1/4. The U.S. Court of Appeals (8thCir) issued its split opinion [PDF] in RIAA v. Charter Communications, reversing the District Court, and holding that a DMCA Section 512(h) subpoena may not be issued to an ISP that is merely acting as a conduit for the P2P infringement of copyright protected music files.

The Appeals Court followed the reasoning contained in the opinion [16 pages in PDF] of the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) in an almost identical case, RIAA v. Verizon. That case is also reported at 351 F.3d 1229. There is also a pending petition for writ of certiorari in that case. See also, story titled "DC Circuit Reverses in RIAA v. Verizon" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 804, December 22, 2003.

The facts in the two cases are very similar. In both cases, the plaintiff is the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which represents music companies whose copyrights are being infringed by people using peer to peer (P2P) systems. In both cases, the RIAA obtained § 512(h) subpoenas from the Clerk of the Court to obtain records from broadband internet access providers that would enable the RIAA to identify individual P2P infringers. In both cases, the District Court allowed the procedure. And, in both cases, the Court of Appeals reversed. In the present case the Appeals Court wrote that "We agree with and adopt the reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Verizon as it pertains to this statutory issue."

Both cases were decided on the basis of a complex interpretation of several interrelated statutory provisions.

Judge Douglas Ginsburg wrote the opinion of the DC Circuit, in which Judges Stephen Williams and John Roberts joined. The 8th Circuit was split. Judge Kermit Bye wrote a 13 page opinion, in which Judge Myron Bright joined. Judge Diana Murphy wrote a longer and vigorous dissent.

17 U.S.C. § 512, which was enacted as part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), provides internet service providers (ISPs) a safe harbor from liability for infringement based upon the activities of their users. There are four specific limitations on liability. § 512(a) pertains to "transmitting, routing, or providing connections for, material through a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider, or by reason of the intermediate and transient storage of that material in the course of such transmitting, routing, or providing connections". This section provides Charter Communications a safe harbor from liability for P2P infringement of music files. The opinion also refer to this as "conduit service".

§ 512(b) pertains to "the intermediate and temporary storage of material on a system or network". § 512(c) pertains to "material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider". And, § 512(d) pertains to "referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity, by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link".

§ 512(h) then provides, in part, that "A copyright owner or a person authorized to act on the owner's behalf may request the clerk of any United States district court to issue a subpoena to a service provider for identification of an alleged infringer in accordance with this subsection." The statute then provides that the requester should also provide a copy of the 512(c)(3) notice, a proposed subpoena, and a sworn declaration.

The § 512(c)(3) notice must include, among other things, an "Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material." (See, § 512(c)(3)(a)(iii).)

However, the statute does not expressly limit the availability of § 512(h) subpoenas to § 512(c) situations.

§ 512(h)(5) then provides, in part, that "Upon receipt of the issued subpoena, ... the service provider shall expeditiously disclose to the copyright owner or person authorized by the copyright owner the information required by the subpoena, notwithstanding any other provision of law and regardless of whether the service provider responds to the notification."

The RIAA obtained subpoenas, from the Clerk of the Court of the U.S. District Court (EDMO), directed to Charter Communications, a cable company that provides broadband internet access service, pursuant to § 512(h). These subpoenas required Charter to produce the names, physical addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of approximately 200 of Charter's subscribers. Charter moved to quash the subpoenas in the District Court. The District Court denied the motion. This appeal followed.

The Appeals Court reversed. Judge Bye reasoned that the § 512(c) safe harbor, and the safe harbor provisions found in §§ 512(b) and (d) each "protect an ISP from liability if the ISP ``responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing upon notification of claimed infringement as described in [§ 512](c)(3).´´ 17 U.S.C. §§ 512(b)(2)(E), 512(c)(1)(C), and 512(d)(3) (emphasis added). In other words, a specific purpose of the notification provision is to allow an ISP, after notification, the opportunity to remove or disable access to infringing material and thereby protect itself from liability for copyright infringement. Therefore, as one might expect, each safe harbor which covers an ISP function allowing the ISP to remove or disable access to infringing material (i.e., the storage, caching, and linking functions) refers to the notification provision and contains a remove-or-disable-access provision." (Parentheses and emphasis in original.)

Judge Bye continued that § 512(a), which is the safe harbor implicated in this case, "does not reference the notification provision of § 512(c)(3)(A), nor does it contain the remove-or-disable-access provision found in the three safe harbors created for the storage, caching, and linking functions of an ISP. The absence of the remove-or-disable-access provision (and the concomitant notification provision) makes sense where an ISP merely acts as a conduit for infringing material -- rather than directly storing, caching, or linking to infringing material -- because the ISP has no ability to remove the infringing material from its system or disable access to the infringing material."

Thus, the Judge Bye concluded, "the text and structure of the DMCA require the ISP to be able both to locate and remove the allegedly infringing material before a subpoena can be issued against it."

Judge Murphy, in her dissenting opinion, concluded that "The subpoena requested by the RIAA in this case was authorized by and in compliance with the DMCA, and the district court's order enforcing it should be affirmed."

She reasoned that while § 512(h) references § 512(c), the structure of the statute, and in particular, the wording of § 512(c), contemplates issuance of § 512(h) subpoenas where the activity of the ISP falls within the § 512(a) safe harbor.

She emphasized the above quoted language of § 512(c)(3)(a)(iii). She argued that § 512(h) "only references § 512(c)(3)(A) to indicate the kind of information which needs to be given to the clerk to request a subpoena". It does not limit the subpoenas to § 512(c) activities. Rather, it identifies both material that is "claimed to be infringing" and material that is "the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled."

She wrote that "The distinction within § 512(c)(3)(A) between material ``claimed to be infringing´´ and material that is ``the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled´´ appears to carry forward the initial distinction in the DMCA between § 512(a) conduit ISPs and §§ 512(b)-(d) storage ISPs. The copyrighted material stored on an ISP's network becomes the subject of infringing activity when it is unlawfully duplicated by subscribers. In order to remove such material or disable access to it, a storage ISP needs it to be identified. On the other hand, when a subscriber transfers copyrighted material through a conduit ISP, that service provider cannot remove the material from the network. It can, however, provide identifying information about the offeror of the material ``claimed to be infringing.´´ Indeed, as the government points out, the subsection's two categories of material are not mutually exclusive, and a conduit ISP can indirectly disable access to material by terminating the accounts of an infringing subscriber."

Judge Murphy also offered a further rationale for affirming the District Court. "To interpret the statute in the way Charter urges, and the court adopts, is to block copyright holders from obtaining effective protection against infringement through conduit service providers. The repercussions of infringement via the internet are too easily ignored or minimized. Regarded by some as an innocuous form of entertainment, internet piracy of copyrighted sound recordings results in substantial economic and artistic costs. ... It is not just faceless corporations who pay the cost. Local music retailers are also vulnerable to the allure of free music ... and artists can lose economic incentive to create and distribute works."

She added that "it is the ISPs who have the names and personal addresses of the infringers. The only viable way for copyright owners to vindicate their intellectual property rights in a timely manner when infringing materials are transmitted across peer to peer networks is to subpoena the ISPs for disclosure of the identities of alleged infringers."

Judge Bye argued, to the contrary, that "organizations such as the RIAA can also employ alternative avenues to seek this information, such as ``John Doe´´ lawsuits. In such lawsuits, many of which are now pending in district courts across the country, organizations such as the RIAA can file a John Doe suit, along with a motion for third-party discovery of the identity of the otherwise anonymous ``John Doe´´ defendant."

This case is Recording Industry Association of America v. Charter Communications, Inc., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 03-3802, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, D.C. No. 4:03MC273CEJ.

For more information about RIAA v. Verizon, see the TLJ stories titled "RIAA Seeks to Enforce Subpoena to Identify Anonymous Infringer" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 499, August 27, 2002; "Verizon and Privacy Groups Oppose RIAA Subpoena" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 501, September 4, 2002; "District Court Rules DMCA Subpoenas Available for P2P Infringers" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 588, January 22, 2003; "Law Professor Submits Apocalyptic Declaration in RIAA v. Verizon" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 596, February 3, 2003; "DOJ Files Brief in Support of RIAA in Verizon Subpoena Matter" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 646, April 22, 2002; "District Court Rules That A DMCA § 512(h) Subpoena for the Identity of an P2P Infringer Does not Violate the Constitution" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 649, April 25, 2003; "Court of Appeals Denies Stay in RIAA v. Verizon" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 674, June 5, 2003; and "Pacific Bell Internet Services Sues RIAA Over Infringer Subpoenas" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 709, August 1, 2003.

12/23. The Department of State published a notice in the Federal Register that states that it will award $800,000 in grants for jazz and urban music performers to perform in other countries, especially "countries with significant Muslim populations". See, Federal Register, December 23, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 246, at Pages 76965 - 76971.

1/4. The U.S. Court of Appeals (4thCir) issued its opinion [PDF] in Lee v. NLRB, holding that BellSouth employees cannot be compelled to wear uniforms with the logo of the labor union, the Communications Workers of America (CWA) on it.

Gary Lee and James Auburn, employees of BellSouth, but not members of the CWA, petitioned for review of the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) dismissal of their complaint against BellSouth and the CWA alleging that the agreement between BellSouth and the CWA that requires them to wear uniforms with the CWA logo violates their rights under labor labor and the First Amendment. The policy is mandatory for all employees in specified job categories, whether the employees are members of the union or not.

The Court of Appeals held that the agreement between BellSouth and the CWA violates the petitioners rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which is codified at 29 U.S.C. § 157. The Court did not address the First Amendment freedom of speech issue. The Court vacated the order, and remanded to the NLRB.

Section 7 provides that "Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 158(a)(3) of this title."

The Court wrote that "Section 7 not only protects employees' right to engage in union activities such as wearing union insignia, it also protects those employees who choose not to participate in union activities. It follows then, that if there is a presumptive right to wear union insignia as part of engaging in union activity under Section 7, there is a reciprocal Section 7 right contained in that section’s "right to refrain" language to choose not to wear union insignia."

BellSouth and the CWA argued that there were special circumstances that warranted the mandatory uniform policy, including promoting the public image of BellSouth. The three judges, who reside in BellSouth territory, did not accept this argument. The opinion states that "the public may view the union logo with suspicion and associate it with service disruptions and labor disputes".

This case is Gary Lee and James Auburn v. National Labor Relations Board, respondent, and Communications Workers of America, and BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., intervenors, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 01-2075, a petition for review of a final order of the NLRB. Judge Widener wrote the opinion of the Court, in which Judges Michael Luttig and Henry Herlong (District Judge for the District of South Carolina) joined.

1/4. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) a motion [4 pages in PDF] to dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus filed by the U.S. Telecom Association (USTA) and others. This is in the consolidated proceedings pertaining to challenges to the FCC's rules regarding the Section 251 unbundling requirements of incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs).

The FCC and DOJ argue that dismissal is now appropriate because the FCC just adopted new unbundling rules, as required by the Court of Appeals in its March 2, 2004 opinion [62 pages in PDF] in USTA v. FCC.

The motion states that "The Commission’s adoption of final rules in response to the USTA II decision has obviated any need for further proceedings on the mandamus petition. That petition concerns interim requirements that the new rules will supersede."

The FCC adopted its Order on Remand at its December 15, 2004 meeting. See, story titled "FCC Adopts Unbundling Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,039, December 16, 2004. However, the FCC has yet to release this order, and the rules therein. The FCC approved a press release on December 15. The FCC's just filed motion adds that "The Commission expects to release its order promulgating the new rules within approximately one month."

The House will not meet. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will not meet.

The Supreme Court will next meet on Monday, January 10, 2005. See, Order List [9 pages in PDF] at page 9.

10:00 AM. Thomas Donohue (P/CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce) and Bruce Josten (VP for Government Affairs) will host a press breakfast. They will announce the Chamber's 2005 policy priorities, economic forecast and legislative outlook, and answer questions. RSVP to 202 463-5682 or press@uschamber.com. Location: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1615 H Street, NW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the International Telecommunications Union's ITU-T Study Group 3 (tariff and accounting principles) meeting. See, the ITU's calendar of meetings. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 20, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 243, at Page 76027. For more information, including the location, contact Julian Minard at minardje@state.gov. Location: undisclosed.

4:00 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Carlos Gutierrez to be Secretary of Commerce. The hearing will be followed by a business meeting to consider the nomination. The hearing and meeting will be web cast by the Committee. See, notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

The House will meet at 11:00 AM. No votes are expected. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM. At 12:50 PM the Senate will proceed as a body to the House of Representatives for a joint session for the counting of electoral votes.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will begin its hearing on the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) will preside. See, notice. Location: Room 216, Hart Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Margaret Spelling to be Secretary of Education. Location: Room 430, Dirksen Building.

2:30 PM. Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge will participate in a press conference announcing the National Response Plan. The DHS's notice also states that "Press wishing to attend this event must present valid press credentials and arrive no later than 2:15 PM". Location: National Governors' Association, Hall of the States, 444 N. Capitol St., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the Export-Import Bank of the United States regarding its notice in the Federal Register that states that it "has received an application to finance the export of approximately $1.2 billion in U.S. semiconductor manufacturing equipment to dedicated foundries in China." The notice adds that "The U.S. exports will enable the dedicated 200-mm and 300-mm foundries to produce approximately 80,000 wafers per month (200-mm equivalent) of logic products. Available information indicates that some of this new production will be exported from China and consumed globally." See, Federal Register, December 23, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 246, at Page 76945.

The House will not meet. See, Republican Whip Notice.

Deadline to submit nominations to the Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) for its Executive Committee and Foundation. Send nominations to Alexandra Wilson at alexandra.wilson@cox.com.

EXTENDED TO JANUARY 24. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding service rules for advanced wireless services (AWS) in the 1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2175-2180 MHz and 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz bands. The FCC adopted this NPRM at its September 9, 2004 meeting, and released the text on September 24, 2004. It is FCC 04-218 in WT Docket No. 04-356 and WT Docket No. 02-353. See, notice in the Federal Register, November 2, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 211, at Pages 63489-63498. See also, story titled "FCC Makes Additional 20 MHz of Spectrum Available for Advanced Wireless Services" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 975, September 13, 2004. See, extension notice in the Federal Register, November 30, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 229, at Pages 69572 - 69573.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Charles Crawford v. FCC, No. 04-1031. Judges Randolph, Tatel and Garland will preside. Location: Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

12:15 - 4:30 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host an event titled "China and the Global Economic Recovery". The speakers will be Anne Krueger (International Monetary Fund), Randal Quarles (Treasury Department), Pieter Bottelier (SAIS, Johns Hopkins University), Jeffrey Frankel (Harvard University), Morris Goldstein (Institute for International Economics), John Makin (AEI), Li Shantong (China Development Research Center), and Desmond Lachman (AEI). See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th Floor, 1150 Seventeenth Street, NW.

5:30 - 7:00 PM. Tamar Jacoby (Manhattan Institute) will give a lecture titled "Immigration Reform: Politics and Prospects". See, notice. Location: American Enterprise Institute (AEI), 12th Floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) petitions to deny the applications of NextWave Telecom and Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for FCC approval of their proposed transfer of control of broadband Personal Communications Services (PCS) licenses from NextWave to Cellco. See, FCC notice [4 pages in PDF]. This notice is DA 04-3873 in WT Docket No. 04-434.

Effective date of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) final rule regarding the former ITFS, MDS, and MMDS. The FCC adopted its Report and Order at its June 10, 2004 meeting. The FCC released the text on July 29, 2004 (FCC 04-135), and then released a modified item on October 29, 2004 (FCC 04-258). This is WT Docket 03-66. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 10, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 237, at Pages 72019 - 72047. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts RO & NPRM Re ITFS/MDS Band" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 916, June 11, 2004.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) in response to the further notice of proposed rulemaking (FNPRM) portion of its Report and Order and FNPRM regarding the former ITFS, MDS, and MMDS, now named the Broadband Radio Service (BRS) and the Educational Broadband Service (EBS), in the 2496-2690 MHz band. The FCC adopted this item at its June 10, 2004 meeting. The FCC released the text on July 29, 2004 (FCC 04-135), and then released a modified item on October 29, 2004 (FCC 04-258). This is WT Docket 03-66. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 10, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 237, at Pages 72019 - 72047. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts RO & NPRM Re ITFS/MDS Band" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 916, June 11, 2004.

End of voluntary negotiation period for determining the royalty fees for analog signals to be paid by satellite carriers under the satellite carrier compulsory license. See, Copyright Office's notice in the Federal Register, December 30, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 250, at Pages 78482 - 78483.

Suggested deadline to submit comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) regarding the European Community's complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO) regarding the Jobs Act, which replaced the Foreign Sales Corporation and Extraterritorial Income (FSC/ETI) tax regimes. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 3, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 1, at Pages 135-136.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir), Panel C, will hear oral argument in Rates Technology v. Nortel Networks (No. 04-1212). and Phonometrics v. Hospitality International (No. 04-1318). See, FedCir calendar. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir), Panel D, will hear oral argument in Israel Bio-Engineering v. Amgen (Nos. 04-1153 and 04-1301) and In Re Fujimura (No. 04-1244). See, FedCir calendar. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) International Telecommunications Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "An Overview of the World Bank's E-Development Policy Goals for Assisting Developing Countries to Integrate Information and Communication's Technologies (ICT) into the Development Agenda". The speakers will be Rob Stephens (World Bank) and Nagy Hanna (World Bank). No RSVP required. Location: AT&T, Suite 1000, 1120 20th St., NW.

1:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) will hold a meeting. It is open to the public. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 27, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 247, at Pages 77259 - 77260. See also, story titled "DHS's National Infrastructure Advisory Council Meeting to Cover Cyber Security" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1045, December 28, 2004. Location: Hamilton Crowne Plaza, 14th & K Streets, NW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The WRC-07 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 5: Regulatory Issues will meet. The FCC notice [PDF] states also that "Non-U.S. citizens desiring to attend this meeting must pre-clear 24 hours in advance by providing their name, country of citizenship, and company name to Sharon Neuner at: sharon.c.neuner @boeing.com." Location: Boeing Company, 1200 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the International Telecommunications Union's ITU-T Study Group 3 (tariff and accounting principles) meeting. See, the ITU's calendar of meetings. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 20, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 243, at Page 76027. For more information, including the location, contact Julian Minard at minardje@state.gov. Location: undisclosed.

TIME? There will be a meeting of the Executive Office of the President's (EOP) Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council's (NSTC) Committee on Technology's Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology Subcommittee. The meeting is closed to the public. For more information, contact Geoff Holdridge at 703 292-4532. Location: undisclosed.

Deadline to register for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) half day meeting on January 19 to discuss policy, privacy, and security issues associated with Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12, titled "Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors." To register, contact Sara Caswell at Sara.caswell@nist.gov or 301 975-4634. See, notice [PDF].

RESCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 26. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a Broadband PCS Spectrum Auction. This is Auction No. 58. See, notice [3 pages in PDF].

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir), Panel E, will hear oral argument in Frazier v. Roessel Cine Photo Tech (No. 04-1060). See, FedCir calendar. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir), Panel F, will hear oral argument in NEC Solutions v. U.S (No. 04-1085), Chantelle v. De Millus Comercio (No. 04-1289), and Shock-Tek v. Trek Bicycle Corporation (04-1324). See, FedCir calendar. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a luncheon. The featured speaker will be Robert Kahn, President of the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI). He will discuss digital object architecture and information management on the internet. See, notice and registration page. Media queries should be directed to Patrick Ross at 202 289-8928 or pross@pff.org. Other queries should be directed to Brooke Emmerick at 202 289-8928 or bemmerick@pff.org. Location: Mandarin Oriental Hotel, 1330 Maryland Ave., SW.

1:30 - 3:30 PM. The WRC-07 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 2: Satellite Services and HAPS will meet. See, FCC notice [PDF]. Location: Leventhal Senter & Lerman, 2000 K St., NW, 7th Floor Conference Room.

1/4. President Bush formally nominated eight people to serve in his cabinet. He had previously announced his intent to make each of these nominations. The nominees are Samuel Bodman (to be Secretary of Energy), Alberto Gonzales (Attorney General), Carlos Gutierrez (Secretary of Commerce), Mike Johanns (Secretary of Agriculture), Michael Leavitt (Secretary of Health and Human Services), Jim Nicholson (Secretary of Veterans Affairs), Condoleezza Rice (Secretary of State), and Margaret Spellings (Secretary of Education). See, White House release.

1/3. Robert Sachs, P/CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), sent a letter [PDF] to Michael Powell, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), urging Powell to "convene and host a discussion between several business and technical representatives from the cable and consumer electronics industries ... to clarify a number of issues" regarding set top boxes and the separate security requirement. Sachs proposes that Powell preside over a meeting with about five representatives from the cable industry and five from the consumer electronics industry. This relates to CS Docket No. 97-80.

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 information page.

Contact: 202-364-8882.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2005 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.