878, a bill
to create numerous additional federal judgeships.
The House also approved an
pages in PDF] offered by Rep. Mike Simpson
(R-ID) that would divide the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
The vote was
205-194. See, Roll Call No.
492. It was a nearly straight party line vote, with Republicans supporting the
amendment, and Democrats opposing it.
This amendment would split the 9th Circuit into three circuits. The new 13th
Circuit would be comprised of the states of Washington, Oregon and Alaska. The
new 12th Circuit would be comprised of the states of Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, and
Montana. Hawaii and California would comprise the remaining states of the 9th
Circuit. See also, Rep. Simpson's
The House also approved an
amendment [PDF] offered by
Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI)
by voice vote.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is
scheduled to hold a business meeting on Thursday, October 7. The
agenda for the meeting includes
S 2396, the
"Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2004". Whether the Committee will actually
consider the bill at this meeting is another question.
|Senate Approves Bill Regarding Privatization
of INTELSAT and Inmarsat
10/5. The Senate approved
an untitled bill to modify and extend certain privatization requirements of the
Communications Satellite Act of 1962, as amended by the Open-Market Reorganization for
the Betterment of International Telecommunications (ORBIT), which became law in 2000.
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT) (at left) and
Sen. John Breaux (D-LA) introduced
S 2896 on October 5, 2004. The Senate approved it without a committee hearing,
without debate, by unanimous consent, on the date of its introduction.
It amends 47 U.S.C. § 763(5)(A)(ii) to further extend the deadline for
privatizing Inmarsat. This bill extends the ORBIT's statutory deadline for conducting
Inmarsat's initial public offering (IPO) from June 30, 2004 to June 30, 2005.
The bill further provides that there need not be an IPO for INTELSAT or
Inmarsat. It adds a new subsection that provides that "a successor entity may be
deemed a national corporation and may forgo an initial public offering and
public securities listing and still achieve the purposes of this section if
(i) the successor entity certifies to the Commission that (I) the
successor entity has achieved substantial dilution of the aggregate amount of
signatory or former signatory financial interest in such entity; (II) any
signatories and former signatories that retain a financial interest in such
successor entity do not possess, together or individually, effective control of
such successor entity; and (III) no intergovernmental organization has any
ownership interest in a successor entity of INTELSAT or more than a minimal
ownership interest in a successor entity of Inmarsat;
(ii) the successor entity provides such financial and other
information to the Commission as the Commission may require to verify such
(iii) the Commission determines, after notice and comment, that the
successor entity is in compliance with such certification."
S 2896 is related to
which Sen. Burns introduced on April 8, 2004. S 2315 extended the deadline for
INTELSAT's IPO from June 30, 2004 to December
31, 2005. See, story titled "Sen. Burns Introduces Bill to
Allow Delay in INTELSAT IPO" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 874, April 12, 2004.
The Senate approved S 2315 on April 27, 2004 by unanimous consent. The
House approved it on May 5, 2004 by unanimous consent. President Bush signed it on May
18, 2004. It is now Public Law No. 108-228.
The ORBIT Act, which Sen. Burns sponsored, is Public Law No. 106-180. Sen.
Burns is the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Communications.
|Senate Judiciary Committee to Meet On
10/6. The Senate Judiciary
Committee is scheduled to hold a business meeting on Thursday, October 7. This
meeting had been scheduled for 9:30 AM, but late on Wednesday the Committee postponed
its start until an unspecified time later in the day. The Committee may meet after the
first floor vote in the Senate. The Committee has not announced a location for this
for the meeting still includes
the "Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004". Whether the
Committee will actually consider this bill at this meeting is another question.
Senate staff and interested parties have continued to work on revisions
to the bill this week. Also, further drafts of the bill have been prepared, but not
publicly released. However, substantial disagreement remains between representatives of
certain entertainment industries, and representatives of certain technology
companies and consumer
Opponents of the bill have asked Sen.
Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the Chairman of the Committee, and
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the ranking
Democrat, not to mark up the bill.
On October 6, 2004, the Consumer Electronics
Association (CEA), IEEE-USA, and NetCoalition wrote a
to the Sen. Hatch and Sen. Leahy in which they stated that "we urge you not to
move forward now with S. 2560".
They wrote that "the recording industry continues to propose language that
would not solve the piracy problems in the manner you identified, but instead
would effectively put at risk all consumer electronics, information technology
products, and Internet products and services that aren't designed to the
industry's liking. In fact, the most recent draft put forward by the recording
industry at 1:00 am this morning is a large step backwards from previous drafts
in that it would jeopardize more legitimate products and would create a flood of
litigation, and thus would hurt vital sectors of the U.S. economy. In short, the
draft is unacceptable."
Also on October 6, the Center for Democracy and
Technology (CDT) wrote a
letter [PDF] to the
Chairman and ranking Democrat. The CDT argued that "the draft circulated by the
RIAA early this morning would sweep in a broad range of legitimate consumer technologies,
leaving those who simply design and distribute products like TiVo, online collaboration
tools, new instant messaging systems, and even web browsers subject to litigation under
The CDT added that "We understand that S.2560 is still scheduled
for markup by the Judiciary Committee this week. Despite the progress being made, current
drafts would chill the development of legitimate consumer technologies, and we urge you
not to pass S.2560 out of Committee at this time."
Also on October 6 another set of groups sent a
to the Committee urging it not to mark up the bill. This letter was signed by
representatives of the American Association of Law Libraries, American Library
Association, Association of Research Libraries, Consumer Federation of America,
Consumers Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Public Knowledge. They
wrote that the latest drafts "would do great harm to future technological
Also on October 6, the Computer and
Communications Industry Association (CCIA) sent a
letter to the Committee in which it argued that "A bill that dramatically
changes copyright law must be thoroughly discussed by all those who affected
rather than rushed through the legislative process."
While many opponents of S 2560 have sought public dissemination
of their views, and letters, many of the proponents of the bill have not.
|Senate Has Yet To Approve Several Major
House IP Bills
10/6. The Congress is on the verge of recessing for the November election.
Several intellectual property bills that have already been approved by the House
have yet to be approved by the Senate. These include
(Piracy Deterrence and Education Act),
HR 1561 (USPTO
fee bill), and
HR 2391 (CREATE Act).
The House approved
the "United States Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act of 2003", on March
3, 2004 by a vote of 379-28. See,
Roll Call No. 38. This
bill contains increases in user fees that implement the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO)
Strategic Plan. It also provides for U.S. outsourcing of patent searches,
and an end to the diversion of user fees to subsidize other government programs.
titled "House Passes USPTO Fee Bill", also published in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 849, March 4, 2004.
The House approved
the "Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004" on September 28, 2004 by voice
story titled "House Approves Copyright Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No.
986, September 29, 2004. This is a large bill with many provisions. It provides
for the creation of a voluntary program at the
Department of Justice (DOJ) to provide notices to apparent infringers. It amends
17 U.S.C. § 411 to allow federal prosecutors to take action against early
pirates without having to wait for the completion of the registration process.
It criminalizes using camcorders to copy movies in movie theatres. It increases
criminal penalties. It also includes the "Family Movie Act of 2004", which is
also known as the ClearPlay bill; it provides an exemption from copyright
infringement for skipping content.
There is also the matter of the CREATE Act, a bill pertaining to
collaborative research. The House passed
the "Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act", on March 10,
by a voice vote. The bill amends Section 103(c) of the Patent Act, which is
codified at 35 U.S.C.
§ 103, to address the August 8, 1997
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit in OddzOn Products, Inc. v. Just Toys, Inc., which ruled that
derived prior art may serve as evidence of obviousness. See,
titled "House Passes CREATE Act" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No.
854, March 11, 2004. The Senate has already passed an identically worded bill,
S 2192. The
remaining issue is who gets to claim more credit for the bill. The House bill is
on the Senate Judiciary Committee's agenda for its Thursday, October 7 meeting.
If these bills are not approved by the Senate in the next few days, or in a
special session following the November election, then they will lapse. The 109th
Congress, which will meet in late January of 2005, will start the legislative
|More Capitol Hill News
10/6. The Senate approved
the "National Intelligence Reform Act of 2004" by a vote of 96-2. See,
Roll Call No. 199.
10/6. The House debated and held a voice vote on
the "Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2004", the
House Judiciary Committee's
spyware bill, late on Wednesday afternoon, October 6. The House postponed its
roll call vote on the bill. At 3:00 AM on October 7, but still during the
October 6 legislative day, the House agreed to postpone the roll call vote until
|1st Circuit Grants Rehearing En Banc in
10/5. The U.S. Court of Appeals
(1stCir) issued an
order in U.S. v. Councilman that grants the government's
petition for rehearing en banc. This is a criminal case regarding the applicability of the
Wiretap Act to e-mail in storage.
On June 29, 2004 a three judge panel of the
U.S. Court of Appeals (1stCir) issued
opinion. It held that there was no violation of the Wiretap Act when stored e-mail
was accessed, because, since it was in storage, there was no interception within
the meaning of the statute.
The defendant, Councilman, was an officer of a company that ran an online
rare and out of print book listing service. The company also provided e-mail
service to some of its book dealer customers. The U.S. Attorney alleged that
Councilman used a program to intercept, copy and store e-mail messages from
Amazon.com to the book dealer customers, and that Councilman read these messages
to gain commercial advantage.
story titled "1st Circuit Holds Wiretap Act Does Not Apply to E-Mail in
Storage" in TLJ
Daily E-Mail Alert No. 930, July 1, 2004.
The October 5 order states that "Although the parties can address other
issues in their supplemental submissions, and the en banc court is free to
consider all of the issues presented, the court specifically requests that the
parties address the following questions:
1. Whether the conduct at issue in this case could have been
additionally, or alternatively, prosecuted under the Stored Communications Act?
2. Whether the rule of lenity precludes prosecution in this case?"
The Court of Appeals does not have before it an appeal from an conviction for
violation of the Stored Communications Act. There are reasons why cases such as Councilman's
are not prosecuted under the Stored Communications Act. For example, the Act exempts
"the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communications service". See,
18 U.S.C. § 2701. Councilman was an employee of the e-mail service provider.
The order adds that "The court welcomes timely motions to file amicus
briefs". The Court is likely to receive many amicus briefs.
The split opinion of the three judge panel was followed by considerable comment and
criticism in technology and academic circles. It addition, it prompted Members of Congress to introduce legislation
that would revise the statute that was interpreted by the Court.
On July 22, 2004, Rep. Jerrold Nadler
(D-NY) and others introduced
the "E-mail Privacy Protection Act of 2004". This bill amends the Wiretap
Act and the Stored Communications Act, to provide that accessing stored e-mail
communications, including by e-mail service providers, can constitute criminal
violations. This bill responds to the recent Appeals Court decision in USA v.
Councilman, and perhaps also, Google's announcement of its proposed Gmail
service. See, story titled "Rep. Nadler Introduces Bill to Criminalize Accessing
Stored E-Mail" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 950, August 2, 2004.
Also on July 22, Rep. Jay Inslee
(D-WA) and others introduced
the "E-mail Privacy Act of 2004". Like Rep. Nadler's bill, HR 4977, this bill
responds to the opinion in USA v. Councilman, and provides increased
legal protection under the Criminal Code for stored e-mail communications.
However, Rep. Inslee's bill would provide less onerous limitations upon the
activities of e-mail service providers. See, story titled "Rep. Inslee
Introduces E-mail Privacy Act" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 950, August 2, 2004.
Oral argument is scheduled for 3:00 PM on December 8, 2004, in the en banc
courtroom of the John Joseph Moakley Courthouse in Boston, Massachusetts.
|Washington Tech Calendar
New items are highlighted in red.
|Thursday, October 7
The House will meet. See,
Republican Whip Notice.
The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM for morning
business. It will then resume consideration of
the Senate Intelligence Reform resolution.
7:00 AM. The
House Rules Committee will meet to
adopt a rule for consideration of HR 10, the "9/11 Recommendations
8:45 AM - 5:00 PM. The Cato Institute will
host a conference titled "Trade and the Future of American Workers".
At 9:30 - 10:15 AM, Roger
Ferguson (Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board) will give the keynote address.
At 1:15 - 2:00 PM, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
will speak. At 3:15 PM, Rep. Cal Dooley
(D-CA) will speak. See,
Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Avenue, NW.
TIME? The Senate Judiciary
Committee will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes consideration
of S 2560,
the "Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004",
the "Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act of 2004",
the "Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2004", and S 2863, a bill to
reauthorize the Department of Justice. The Committee is unlikely to consider all of
these items. Press contact: Margarita Tapia (Hatch) at 202 224-5225 or David Carle
(Leahy) at 202 224-4242. See,
Room 226, Dirksen Building.
9:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The World
Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-07) Advisory Committee's
Informal Working Group 4:
Broadcasting and Amateur Issues will meet. See, FCC
notice [PDF]. Location: Shaw Pittman,
2300 N St., NW.
9:30 AM - 4:30 PM. The Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) will host an event
titled "Radio Frequency Identification Workshop". See,
and agenda [PDF]. The scheduled speakers include Chairman Michael Powell,
Commissioners Kathleen Abernathy, Ed Thomas (Chief of the OET), and Julius
Knapp (Deputy Chief of the OET). For more information, contact Bill Lane at
firstname.lastname@example.org or voice:
202-418-0676. The event will be webcast. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting
Room (TW-C305), at 445 12th St., SW.
Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division
will host a workshop titled "Personal Identity Verification of Federal
Employees/Contractors ". See, NIST
notice in the Federal Register, September 15, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 178, at
Page 55586. Location: Hilton Hotel, Gaithersburg, MD.
Day two of a two day conference hosted by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST), Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
and the National
Cyber Security Partnership's (NCSP) Coordinating Committee titled "Common
Criteria Users' Forum". The event is free for government employees. The
price to attend is $100 for non-government employees. See,
[PDF]. Location: L'Enfant Plaza.
|Friday, October 8
The House may meet at 9:00 AM. See,
Republican Whip Notice.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals
(FedCir) will hear oral argument in PC Connector v. SmartDisk. This is
No. 04-1180. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.
Deadline to submit comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response
to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding its proposal to eliminate paper
filings and require applicants to file electronically filings related to international
telecommunications services. This NPRM is FCC 04-133 in IB Docket No.04-226. See,
notice in the Federal Register, August 9, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 152, at Pages
48188 - 48192.
Deadline to submit comments to the
Department of Homeland Security's (DHS)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
regarding its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in which its proposes to
exempt the Registered Traveler Operations Files from several provisions of the
Privacy Act. See,
notice in the Federal Register, September 8, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 173, at
Pages 54256 - 54258.
|Tuesday, October 12
9:00 AM - 2:00 PM. The
American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host
an event titled "The Proper Direction for Telecommunications Reform
Legislation". Duane Ackerman, Chairman of BellSouth, will give the luncheon
notice. Location: AEI, 12th Floor, 1150 17th Street, NW.
1:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS), Directorate of Information Analysis and
Infrastructure Protection's (IAIP), National Infrastructure Advisory Council
(NIAC) will meet. The NIAC provides advice on the security of information systems for
critical infrastructure supporting other sectors of the economy, including banking and
finance, transportation, energy, manufacturing, and emergency government services. See,
notice in the Federal Register, September 28, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 187, at Pages
57951 - 57952. Location: Hamilton Crowne Plaza Hotel, 529 14th & K St., NW.
Deadline to submit comments to the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) regarding amendments to FCC rules to permit VHF public coast (VPC) and automated
maritime telecommunications system (AMTS) licensees to provide private mobile radio
service to units on land. This NPRM is FCC 04-171 in WT Docket No. 04-257 and RM-10743. See,
in the Federal Register, August 10, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 153, at Pages 48440 - 48443.
Deadline to submit comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in
response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to examine the proper number of
end user common line charges that carriers may assess upon customers that obtain derived
channel T-1 service where the customer provides the terminating channelization equipment
and upon customers that obtain Primary Rate Interface (PRI) Integrated Service Digital
Network (ISDN) service. This NPRM is FCC 04-174 in WC Docket No. 04-259 and RM-10603. See,
in the Federal Register, August 13, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 156, at Pages 50141 - 50146.
Extended extended deadline to submit comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response
to its public notices (DA 04-1690, DA 04-1758, and DA 04-2906) requesting public
comments on constitutionally permissible ways for the FCC to identify and eliminate
market entry barriers for small telecommunications businesses and to further opportunities
in the allocation of spectrum-based services for small businesses and businesses owned by
women and minorities. This proceeding is MB Docket No. 04-228. See,
in the Federal Register, September 15, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 178, at Pages 55630
|Wednesday, October 13
12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The
Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will
host a luncheon titled "Innovation Agenda 2004". The featured speaker will be
James Crowe, the CEO of
Level 3 Communications. The other speakers
will be Scott Cleland (The Precursor Group), Rebecca Arbogast (Legg Mason
Equity Research), and Jessica Zufolo (Medley Global Advisors). See,
registration page. Location: Mandarin Oriental hotel, 1330 Maryland
12:00 NOON. The Federal
Communications Bar Association Foundation's Board of Trustees will meet. Location:
Wiley Rein & Fielding, 1776 K Street, NW.
12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar
Association's (FCBA) Mass Media Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch
on DTV transition. The speaker will be Rick Chessen, Associate Chief of the
FCC's Media Bureau's (MB) Digital Television Task
Force. No RSVP is required. For more information, contact Frank Jazzo at
National Association of Broadcasters, 1771 N
2:00 - 4:30 PM. The American Enterprise
Institute (AEI) will host a panel presentation titled "Comparing the New
York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ, and the Electronic Communications Networks".
The speakers will be Kenneth Lehn, Sukesh Patro, and Kuldeep Shastri (all of the
University of Pittsburgh). See,
notice and registration page. Location: AEI, Twelfth floor, 1150 17th St., NW.
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association's
Intellectual Property Law Section and Employment Law Section will host a continuing
legal education (CLE) program titled "Secrets of the Uniform Trade Secrets
Act". The speakers will be Milton Babirak (Babirak Vangellow & Carr). See,
Prices vary from $80 to $115. For more information, call 202 626-3488. Location: D.C.
Bar Conference Center, B-1 Level, 1250 H Street, NW.
|People and Appointments
10/6. Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc.
announced that beginning on January 1, 2006, Howard Stern, a talk radio
performer, will be provided by Sirius. Stern stated that Sirius is "the future
of radio". See, Sirius
release. Sirius also filed a
Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) regarding its agreement with Stern. This filing states that there will
be a Stern channel, created by Stern, and that Stern is expected "to develop and
produce one or more additional channels of programming". The 8-K filing also states
that "Our aggregate fixed obligations under the agreement are approximately $100 million
per year." Neither Sirius' release, nor its 8-K filing, reference the
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
imposition of fines in connection with the content of Stern's past programs
provided via terrestrial broadcast. See for example, story titled "FCC Fines
Clear Channel $495,000" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 874, April 12, 2004.
10/6. The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) released a
[12 pages in PDF] titled "Radio Frequency Identification: Little Devices
Making Big Waves". See also,
executive summary. This paper states that "despite the
tremendous potential benefits of RFID technology, privacy advocates worry it
could lead to more detailed tracking of the products we buy, maybe even to the
level of taking inventory of what is in our homes and what is on our person at
any given time. Arguing that stores, corporations, and even libraries will use
the technology to spy on people, RFID critics have threatened boycotts to derail
the technology's adoption. In response, a number of companies have postponed
item-level RFID programs and lawmakers in several states and the U.S. Congress
have introduced legislation that, if passed, would curtail the use of RFID
technology." It concludes that "the privacy alarms being raised are at best
premature and at worst hypothetical and impractical. Because this is such a
promising yet nascent technological application, PPI believes that the call for
RFID legislation is not yet warranted." This paper was written by Julie Hutto
(PPI) and Robert Atkinson (PPI).
10/6. The Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) announced that the U.S. will file a complaint with the
World Trade Organization (WTO) against the
European Union (EU) alleging that government subsidies of the Airbus are illegal
under the WTO's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The first
step under WTO procedure is for the U.S. to file a Request for Consultations.
Then, after 60 days, the U.S. could file a request to establish a WTO panel.
release and second
release [4 pages in PDF].
10/4. The Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR), the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) and other federal government agencies announced an initiative pertaining
to violation of intellectual property rights titled "Strategy Targeting Organized Piracy
(STOP)". See, USTR
9/30. The Recording Industry Association of
America (RIAA) announced that it "filed copyright infringement lawsuits
against more than 700 illegal file sharers, including individuals at 26
different universities across the country". See, RIAA
|Notice of Change of E-Mail
The e-mail address for Tech Law Journal has changed. The new address is
All previous e-mail addresses no longer operate. This new address is
published as a graphic to avoid e-mail address harvesting, and the associated
spam messages and malicious code messages. If your e-mail system does not
display graphics, see notice in TLJ website.
|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
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.
Copyright 1998 - 2004 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All