3/2. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) issued its opinion [29 pages in PDF] in Eolas v. Microsoft, vacating in part, and affirming in part, the judgment of the District Court, and remanding.

The Court of Appeals held the the District Court "improperly granted judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) in Eolas’ favor on Microsoft's anticipation and obviousness defenses and improperly rejected Microsoft’s inequitable conduct defense, this court vacates the district court's decision and remands for a new trial on these issues."

However, the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court on other issues. It affirmed the District Court's claim construction of "executable application". It also found the the District Court did not err in its jury instruction with regard to the claim limitation "utilized by said browser to identify and locate." And, it affirmed the District Court's holding that "components" under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(1) (regarding foreign sales) includes software code on golden master disks.

Eolas is the licensee of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,906. It is titled "Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document". Eolas asserts that Microsoft's web browser, Internet Explorer, incorporates the invention disclosed in this patent.

The University of California (UC) filed the patent application on October 17, 1994. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued the patent on November 17, 1998. The UC granted an exclusive license to Eolas.

On February 2, 1999 Eolas filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (NDIll) against Microsoft alleging patent infringement.

On August 11, 2003, a trial jury of the District Court returned its verdict that Microsoft's Internet Explorer infringed this patent. The jury also awarded damages of $521 Million. See, story titled "Jury Returns Verdict of Infringement Against Microsoft in Eolas Browser Patent Case" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 716, August 12, 2003.

On October 30, 2003, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a "Director Initiated Order for Reexamination" of this patent. See, story titled "USPTO Orders Reexamination of Eolas Patent" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 778, November 13, 2003. This is Control No. 90/006,831.

Microsoft argues that the patent is invalid because prior art anticipated it, or rendered it obvious. The prior art in question is an earlier browser developed by Pei-Yuan Wei, and named Viola, or DX34. Microsoft also asserts the defense of inequitable conduct. That is, Michael Doyle, one of the inventors of the invention disclosed in the Eolas patent, knew of Wei's browser, but did not disclose this to the USPTO.

The District Court rejected these arguments. It held that the Viola browser was abandoned, suppressed, or concealed within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102(g). The Court of Appeals, noting that Wei demonstrated his browser to two Sun Microsystems engineers without a confidentiality agreement and posted it on a publicly accessible internet site, held that the District Court erred, and vacated. Hence, on remand to the District Court, Microsoft will be able to present evidence of Wei's browser, and argue anticipation and obviousness.

The District Court also held that the failure to disclose Wei's browser to the patent examiner could not constitute inequitable conduct because the browser was not prior art. The Court of Appeals vacated, and remanded.

However, Microsoft lost on other appeal issues. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the claim construction issues. It also affirmed on the Section 271 foreign sales issue.

Microsoft issued a release in which it claimed victory. It wrote that "Today's Appeals Court decision overturning and remanding the District Court verdict in the Eolas patent case is a clear victory not only for Microsoft, but for Internet users as well."

Microsoft added that "We have maintained throughout this process that the Eolas patent is not valid, and today's ruling is a clear affirmation of our position. The potential enforcement of the Eolas patent further created confusion that could have impacted the use of the World Wide Web. This concern was shared by others in the industry -- including the W3C -- who have also maintained that the patent is invalid and have requested a re-examination by the U.S. Patent Office."

Microsoft also wrote that "Today's reversal gives Microsoft the opportunity to tell the jury the whole story of how this technology was developed and to present evidence that shows that Eolas did not invent this technology, and that it was developed by others, particularly Pei-yuan Wei and his colleagues at O’Reilly and Associates. They are the true pioneers of this technology. The ruling also gives Microsoft the opportunity to present evidence that Eolas knowingly withheld information about Pei-Wei’s invention to the Patent Office."

The outcome of this case will affect not only Eolas and Microsoft. For example, on October 28, 2003, Tim Berners-Lee, the Director of the W3C wrote a letter to James Rogan, the then Director of the USPTO, in which he stated that "we urge you to initiate a reexamination of the '906 patent in order to prevent substantial economic and technical damage to the operation of World Wide Web. As a result of a recent infringement judgment against Microsoft Corporation based on the '906 patent, they have stated publicly that they intend to redesign the Internet Explorer browser to avoid infringing the '906 patent. Although Microsoft's proposed redesign covers only a small portion of its entire browser program, it would render millions of Web pages and many products of independent software developers incompatible with Microsoft's product."

Berners-Lee, who is also generally credited with being the primary inventor of the web, continued in his letter that "A patent whose validity is demonstrably in doubt ought not be allowed to undo the years of work that have gone into building the Web. Removing the improperly disruptive effect of this invalid patent is important not only for the future of the Web, but also for the past. Even if the Web has to endure several years of disruption, we are confident that currently active Web pages will eventually be fixed and brought into compliance with whatever the prevailing standard is. However, pages that are inactive but have historical value may well remain in a state of impaired accessibility indefinitely if Web technology is forced to deviate from standards in this manner. The Web functions only on the strength of its common standards." (Emphasis in original.)

This case is Eolas Technologies Incorporated and the Regents of the University of California v. Microsoft Corporation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, App. Ct. No. 04-1234, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, D.C. No. 99 C 0626, Judge James Zagel presiding. Judge Randall Rader wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judges Friedman and Plager joined.

In addition, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) announced that it will host a panel discussion titled "The Patent System and the New Economy" on Thursday, March 10. The presenter will be Brad Smith, General Counsel of Microsoft. Todd Dickinson (former head of the USPTO), John Duffy (George Washington University Law School), James DeLong (Progress and Freedom Foundation), and Andre Carter (Imiri Incorporated) will also speak. Christopher DeMuth (AEI) will moderate. See, notice.

3/2. The U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir) issued its opinion [8 pages in PDF] in Native American Arts v. Waldron Corporation, an intellectual property case involving native American products. The Court of Appeals affirmed, on other grounds, the District Court's refusal to give a jury instruction based upon a regulation implementing the statute under which the suit was brought.

This case involves a little known, and rarely litigated intellectual property rights (IPR) statute, the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (IACA). Because it forbids selling a good "in a manner that falsely suggests it is ... an Indian product", it is conceptually similar to certain provisions of the Lanham Act, which provides protection for trademarks (see, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051, et seq.), and protection against false designations of origin (see, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)).

The Defendant, The Waldron Corporation, made and sold jewelry that it advertised under the names ``Navajo,´´ ``Crow,´´ ``Southwest Tribes,´´ and ``Zuni Bear´´. However, none of this jewelry was made by ``Navajo,´´ ``Crow,´´ ``Southwest Tribes,´´ ``Zuni Bear´´, or any member of any other Indian tribes. Moreover, the tags affixed to these jewelry items also included information about various Indian tribes. The defendant did not qualify its advertising with any statement that its jewelry is not Indian products.

Native American Arts, Inc., and others, filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (NDIll) against Waldron alleging violation of the IACA.

The jury returned a verdict for Waldron. However, the District Court first denied the plaintiffs' request for a jury instruction based upon a regulation implementing the IACA. See, Memorandum Opinion [22 pages in PDF] of the District Court. Hence, the error asserted upon appeal is the District Court's refusal to grant this jury instruction.

The Seventh Circuit hears few IPR cases. A disproportionate share of its opinions in IPR cases, including this one, are written by Judge Richard Posner. He has recently written and spoken much on this area of law. See, for example, The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law [Amazon].

The IACA is codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 305, et seq. § 305 creates an "Indian Arts and Crafts Board", and § 305b gives this Board authority to promulgate rules and regulations implementing the IACA.

The key section for the purpose of this case is § 305e. It creates a private right of action for falsely suggesting that a product is an Indian product.

It provides that an Indian tribe, or an Indian arts and crafts organization, may "in a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction, bring an action against a person who, directly or indirectly, offers or displays for sale or sells a good, with or without a Government trademark, in a manner that falsely suggests it is Indian produced, an Indian product, or the product of a particular Indian or Indian tribe or Indian arts and crafts organization, resident within the United States". § 305e further provides that the plaintiff may obtain injunctive relief, treble or statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys fees.

While the original statute dates back to 1935 (see, Public Law No. 87-23), § 305e was enacted in 1990 as a part of HR 2006 in the 101st Congress. It is now Public Law No. 101-644. It was sponsored by then Rep. Jon Kyl (R-AZ). He is now Sen. Jon Kyl, and a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This bill had four cosponsors, two of whom are now also Senators -- Ron Wyden (R-OR) and Tim Johnson (D-SD).

The Indian Arts and Crafts Board promulgated a regulation implementing § 305e that provides, in part, that "the unqualified use of the term `Indian´ or ... of the name of an Indian tribe ... in connection with an art or craft product is interpreted to mean ... that the art or craft product is an Indian product." See, 25 C.F.R. § 309.24(a)(2).

The District Court held that this regulation is an unconstitutional restraint upon freedom of speech. It consequently refused to give the jury an instruction based upon this regulation.

Judge Posner, writing for the Court of Appeals, rejected this conclusion. He wrote, "He indeed was wrong. If he were right, trademark law would be unconstitutional. In effect the regulation makes ``Indian´´ the trademark denoting products made by Indians ... A non-Indian maker of jewelry designed to look like jewelry made by Indians is free to advertise the similarity but if he uses the word ``Indian´´ he must qualify the usage so that consumers aren't confused and think they're buying not only the kind of jewelry that Indians make, but jewelry that Indians in fact made. There is no constitutional infirmity."

However, Judge Posner affirmed the refusal to give a jury instruction based upon this regulation on other grounds. First, he concluded that the Indian Arts and Crafts Board lacked authority under the statute to promulgate such a rule.

Posner did not discuss what degree of deference to accord the Board. He did not discuss the Chevron case, or any other cases dealing with judicial deference to administrative agencies. See, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

Rather, he pointed out that the Indian Arts and Crafts Board is a "small office". Perhaps Posner means to suggest that big agencies, such as the FCC, write sound regulations, based upon statutory authority, that always withstand judicial scrutiny.

He also wrote that "the Board's enforcement role is extremely limited". He did not explain why enforcement authority is pertinent when § 305b gives this Board authority to promulgate rules.

Nevertheless, he concluded that "There is no indication that Congress delegated to the Department authority to determine what constitutes sufficient proof of false advertising".

He also wrote that litigants are not entitled to jury instructions on all regulations.

Finally, while the above quoted language from the opinion makes clear that Judge Posner understood that the IACA's civil remedy provisions are similar to Lanham Act remedies, he did not also address how the IACA may be different from the Lanham Act. For example, constitutional authority for trademark legislation derives from the clause, "To regulate Commerce ... among the several States", while authority for the IACA also derives from the clause "To regulate Commerce ... with the Indian tribes". Also, while the trademark laws serve the purposes of distinguishing the origin of products, and protecting consumers from false advertising, the IACA serves these purposes, and the additional purpose stated in § 305a. It provides that "It shall be the function and the duty of the Secretary of the Interior through the Board to promote the economic welfare of the Indian tribes and Indian individuals through the development of Indian arts and crafts and the expansion of the market for the products of Indian art and craftsmanship."

The Court of Appeals did not address whether either or both of these have any bearing upon construction of the statute and regulation, the deference to be given to the Board, or the plaintiffs' entitlement to a jury instruction.

This case is Native American Arts, Inc., et al. v. The Waldron Corporation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 04-3182, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, D.C. No. 01 C 2370, Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan presiding.

3/1. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), heretofore a Washington DC based group, announced the opening of an office in San Francisco, California. The Director of this new office will be Chris Hoofnagle. He was previously Associate Director of the Washington DC office.

Hoofnagle stated that the EPIC is interested in leveraging the power of the states to protect privacy. He noted, for example, that ChoicePoint's sale of information about 145,000 individuals to identity thieves may not have been exposed, but for the state of California's security breach notice law.

See, stories titled "Senate Judiciary Committee Could Hold Hearings on ChoicePoint, Technology, Privacy and Security" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,083, February 25, 2005, and "ChoicePoint Describes Its Sale of Data to Identity Thieves" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,081, February 23, 2005.

A San Francisco office will also provide the EPIC a presence close to many of its supporters. In addition, the EPIC is a frequent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigant. The 9th Circuit is a more favorable forum for FOIA plaintiffs than the District of Columbia Circuit.

3/2. Adam Thierer will join the Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) as Senior Fellow and the Director of PFF's new Center for Digital Media Freedom, effective March 7, 2005. He was previously Director of Telecommunications Studies at the Cato Institute. See, Thierer's Cato biography. His new contact information will be athierer at pff dot org and 202 289-8928.

3/2. Bill Gates, Chairman and Chief Software Architect of Microsoft, was made a Knight Commander of the British Empire (KBE) in a private ceremony conducted by her royal majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, at Buckingham Palace in London. Membership in the Order of the British Empire entitles Gates to attach the letters "KBE" after his name, and to attach the motto of the Order to his coat of arms, but not to attach Windows Media Player to the Windows operating system. Said Gates, "I am humbled and delighted". See, Microsoft release.

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.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Republican Whip notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM. It will resume consideration of S 256, the "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005".

8:30 AM - 4:00 PM. The Executive Office of the President's (EOP) Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council's (NSTC) Manufacturing Research and Development Interagency Working Group (IWG) will hold a one day public forum on manufacturing research and development in nanomanufacturing, manufacturing for the hydrogen economy, and intelligent and integrated manufacturing systems. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 1, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 20, at Page 5181. Location: auditorium, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property (CIIP) will meet to mark up several items: S 167, the "Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2005", HR 683, the "Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2005", HR __, technical corrections to the "Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004", HR __, technical corrections to the "Copyright Royalty and Distribution Reform Act of 2004", HR __, the "Multidistrict Litigation Restoration Act of 2005", and HConRes 53, regarding the issuance of the 500,000th design patent to DaimlerChrysler. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

CANCELLED. 9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold an executive business meeting. See, notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary will hold a hearing on the President's proposed budget FY 2006 for the Department of Commerce. Location: Room 192, Dirksen Building.

TIME CHANGE. 2:00 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on several judicial nominees: Terrence Boyle, (to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit), James Dever (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina), and Robert Conrad (U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina). See, notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

3:00 PM. The House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities will hold a hearing the Fiscal Year 2006 national defense authorization budget request on tactical command, control, communications, and computer (C-4) systems. The hearing is titled "Why Does the DoD Have So Many Different Systems Performing the Same Functionally?". The witnesses will be Linton Wells (Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration), Vice Admiral R.F. Willard (U.S. Navy, Director for Force Structure, Resources and Assessment), Lt. Gen. Robert Shea (U.S. Marine Corps, Director for Command, Control, Communications and Computer Systems), and Lt. Gen. Robert Wagner (U.S. Army, Deputy Commander, United States Forces Command). Location: Room 2212, Rayburn Building.

4:00 PM. David Nimmer (Irell & Manella) will present a draft paper titled "Codifying Copyright Comprehensively". See, notice of event. This event is part of the Spring 2005 Intellectual Property Workshop Series sponsored by the Dean Dinwoodey Center for Intellectual Property Studies at the George Washington University Law School (GWULS). For more information, contact Robert Brauneis at 202 994-6138 or rbraun at law dot gwu dot edu. The event is free and open to the public. Location: GWULS, Faculty Conference Center, Burns Building, 5th Floor, 716 20th St., NW.

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 Science's Subcommittee on Research Business Methods. The meeting is closed to the public. For more information, contact Megan Columbus at 301 435-0937. Location: undisclosed.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "FCBA Biennial Congressional Reception". The price to attend ranges from $25 to $75. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Room HC-5, Capitol Building.

Day two of a three convention hosted by the Center for Homeland and Global Security titled "4th Annual Homeland and Global Security Summit". See, notice. Location: Washington Convention Center.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding BellSouth's and Sprint's petition for reconsideration of the FCC's schools and libraries Fifth Report and Order. The FCC adopted this 5th R&O at its August 4, 2004 meeting, and released it on August 13, 2004. See, FCC Public Notice (DA 05-103). This 5th R&O is FCC 04-190 in CC Docket No. 02-6.

9:45 AM - 1:30 PM. The Citizens Against Government Waste will host a briefing and luncheon titled "High Tech Policy Forum". At 9:45 AM Tom Schatz (President of CAGW) will give opening remarks. At 10:00 AM Orson Swindle (Federal Trade Commission) and David Taylor (Capitol Solutions) will speak on privacy and spectrum allocation. At 11:00 AM Jonathan Zuck (Association for Competitive Technology) and Lawrence Spiwak (Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies) will speak on intellectual property and VOIP. At 12:00 NOON. James Gilmore will give the luncheon address. See, notice. RSVP to dwilliams@cagw.org or fax to 202 467-4253. Location: Room B340, Rayburn Building, Capitol Hill.

Day three of a three convention hosted by the Center for Homeland and Global Security titled "4th Annual Homeland and Global Security Summit". See, notice. Location: Washington Convention Center.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding Qualcomm's Petition for Declaratory Ruling seeking clarification of rules and the establishment of a streamlined review process to accelerate the deployment of new services in the 700 MHz band. See, FCC Public Notice (DA 05-87). This proceeding is WT Docket No. 05-7.

Deadline to submit comments to Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) in response to the Department of Defense's (DOC) and Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Cyber Security Division's (NCSD) request for public comments regarding the National Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP) and security flaws in commercial software products. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 2, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 21, at Page 5420.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in i2way v. FCC, No. 03-1174. This is a petition for review of an order of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) interpreting its rule that provides that no more than ten channels for a trunked mobile radio operation may be applied for in a single application. See, FCC's brief [25 pages in PDF]. Judges Randolph, Roberts and Williams will preside. Location: Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Storage Technology, Corp. v. Custom Hardware Engineering & Consulting, Inc., No. 04-1462. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DMass), in a case involving patent infringement, DMCA, copyright, trade secret and antitrust claims. This is D.C. No. 02-12102-RWZ. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Ericsson Radio Systems, Inc. v. Interdigital Comm. Corp., a patent case involving cell phone technology. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (NDTex), D.C. No. 04-1484, Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Space Systems v. Lockheed Martin, 04-1501. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Transactional Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch "to discuss and plan upcoming programs". RSVP to Tammi Foxwell at tfoxwell at dlalaw dot com or 202 776-2699. Location: Dow Lohnes & Albertson, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW, 8th floor.

2:00 PM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in PMI Photomagic, Ltd. v. Foto Fantasy, Inc., No. 04-1362. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

2:00 PM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Michael Jackson to be Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security. See, notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

2:00 PM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Mirror Imaging, LLC v. Affiliated Computer Services, Inc., No. 04-1479. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding various pay and work schedule issues. Among the subjects addressed in this NPRM is the e-Payroll initiative. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 5, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 3, at Pages 1067 - 1110.

8:00 - 9:30 AM. Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), Chairman of the House Republican Study Committee, will be the speaker at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce Policy Insiders event. The price to attend ranges from free to $55. See, notice. For more information, contact Matt Haller at mhaller at uschamber dot com or 202 463-3176. Location: Herman Lay Room, U.S. Chamber, 1615 H St., NW.

9:00 AM. The Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee (RPTAC) will meet. The meeting agenda includes an "Update on computer and microprocessor technology controls" and an "Update on encryption controls". (Emphasis added.) See, notice in the Federal Register, February 18, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 33, at Pages 8342-8343. Location: Room 3884, Herbert Hoover Building, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, NW.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Thomas Griffith to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the Organization of American States' (OAS) Inter-American Telecommunication Commission's (CITEL) Permanent Consultative Committee II meeting in Guatemala to be held in April 2005. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 30, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 250, at Pages 78515-78516. For more information, including the location, contact Cecily Holiday at holidaycc@state.gov or Anne Jillson at jillsonad@state.gov. Location: undisclosed.

10:00 AM. The President's Export Council's Subcommittee on Export Administration will hold hold a partially closed meeting. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 11, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 28, at Page 7232. Location: Room 4832, Department of Commerce, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.

2:30 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security will hold a hearing on terrorism and the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat to homeland security. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking regarding revisions to its Schedule of Regulatory Fees. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 28, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 38, at Pages 9575-9606.

RESCHEDULED FOR MARCH 3. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "FCBA Biennial Congressional Reception".

8:30 AM - 5:30 PM. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will host a plenary meeting of the Technical Guidelines Development Committee. This pertains to the developing the security and usability of computer voting systems. See, NIST notice, and NIST voting web site. Location: NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Building 101, Gaithersburg, MD.

9:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Advisory Committee to the Congressional Internet Caucus will host an event titled "RFID Exhibition & Policy Primer". See, notice. Location: Room 902, Hart Building.

9:30 AM. Clayton Christensen, a professor at Harvard Business School, will give a speech titled "How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Communications Industry". He is the author of The Innovator's Dilemna [Amazon], The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth [Amazon], and Seeing What's Next: Using Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change [Amazon]. Breakfast will be served at 8:30 AM. RSVP to 202 380-0620 or conferences at hbsp dot harvard dot edu. Location: Ballroom, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the President's budget request for FY 2006 for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). See, notice. Room 342, Dirksen Building.

Day one of a three day conference host by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) titled "IAPP National Summit". See, conference web site. Location: Omni Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert St., NW.

9:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a meeting. The event will be webcast by the FCC. Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW, Room TW-C05 (Commission Meeting Room).

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Luck Music Library v. Ashcroft, No. 04-5240. Judges Randolph, Roberts and Williams will preside. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DC), which issued its opinion [21 pages in PDF] on June 10, 2004 holding that Section 514 of the Uraquay Round Agreements Act is not unconstitutional. Section 514, which amended 17 U.S.C. § 104A, pertains to international enforcement of copyright. The District Court proceeding is D.C. No. 01-2220. See also, story titled "District Court Upholds Constitutionality of § 514 of Uruguay Round Agreements Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 920, June 17, 2004. Location: Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion titled "The Patent System and the New Economy". The presenter will be Brad Smith, General Counsel of Microsoft. The discussants will be Todd Dickinson (General Electric Company, and former head of the USPTO), John Duffy (George Washington University Law School), James DeLong (Progress and Freedom Foundation), and Andre Carter (Imiri Incorporated). Christopher DeMuth (AEI) will moderate. See, notice. Location: 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a brown bag lunch titled "Developments in the Fight Against Spam and Phishing". The scheduled speakers are Eric Wenger (Department of Justice's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section), Jennifer Jacobsen (AOL/Time Warner), Paula Bruening (Center for Democracy and Technology), and Frank Gorman (Bryan Cave). See, notice. Prices vary from $10 to $30. For more information, call 202 626-3463. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, B-1 Level, 1250 H St., NW.

2:00 PM. The House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities will hold a hearing on the President's budget request for FY 2006 on defense science and technology. The witnesses will be Anthony Tether (Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), Ronald Sega (Director of Defense Research and Engineering), James Tegnelia (Director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency), Thomas Killion (Asst. Sec. of the Army for Research and Technology), Rear Admiral Jay Cohen (Chief of Naval Research), and James Engle (Dep. Asst. Sec. of the Air Force for Science, Technology and Engineering). Location: Room 2118, Rayburn Building.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will meet by teleconference. The meeting is closed to the public. The NSTAC states that the agenda includes the following: "receive briefings and consider proposed recommendations from (1) the NSTAC's Next Generation Network Task Force (NGNTF) concerning near-term issues emerging from the convergence of telecommunications and information technology, and (2) the NSTAC's Legislative and Regulatory Task Force (LRTF) concerning issues associated with the availability of critical telecommunications infrastructure information over the Internet." See, notice in the Federal Register, February 28, 2005, Vol. 70, No.38, at Page 9664.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) program titled "Introduction to Licensing Intellectual Property". The scheduled speakers are Joseph Contrera (Jacobson Holman) and Carol Lavrich (Georgetown University). See, notice. Prices vary from $70 to $115. For more information, call 202 626-3488. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, B-1 Level, 1250 H St., NW.

Day two of a three day conference host by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) titled "IAPP National Summit". See, conference web site. Location: Omni Shoreham Hotel, 2500 Calvert St., NW.