6/9. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, a Declaratory Ruling (DR) and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding implementation of the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act (CSEA) and changing the FCC's competitive bidding rules and procedures. The FCC issued only a short release that describes this item.

The Congress enacted the CSEA late in the 108th Congress as part of HR 5419, a larger composite bill. President Bush signed the bill on December 23, 2004.

The CSEA changes the process for reallocating spectrum from federal users to commercial users, such as wireless broadband services. The bill creates a Spectrum Relocation Fund, funded by auction proceeds, to compensate federal agencies for the cost of relocating.

See also, stories titled "House Approves Bill that Includes the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,025, November 24, 2004; "Powell Urges Senate to Approve Telecom Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,032, December 7, 2004; and, "Congress Approves Telecom Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,035, December 10, 2004.

The FCC release describes the DR in one paragraph. It states that "Under CSEA, an auction of eligible frequencies may not conclude if the total cash proceeds of the auction are less than 110 percent of the total estimated relocation costs of the federal users. As the statute does not define ``total cash proceeds,´´ the Commission determined that, for purposes of CSEA, ``total cash proceeds´´ should be defined as winning bids net of any applicable discounts, such as small business bidding credits."

The FCC release enumerates six topics upon which the NPRM seeks comment. First, the FCC seeks comment on "Revising the reserve price rule to ensure that auctions of frequencies eligible under CSEA are not concluded without raising 110% of the estimated federal user relocation costs, as required by the statute". The FCC seeks comment on "Options for preserving the availability of tribal land bidding credits in auctions of frequencies eligible subject to CSEA". The FCC seeks comment on "Increasing the Commission’s discretion regarding the amount of interim bid withdrawal and additional default payments".

The FCC also seeks comment on "Establishing procedures in advance of each auction for apportioning bid amounts among licenses in a package", "Changing the payment rules and procedures for broadcast construction permits won at auction to conform to those for non-broadcast licenses", and "Facilitating the use of small business bidding consortia".

Steve Largent, P/CEO of the CTIA, stated in a release that "The Commission's actions today clarify some of the language in the Commercial Spectrum Enhancement Act and continue to pave the way toward an auction of the Advanced Services spectrum. Every decision by the FCC that creates certainty in the auction process and facilitates carriers’ uninhibited access to spectrum has the potential to bring consumers one step closer to enjoying the versatile benefits of wireless technology and advanced wireless services. The industry appreciates the FCC's actions today and looks forward to continuing to work with the Commission on this auction."

This item is FCC 05-123 in WT Docket No. 05-211.

6/9. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, an Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in its proceeding regarding the regulation of the design and marketing of wireless phones with respect to hearing aid compatibility.

The FCC issued a short release [PDF] that describes this item. It states that the FCC determined that "by September 16, 2005, Tier I wireless carriers must, per air interface, either make four hearing aid-compatible handset models available or ensure that 25% of their handset models are hearing aid-compatible. By September 16, 2006, the Tier I wireless carriers must, per air interface, either make five hearing aid-compatible handset models available or ensure that 25% of their handset models are hearing aid-compatible. The Commission did not alter the obligation for all wireless carriers to ensure that 50% of their handset models are compatible with hearing aids by February 18, 2008."

The release adds that the order requires that "all carrier-owned and operated retail outlets must make live, in-store consumer testing available", and that the NPRM seeks comment on "extending the in-store testing requirements to more types of outlets that sell wireless services".

FCC Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy wrote in a separate statement [PDF] that the FCC may be exceeding its statutory authority if it adopts further rules. She wrote that "I would sound a note of caution about today’s further notice, however. In it, the Commission seeks comment on extending the in-store consumer testing requirement to retail stores that are not owned or operated directly by wireless carriers. While I continue to support testing requirements in connection with the carriers’ own retail sales and urge independent retailers to do the same, I believe we should be circumspect about any attempt to extend well beyond our traditional jurisdiction to compel action by independent retailers without a clear directive from Congress to do so."

See also, statement [PDF] by Commissioner Michael Copps, and statement [PDF] by Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein.

Steve Largent, P/CEO of the CTIA, stated in a release that "The wireless industry took seriously the concerns of the hearing loss community and worked to craft a plan that addresses and fulfils its members’ needs. When hearing aid users sign up for wireless service they not only have a choice in service provider, but also now have a diverse choice in devices -- whether they want phones with all the bells and whistles or more simplified versions. Wireless technology was built as a service for all consumers and today’s ruling furthers that reality. CTIA commends the Self Help for Hard of Hearing People's for helping to lead us down a path that gets us closer to that goal."

This item is FCC 05-122 in WT Docket No. 01-309.

6/10. The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) held a hearing on Friday morning, June 10, titled "Reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act". This was the last of long series of hearings held by the HJC, and its Crime Subcommittee, since April on the sixteen sections of the PATRIOT that expire on December 31, 2005. This latest hearing, and statements made after the hearing, were tempestuous. This may have decreased the likelihood that the HJC will now develop a bipartisan bill that includes further sunsetting, reporting requirements, and checks against abuse of power.

Introduction. The hearing, and statements made after the hearing, demonstrated a high level of partisanship and theatrics. Some statements were personal and ad hominem. There was a breakdown of decorum.

There is much partisanship and lack of decorum in the House and Senate, involving both parties. However, this conduct is rarely displayed in debates and hearings involving technology related issues. Title II of the PATRIOT Act, and the 16 of its sections that are sunsetted, mostly pertain to law enforcement access to communications and data, especially those involving new information technologies.

The Bush administration has all along pushed for a simple bill that permanently extends all of the sunsetting provisions. The HJC has been conducting a long, thorough and bipartisan effort to study the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act, and develop a bipartisan consensus bill that extends all or most of the sections, but might include further sunset provisions, new requirements for the government to report on its implementation of these provisions, and new judicial checks and other safeguards against abuse. The thought of some members of both parties has been that if the bill has wide and bipartisan support on the HJC, and it is based on a thorough examination of the issues, then it stands a better chance of approval by the full House and the Senate.

The events of June 10 threaten to derail this bipartisan process. They may reframe the issue and the debate. What had been a question of whether and how the HJC might fashion a consensus bill to impose some limits on Title II powers may have been transformed into a question of whether one stands behind George Bush or Nancy Pelosi on Guantanimo Bay and other contentious policy issues. Some members of both parties who might have been inclined to involve themselves in the former, may wish to avoid the latter. Hence, the events of Friday, June 10 may make it less likely that the Committee will develop a bipartisan bill that wins support in the House and Senate.

Whatever the merits of the Bush administration's war on terror policies may be, the HJC has just completed one of the longest, most thorough, most open, and bipartisan set of oversight hearings of any Congressional committee in recent years. In the wake of Friday's hearing, some Democrats are left outraged at Rep. Sensenbrenner and Republicans, and some Republicans are left outraged by the partisan theatrics of those Democrats. And, some are concerned that their effort to draft a bipartisan bill may have been sidetracked by a partisan debate.

Summary of Events of June 10. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the Chairman of the HJC, presided at the hearing. Beginning in April of this year, he put in place a long series of hearing on the expiring provisions of Title II of the PATRIOT Act. Most have been conducted by the HJC's Crime Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC).

There have been about a dozen, depending on how one counts hearings labeled as "continuation", and multiple hearings held on the same day. These hearings have been numerous. They have afforded ample opportunity for critics of the 16 sections to offer their analysis. The Crime Subcommittee hearings in particular have been conducted in a patient, bipartisan and cooperative fashion.

Rep. Sensenbrenner allowed hearings on the expiring sections of Title II of the PATRIOT Act. At the June 10 hearing, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. Sheila Lee (D-TX), and other Democrats sought to covert this hearing process into a open ended examination of the Bush administration's policies related to the war on terrorism, regardless of whether the issues relate to any the sunsetted provisions of the PATRIOT Act, or even to any provision of the PATRIOT Act, or matters within the jurisdiction of the HJC.

Rep. Sensenbrenner was not pleased with the actions of Rep. Nadler. On the other hand, Rep. Nadler was not pleased with the actions of Rep. Sensenbrenner. Their exchanges were terse, but not personal.

The hearing of June 10, and its witnesses, were requested by some of the Committee Democrats. All of the witnesses are harsh critics of the Bush administrations terrorism related policies, with little if anything to say about the sunsetting provisions of the PATRIOT Act. Rep. Sensenbrenner nevertheless allowed the hearing. However, he scheduled it for Friday, after the House had recessed for the weekend. He also scheduled it at 8:30 AM, which is unusually early for a hearing. These upset some Democrats.

Rep. Sensenbrenner strictly followed the HJC's rules. See, Rules of Procedure [7 pages in PDF]. Rule III(d) provides that "In the course of any hearing each Member shall be allowed five minutes for the interrogation of a witness ..." He allowed the witnesses their allotted time, and then he allowed each member of the Committee their allotted time to ask questions. He did not allow extra time. Rep. Nadler and Rep. Lee wanted to continue. But, he concluded the hearing.

After the hearing, many Democrats remained, as did their witnesses. They continued as though the hearing had not been concluded. As C-SPAN continued its coverage, Rep. Nadler criticized the "actions of the administration". He complained that "we have not have the opportunity to have hearings on these other issues" related to the war on terrorism.

Rep. Nadler complained that the Chairman left, and would not listen to him. He complained too that his microphone was turned off. But, other than this, he did not condemn Rep. Sensenbrenner. He focused his criticism on "the administration".

The witnesses remained at the witness table, and one condemned the process followed by the HJC. He added that it sets a bad example for the rest of the world.

The witnesses were Carlina Ruano (American Immigration Lawyers Association), James Zogby (Arab American Institute), Deborah Pearlstein (U.S. Law and Security Program), and Chip Pitts (Amnesty International USA). They did not discuss the expiring provisions, except that Pitts discussed Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act in his written and oral testimony. Much of their testimony and answers focused on immigration law and procedure, Guantanimo Bay, an American gulag, and the Bush administration's policies regarding the war on terror.

After the hearing, House Minority Leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), leveled personal attacks on Rep. Sensenbrenner, and Republicans generally. She made various partisan and defamatory statements about Rep. Sensenbrenner, and the conduct of Committee's hearings on extending the sunsetting provisions of the PATRIOT Act.

For example, the Rep. Pelosi, wrote in a release that "The Republicans' abuse of power reached a new low this morning when they tried to silence Democrats at a hearing on the Patriot Act by cutting the microphones. Chairman Sensenbrenner proved again today that he is afraid of ideas, and that Republicans will stop at nothing to silence Democrats."

She leveled accusations of "Republican abuses of power". She asserted that "Republican leaders dictate the party line and ram bills through committees". She decried the "Republicans' shameful behavior" and the "disgraceful conduct by Mr. Sensenbrenner".

Sunsetting Provisions of Title II of the PATRIOT Act. USA PATRIOT Act is an acronym for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001". It was passed quickly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 by the 107th Congress as HR 3162. It became Public Law 107-56 on October 26, 2001.

There are sixteen sections of Title II of the PATRIOT Act that are set to sunset on December 31, 2005. These sections pertain to the authority of law enforcement to obtain phone conversations, VOIP communications, e-mail, voice mail messages, and other communications and data. It also pertains to law enforcement access to the records, such as subscription records, of phone companies, internet service providers, and entities that provide internet access, such as libraries. It covers what information can be accessed, what judicial or other permission is required, what notice to individuals is required, how this information can be used and shared, and what remedies individuals have, if any, if law enforcement entities abuse their powers. The sunsetted provisions substantially affect communications and information technologies.

The PATRIOT Act is a huge and broad bill, with many titles. Yet, the sunsetted provisions are all in Title II.

The sunsetting provisions of the PATRIOT Act modified numerous sections of the criminal code, which is codified at Title 18, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which is codified at 50 U.S.C. § 1861, et seq.

The sections of Title II that are scheduled to sunset are as follows:

  § 201 pertaining to "Authority to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to terrorism"
  § 202 pertaining to "Authority to intercept wire, oral, and electronic communications relating to computer fraud and abuse offenses"
  § 203(b) pertaining to "Authority to share electronic, wire and oral interception information" of criminal investigations
  § 203(d) pertaining to sharing "Foreign intelligence information"
  § 204 pertaining to "Clarification of intelligence exceptions from limitations on interception and disclosure of wire, oral, and electronic communication"
  § 206 pertaining to "Roving surveillance authority under the FISA"
  § 207 pertaining to "Duration of FISA surveillance of non-United States persons who are agents of a foreign power"
  § 209 pertaining to "Seizure of voice-mail messages pursuant to warrants" (This section is deceptively titled; it actually pertains to stored communications, and may affect access to VOIP communications.)
  § 212 pertaining to "Emergency disclosure of electronic communications to protect life and limb"
  § 214 pertaining to "Pen register and trap and trace authority under FISA" (This section relates to phone numbers, and routing and addressing information for internet communications.)
  § 215 pertaining to "Access to records and other items under the FISA"
  § 217 pertaining to "Interception of computer trespasser communications"
  § 218 pertaining to "Foreign intelligence information"
  § 220 pertaining to "Nationwide service of search warrants for electronic evidence"
  § 223 pertaining to "Civil liability for certain unauthorized disclosures"
  § 225 pertaining to "Immunity for compliance with FISA wiretap".

Extensive Nature of Hearings. Rep. Pelosi's characterizations were not descriptive of the hearing process that the HJC has followed. She characterized Rep. Sensenbrenner's conduct as "disgraceful", and Republican's behavior as "shameful". She asserted that "Republican leaders dictate the party line and ram bills through committees".

The Bush administration did not seek the dozen or so hearings that the HJC has held. It wants permanent extension of the sunsetting provisions, and with one minor change, has opposed all proposals to add any further language. It has fought Congressional efforts to engage in effective oversight.

Also, many in the Republican party stand with the Bush administration on this subject. And, no other Committee in either the House or Senate has held anywhere near as many oversight hearings on these sunsetting provisions as the HJC.

Moreover, the manner in which the hearings have been conducted is noteworthy. First, Rep. Sensenbrenner assigned the bulk of the oversight work to the Crime Subcommittee, which is chaired by Rep. Coble. He is one of the more friendly and bipartisan members of the HJC.

Second, at each of the Crime Subcommittee's hearings the witness panels included persons with critical viewpoints. Moreover, the Subcommittee heard from witnesses with particular expertise, such as former Rep. Bob Barr, Greg Nojeim of the ACLU, law professor Peter Swire, law professor Orin Kerr, and Jim Dempsey of the Center for Democracy and Technology.

The only witness sought by Democrats who was not called to testify was the infamous trial lawyer, Gerry Spence. (Committee Democrats have also noted that the HJC did not pay travel expenses of witnesses for this set of hearings, but have not pointed to any hearing for which they were not able to obtain expert testimony.)

Third, at each of the Crime Subcommittee's hearings the government witnesses appeared concurrently with their critics. Most Congressional committees afford government witnesses the privilege of testifying first, and on a separate panel. By mixing the two groups, the Crime Subcommittee forced the government witnesses to respond to their critics, and suffer rebuttals. For example, when a government witness answered a question, it was often followed up by a rebuttal answer from another panel member. Also, members of the Subcommittee often asked government witnesses to respond to points made by the other witnesses.

Fourth, Rep. Coble conducted the hearings with great patience and deference to the Democrats. He allowed second rounds of questions. He routinely allowed Democrats to go over their allotted time.

Moreover, these hearings were all held in the HJC's hearing room, so that for each hearing there was ample room for any member of the public who sought to attend. The hearings were webcast. Witness statements have been published fairly promptly after hearings.

Rep. Sensenbrenner and Rep. Coble conducted as extensive, thorough, open, and bipartisan a set of oversight hearings as the Congress has witnessed in recent years. Yet, they find themselves accused by Rep. Pelosi of shameful conduct and ramming through bills.

Consensus Building Process.  Rep. Nadler does not have the votes to push a bill through the HJC. Rep. Pelosi does not have the votes to push a bill through the House. And even if they did, their bill would not likely be well received in the Senate. The Democrats hold a minority of seats on the HJC and in the House. Rep. Nadler and Rep. Pelosi would need to attract votes from some of the less partisan and less confrontational members of their party, and Republicans.

Any effort to revise the PATRIOT Act must reach out more broadly than to only activist Democrats. It must incorporate other Democrats, as well as Republicans inclined to challenge the Bush administration on Title II of the PATRIOT Act. For any such efforts to succeed, it must be bipartisan and cooperative. And, up until Friday, June 10, there has been an extensive effort of this nature.

There are several members of the HJC who could contribute to just such a bipartisan effort. For example, there is Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA). He represents an overwhelmingly white, rural, Southern district. His state and district have voted for George Bush. Demographically, one would expect his district to send a Republican to Congress. If Rep. Boucher were to associate closely with Rep. Pelosi, and her political style, it probably would.

But, Rep. Boucher is more than just one vote. He is also perhaps more knowledgeable about information and communications technologies than any member of the House or Senate. His active participation in any discussions, debates, or markups would be invaluable for those seeking to insert limits on PATRIOT Act powers.

There is also Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), a more junior member of the HJC. He represents a suburban southern California district that is home to many Republicans. He won his seat by ousting a Republican after two hard fought campaigns.

Since Democrats are a minority, a necessary precondition for passing legislation that imposes limits on PATRIOT Act power is winning some Republican support.

There has been some significant interest in this. For example, on the Crime Subcommittee there is Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ). He spent a considerable amount of time at the hearings, and asked numerous questions of the government witnesses that suggest a strong interest in placing some limits on PATRIOT Act powers.

He also joined the Patriot Act Reform Caucus. Thus, he has demonstrated a commitment revising the PATRIOT Act as part of a studious, bipartisan process. However, it would be altogether different to expect a conservative Republican such as Rep. Flake to take any action that may be perceived as siding with Nancy Pelosi in a partisan squabble with the Bush administration.

Other HJC members, such as Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA) have a history of distrust of government power. Philosophically, they may be inclined to impose some limits in Title II of the PATRIOT Act. But, they are also leading California Republicans who will not wish to associate themselves with the politics of Nancy Pelosi.

Rep. Sensenbrenner and Rep. Coble have demonstrated a commitment to conducting a through and open oversight process. But, their enthusiasm for following through may be dampened by the partisan mischaracterization of their hearings.

One staff member who has been working on reaching a bipartisan HJC bill spoke with TLJ on Friday, and expressed the hope that when the members of the HJC return on Monday, June 13, they will have forgotten that anything happened on Friday, June 10.

6/13. The Supreme Court will meet on Monday, June 13, 2005. It is likely to release opinions, and an order list announcing whether or not to grant pending petitions for writ of certiorari.

It is possible that it will issue opinions on June 13 in MGM v. Grokster (regarding copyright and P2P systems), NCTA v. Brand X (regarding regulation of broadband internet services), and/or Merck v. Integra (regarding a research exemption to patent infringement).

The Supreme Court's calendar [PDF] also indicates that it may meet, and release opinions, on Monday, June 20, and Monday, June 27.

The Supreme Court's calendar also indicates that it held a conference on Thursday, June 9, and that it mayl hold further conferences on Thursday, June 16, and on Thursday, June 23.

The Court may decide whether or not to grant certiorari in Honeywell v. Hamilton Sundstrand at its June 16 conference. This is a case regarding whether a patent applicant who has withdrawn an independent patent claim and rewritten a formerly dependent claim as a new independent claim is subject to prosecution history estoppel. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) opposes the petition for certiorari. See, May 19 amicus curiae brief.

The Court may decide whether or not to grant certiorari in Texaco v. Dahger at its June 23 conference. This is an antitrust case involving whether an agreement between the owners of a lawful joint venture with respect to the pricing of the joint venture's products may be treated as a per se violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1, when the joint venture's owners do not compete in the market for those products. The OSG supports this petition. See, May 26 amicus curiae brief.

It is also possible that individual Justices may announce their retirements. The most likely retirement would be that of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who is 80 and in poor health. Other possible retirements include Sandra O'Conner (75) and John Paul Stevens (85).

6/9. The House rejected HJRes 27 by a vote of 86-338. It was a non-partisan vote. The Republicans voted 39-185. The Democrats voted 46-153. See, Roll Call No. 239.

This resolution provided as follows: "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress withdraws its approval, provided under section 101(a) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, of the WTO Agreement as defined in section 2(9) of that Act."

Rep. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Trade, explained, during the floor debate, why the House held this vote. "The reason we have this resolution before us is that 10 years ago we passed legislation to gain access to the WTO. At that time Bill Clinton was the President of the United States. Congressman Gingrich thought it was important that because the legislative branch of government is the branch responsible for trade that there be a review process every 5 years as to whether we should remain within the WTO, to give Congress the ability to exercise its constitutional responsibility to oversight and be responsible for trade. At that time, Mr. Speaker, I must tell the Members I had certain concerns as to why we would want to have basically a nuclear option in pulling out from the WTO."

Rep. Cardin added that "it is in the interest of the United States to be in a rules-based trading system and to withdraw from a rules-based trading system would be folly, it would be wrong."

Robert Portman, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), stated in a release after the vote that "I look forward to working with Congress to lower tariffs to American products which can only be completed with engagement with our trading partners. The WTO provides an important framework for a fair, rules based, international system of trade that we benefit from every day ... American exporters face high tariffs and other trade barriers around the world, and the ongoing Doha trade negotiations offer us the best opportunity to really level the playing field."

The House will meet at 12:30 PM for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. The House will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM. It will begin consideration of the nomination of Thomas Griffith to be Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

The Supreme Court will meet. It is possible that it will issue opinions in MGM v. Grokster (regarding copyright and P2P systems), NCTA v. Brand X (regarding regulation of broadband internet services), and/or Merck v. Integra (regarding a research exemption to patent infringement).

5:00 PM. The House Rules Committee will meet to adopt rules for consideration of HR 2862, the "Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006", and HR 2863, the "Department of Defense Appropriations, FY 2006". Location: Room H-312, Capitol Building.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for morning hour, and at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will begin consideration of HR 2862, the "Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006". See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:30 AM. The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) will hold a news conference to announce the winners of its Inventor of the Year Awards. For information call 202 466-2396. Location: National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.

10:00 AM. The Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Homeland Security will meet to mark up HR 2360, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Location: Room S-128, Capitol Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the Bush administration's program titled "Strategy Targeting Organized Piracy" or "STOP". The witnesses will be Jon Dudas (Director of the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office), Victoria Espinel (acting Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property), Daniel Baldwin (acting Assistant Commissioner of the Office of Strategic Trade, U.S. Department of Homeland Security), Laura Parsky (Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice), Loren Yager (General Accounting Office), Brad Huther (U.S. Chamber of Commerce), Franklin Vargo (National Association of Manufacturers), Jeffrey Evans (P/CEO of The Will-Burt Company). See, notice. Location: Room 562, Dirksen Building.

8:30 AM - 3:15 PM. The Chamber of Commerce will host a program titled "The Global Potential of Radio Frequency Identification". The speakers will include Daniel Caprio (Deputy Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy, and Chief Privacy Officer, at the Department of Commerce), Claus Heinrich (SAP Executive Board Member), Bill McDermott (P/CEO of SAP America), and Patrick Gauthier (SVP of Visa USA). The price to attend ranges from free to $195. For more information, contact Andrew Persson at 202 463-5500. See, notice and agenda [PDF]. Location: Chamber of Commerce, 1615 H Street, NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a luncheon. The speaker will be Dan Glickman, P/CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). For more information, contact Brooke Emmerick at 202-289-8928 or bemmerick at pff dot org. Press contact: Patrick Ross at 202 289-8928 or pross at pff dot org. See, notice and registration page. Location: Rotunda Room, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) WRC-07 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 5 (Regulatory Issues) will meet. See, notice [PDF]. Location: Boeing, 1200 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA. The nearest Metro is Rosslyn.

2:30 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Intellectual Property will hold a hearing on "injunctions and damages relating to patent law reform". The SJC frequently cancels meetings without notice. Location: Room 224, Dirksen Building.

6:00 PM. The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) will host a reception for its Inventor of the Year Award winners. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) will present the awards. For information call 202 466-2396. Location: Caucus Room, Cannon House Office Building.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will continue its consideration of HR 2862, the "Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006". It will also begin consideration of HR 2863, the "Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2006". See, Republican Whip Notice.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a program titled "An Introduction to Copyright Law". The price to attend ranges from $25-$35. For more information, contact 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

2:00 PM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection will hold a hearing titled "Product Counterfeiting: How Fakes Are Undermining U.S. Jobs, Innovation, and Consumer Safety". See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the HCC. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

8:30 AM - 5:30 PM. The National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for International Science and Engineering will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 1, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 104, at Pages 31545 - 31546. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 730, Arlington, VA.

9:00 AM - 4:30 PM. Day one of a two day conference hosted by the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) titled "Pirates, Thieves and Innocents: Perceptions of Copyright Infringement in the Digital Age". Registration has closed. The event will be webcast. See, webcast registration page. Location: UMUC, 3501 University Blvd. East, Adelphi, MD.

9:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) WRC-07 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 4 (Broadcasting and Amateur Issues) will meet. See, notice [PDF]. Location: Shaw Pittman & Pillsbury, 2300 N Street, NW, Conference Room 1E/F.

9:30 AM. There will be a news conference titled "US-Brazil Trade Relations". For more information, call John Proctor at Direct Communications Group at 202 272-2179. Location: Zenger Room, National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.

10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on federal legislative solutions to data breach and identity theft. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) will preside. The witnesses will be the five Commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Deborah Majoras, Orson Swindle, Thomas Leary, Pamela Harbour, and Jonathan Leibowitz, and William Sorrell (Vermont Attorney General, and President of the National Association of Attorneys General). Press contact: Melanie Alvord (Stevens) at 202 224-8456 or Melanie_Alvord at commerce dot senate dot gov, or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202 224-4546 or Andy_Davis at commerce dot senate dot gov. See, notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

2:00 AM. The Senate Appropriations Committee will meet to mark up HR 2360, the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Location: Room 106, Dirksen Building.

2:30 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on the nominations of William Jeffrey (to be Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology), Ashok Kaveeshwar (Administrator of the Research and Innovative Technology Administration), Edmund Hawley (Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for the Transportation Security Administration), and Israel Hernandez (Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director General of the U.S. Foreign and Commercial Service). Press contact: Melanie Alvord (Stevens) at 202 224-8456 or Melanie_Alvord at commerce dot senate dot gov, or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202 224-4546 or Andy_Davis at commerce dot senate dot gov. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

TIME? The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee's (ITAC) ITU-T Study Group 3 (Tariff and accounting principles including related telecommunication economic and policy issues) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 7, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 108, at Page 33253. Location: AT&T, 1133 21st Street, Suite 210.

6:00 - 8:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host an event titled "Happy Hour". For more information, contact Debrea Terwilliger at 202 383-3349 or debrea dot terwilliger at wbklaw law com or 202-393-3000. Location: Topaz Hotel, Zen Den, 1733 N St., NW.

Deadline to submit comments, and notices of intent to participate, to the Copyright Office in response to its proposed rules containing a proposed settlement of royalty rates for the retransmission of digital over-the-air television broadcast signals by satellite carriers under the statutory license. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 17, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 94, at Pages 28231 - 28233.

8:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. Day two of a two day meeting of the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for International Science and Engineering. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 1, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 104, at Pages 31545 - 31546. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 730, Arlington, VA.

9:00 AM - 3:00 PM. Day two of a two day conference hosted by the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) titled "Pirates, Thieves and Innocents: Perceptions of Copyright Infringement in the Digital Age". Registration has closed. The event will be webcast. See, webcast registration page. Location: UMUC, 3501 University Blvd. East, Adelphi, MD.

Deadline to submit comments to the Antitrust Modernization Commission (AMC) in response to the AMC's request for public comments regarding (1) treble damages, (2) prejudgment interest, (3) attorneys' fees, (4) joint and several liability, contribution, and claim reduction, (5) remedies available to the federal government, (6) private injunctive relief, and (7) indirect purchaser litigation. See, notice in the Federal Register: May 19, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 96, at Pages 28902-28907.

The annual U.S.-EU Summit will take place. See, White House release. Location: Washington DC.

10:00 AM. Kevin Ring (author of Scalia Dissents : Writings of the Supreme Court's Wittiest, Most Outspoken Justice), Herman Schwartz (American University Law School) and Mark Tushnet (Georgetown University Law School) will participate in a panel discussion regarding Supreme Court developments. Location: Zenger Room, National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.

12:30 PM. Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, will give a luncheon address. Location: Ballroom, National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) [15 pages in PDF] regarding implementation of the satellite broadcast carriage requirements in the noncontiguous states, as required by Section 210 of the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004 (SHVERA). The FCC adopted this NPRM at its April 29, 2005 meeting. This NPRM is FCC 05-92 in MB Docket No. 05-181. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 20, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 97, at Pages 29252-29253.

6/10. Alexander Acosta resigned his position as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division. See, statement by AG Alberto Gonzales. Acosta has been appointed to serve as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida.

6/10. Bill Miller was named Vice President of Congressional and Public Affairs and National Political Director at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He has worked at the Chamber since 1999 on election and get out the vote efforts. Before that, he worked for former Rep. Connie Morella (R-MD). See, Chamber release.

6/8. Arthur Dunkel died. He was Director-General of the GATT from 1980 through 1993. See, World Trade Organization (WTO) release.

6/7. Paul Verhoef was named by the European Commission to the post of head of unit for Project 'Galileo' and Intelligent Transport in the Directorate General for Energy and Transport. See, ICANN release.

6/9. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding procedures for amending the FM Table of Allotments and other procedures for making certain modifications to broadcast facilities. First Broadcasting Investment Partners LLC filed a petition for rulemaking [39 pages in PDF] on March 5, 2004. The FCC issued a short release that describes this NPRM. This NPRM is FCC-05-120 in Docket 05-210 and RM-10960.

6/8. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division issued a release regarding the fourth annual conference of the International Competition Network (ICN) in Bonn, Germany.

6/8. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register that describes, recites, and sets the effective dates for its revisions to its antenna gain pattern rules, and its new rules for Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) networks and other networks using certain multiple access techniques. Most of these rule changes take effect on July 8, 2005. The rest take effect on September 30, 2005. The FCC adopted its 6th Report and Order on March 10, 2005, and released it on March 15, 2005. This item is FCC 05-62 in IB Docket No. 00-248. See, Federal Register, June 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 109, at Pages 33373 - 33377.

6/7. Meredith Attwell, Senior Policy Advisor to the head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), gave a speech in Covington, Kentucky, titled "Promoting Broadband Deployment in Rural America". See, presentation slides [PDF].

6/6. The House Commerce Committee published in its web site a transcript of an interview of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), the Chairman, by Roll Call's Morton Kondrake. Rep. Barton discussed the possibility of a major rewrite of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

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.