7/1. Broadcom filed a complaint [48 pages in PDF] in U.S. District Court (DNJ) against Qualcomm alleging violation of federal antitrust laws in connection with WCDMA technology and the UMTS standard.

The complaint states that it pertains to "the illegal and anticompetitive conduct of defendant Qualcomm in the markets for technology and chipsets that operate cell phones employing Wideband Code Division Multiple Access ("WCDMA"), a third generation ("3G") technology that is implemented through a mobile telephone standard known as Universal Mobile Telephone System ("UMTS")."

Broadcom also makes UMTS chipsets. See also, Broadcom release.

The complaint alleges that "Qualcomm holds certain patents that it has asserted are "essential" to WCDMA technology and the UMTS standard. Thus, international and United States standard-setting bodies only adopted UMTS as a mobile telephone standard after Qualcomm represented in writing that it would license its WCDMA patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (that is, so-called "FRAND") terms. The adoption of the UMTS standard led mobile telephone services carriers to invest billions of dollars in developing UMTS phone systems."

The complaint further alleges that "after the UMTS standard was adopted, giving Qualcomm monopoly power in the WCDMA technology markets, Qualcomm disregarded its FRAND commitments. Qualcomm has instead leveraged its WCDMA patents in an attempt to expand its monopoly power into the separate market for the sale of the UMTS chipsets that provide basic operational functionality for UMTS phones. Indeed, Qualcomm is now employing with respect to WCDMA and UMTS the same types of unlawful and anticompetitive tactics that Qualcomm has already used to gain tight monopoly control of the markets for technology and chipsets applicable to another third-generation mobile phone standard based on Code Division Multiple Access ("CDMA") technology."

The complaint alleges monopolization in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 2, attempted monopolization in violation of Section 2, unfair exclusive dealings and other exclusionary agreements in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, unlawful tying in violation of Section 1, exclusive dealing in violation of Section 3 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 14, unlawful tying in violation of Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and maintenance of monopoly in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

This shotgun complaint also alleges numerous violations of the state law of New Jersey, including violation of New Jersey Antitrust Act, tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and fraud.

Qualcomm stated in a release that the complaint is "meritless". It stated that "Broadcom's accusation that QUALCOMM has not lived up to its commitments to standard setting organizations to license its essential patents on fair and reasonable terms is belied by the more than 130 licenses that QUALCOMM has granted to a broad range of companies. These licenses-including agreements with the world's largest and most sophisticated manufacturers of wireless telecommunications equipment-make QUALCOMM's patents the most extensively licensed portfolio in the cellular industry."

Qualcomm further stated that Broadcom frequently files lawsuits that fail. It added that it "believes that the patent infringement claims filed in May of this year by Broadcom in federal court and in the ITC are without merit and that QUALCOMM looks forward to proving that it has not infringed any of the asserted patents."

This case is Broadcom Corporation v. Qualcomm, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. Broadcom is represented by the law firm of Boies Schiller & Flexner.

6/29. The House Government Reform Committee held a hearing titled "To Lead or to Follow: The Next Generation Internet and the Transition to IPv6".

This was the first House hearing devoted solely to issues associated with the transition to IPv6. Karen Evans, the Administrator for Electronic Government and Information Technology at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), stated that the OMB will require that federal agencies' infrastructure must be using IPv6 by June 2008.

Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6), which is currently replacing IPv4, provides a vastly increased number of internet addresses. It also provides for more efficient and faster routing, enhanced mobility features, and improved security, for example, through authentication.

The two hour hearing focused on numerous issues, including what are the benefits of IPv6, what is the current availability of IPv4 numbers, what security threats does the transition pose, what should the U.S. government do to assist the transition (such as government regulations and mandates, government funded research, and government management of transitioning its own facilities), what are the consequences for the U.S. economy and U.S. world leadership, and what are the national security implications.

The Committee heard from two executive branch officials, two Congressional witnesses, and four private sector witnesses. See, prepared testimony [PDF] of Karen Evans (OMB, Executive Office of the President) and prepared testimony [PDF] of George Wauer (Director, Architecture & Interoperability, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration and DOD Chief Information Officer, Department of Defense).

See also, prepared testimony [PDF] of David Powner (Director of Information Technology Management Issues, Government Accountability Office) and Keith Rhodes (Chief Technologist and Director, Center for Technology and Engineering, GAO). The GAO is an arm of the U.S. Congress.

See also, prepared testimony [PDF] of John Curran (Chairman of the American Registry for Internet Numbers), prepared testimony [PDF] of Jawad Khaki (Microsoft), prepared testimony [PDF] of Stan Barber (Verio), and prepared testimony [PDF] of Alex Lightman (Charmed Technology Inc.).

Government Actions. The OMB's Karen Evans was the lead off witness. She wrote in her prepared testimony [PDF] that "The overarching challenge facing us is ensuring continued uninterrupted functionality of Federal agencies during the transition while providing continued and improved information assurance. This will require major changes in the architecture of many agency networks. Since there is a large embedded base of IPv4-compatible equipment and applications, transitioning to IPv6 will also require large capital investments and labor resources."

She said that "we are about to issue a policy memorandum providing guidance to the agencies to ensure an orderly and secure transition to IPv6."

She elaborated that "Our policy will also set June 2008 as the date by which all agencies’ infrastructure (network backbones) must be using IPv6 and agency networks must interface with this infrastructure. Once the network backbones are ready, the applications and other elements will follow. Setting this firm date is necessary to maintain focus on this important issue. Overall the actions set out in our policy will begin to address the many challenges that come with IPv6 transition." (Parentheses in original.)

Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), the Chairman of the Committee, presided. He said in his opening statement that "to reap the benefits from IPv6 federal agencies must first begin to plan and develop requirements that will take full advantage of what the new protocol offers. I hope that the Office of Management and Budget will continue its leadership role in information policy and begin to address some essential issues, including how much IP address space the federal agencies may require, whether the federal government is ready for the transition, and how much it will cost."

Rep. Davis (at right) repeatedly asked witnesses, "Are we behind the eight ball?" This is American slang for being in a disadvantageous or uncomfortable position. In the pool game of eight ball, the ball with the number eight must be sunk last.

He received a wide range of responses. One, and only one, witness advocated Congressional legislation. He argued that the Congressional should mandate transition by all federal agencies by 2010, create a leader and agency for the IPv6 transition, and provide this agency with funding of about $50 Million per year.

Lightman also railed against patents related to IPv6.

The OMB's Evans said that the U.S. is following a market based approach.

Microsoft's Khaki said that "market forces should lead the transition", but that the government should fund research, and lead through the government procurement process.

Current Availability of Numbers. The current 32 bit IPv4 numbering system yields a quantity of unique internet protocol addresses of about 4.3 times 10 to the 9th power (about 4.3 Billion). The new 128 bit IPv6 numbering system yields about 3.4 times 10 to the 38th power unique addresses.

The GAO's Powner wrote in his prepared testimony that this "means that almost any electronic device can have its own address. While IP numbers are commonly associated with computers, they are increasingly being assigned to other items such as cellular phones, consumer electronics, and automobiles."

The ARIN's Curran testified that due to more efficient use of IPv4 numbers, "there is ample" time for the transition to IPv6, and "there is not a crisis per se". He said that the ARIN has been allocating IPv6 numbers since 1999, and that the IPv4 numbers will not run out until about 2018.

Charmed Technology's Lightman disputed Curran's statements. He argued that the numbers are not running out because of restrictions being imposed by address managers, such as the ARIN. For example, he asserted that the ARIN only gives out blocks of numbers to entities who business plans it approves. He also asserted that there are inefficient, Soviet style, restrictions on use.

Transition Related Security Threats. The GAO's Powner testified that the transition to IPv6 "is similar to Y2K", but without the hard deadline. The DOD's Wauer said that the DOD is following the Y2K model, and that it will be successful.

Keith Rhodes of the GAO testified solely about security threats associated with the transition to IPv6. The GAO's prepared testimony states that "As IPv6-capable software and devices accumulate in agency networks, they could be abused by attackers if not managed properly. For example, IPv6 is included in most computer operating systems and, if not enabled by default, is easy for administrators to enable either intentionally or as an unintentional byproduct of running a program. We tested IPv6 features and found that, if firewalls and intrusion detection systems are not appropriately configured, IPv6 traffic may not be detected or controlled, leaving systems vulnerable to attacks by malicious hackers."

See also, U.S. Computer Emergency Response Team (US-CERT) document [PDF] titled "Malware Tunneling in IPv6".

U.S. Economy and U.S. World Leadership. The GAO's Powner wrote in his prepared testimony that "Interest in IPv6 is gaining momentum around the world, particularly in parts of the world that have limited IPv4 address space to meet their industry and consumer communications needs. Regions that have limited IPv4 address space, such as Asia and Europe, have undertaken efforts to develop, test, and implement IPv6 deployments."

For example, Powner wrote, "the Japanese government's e-Japan Priority Policy Program mandated the incorporation of IPv6 and set a deadline of 2005 to upgrade existing systems in both the public and private sectors. The government has helped to support the establishment of an IPv6 Promotion Council to facilitate issues related to development and deployment and is providing tax incentives to promote deployment. In addition, major Japanese corporations in the communications and consumer electronics sectors are also developing IPv6 networks and products.

Microsoft's Khaki also wrote about the transition in Asia. He wrote that "Japan is a particularly good example of active government involvement in IPv6 deployment. In September 2000, Prime Minister Mori Yoshiro made IPv6 a national priority, and by early 2001 Japan had initiated an "e-Japan" strategy that specifically called out the need for government support of IPv6 networks. Since that time, Japan has used cooperation with other Asian nations, economic incentives, policies supporting network security and consumer privacy, deregulation, and the digitization of government to help promote its IPv6 efforts to great effect. This strong push has prompted Japan's commercial sector to respond with rapid advances in network technologies and devices. We anticipate that Japan will roll out robust, commercial IPv6 networks capable of supporting tens of millions of broadband subscribers over the next few years. This Japanese effort is in many ways akin to the US government and industry partnership seen most prominently during the early development of the Internet."

Khaki added that in the U.S. "it appears that private industry efforts are working well at this early stage of IPv6 planning and deployment; companies continue to support IPv4, increasingly provide IPv6 compatibility, and many are preparing for an eventual transition to an IPv6 network."

Verio's Barber said that developments in Asian demonstrate the "clear recognition by policymakers abroad of the potential of IPv6", but do not warrant government mandates in the U.S.

Rep. Davis raised the subject of whether the "US is at competitive risk with respect to the Next Generation Internet", and expressed concerns about the People's Republic of China. And, he asked witnesses whether the U.S. is "behind the eight ball".

Others took an alarmist view of developments in Asia.

Rep. Brian Higgins (D-NY), a first term Representative from Buffalo, New York, stated that the "U.S. position of leadership is eroding", and that "there is economic troubles, currently, and on the horizon".

Lightman offered this argument in his written testimony. "Over $9 trillion of America’s nearly $13 trillion economy relates to services, subscriptions, and transactions, and IPv6 will help keep the trust and keep hundreds of millions of customers loyal to American companies. If we don't show leadership in the New Internet, we get a loss of millions of jobs and market share across thousands of companies. A loss of public trust and reputations in transactions over U.S. networks using the existing, highly vulnerable IPv4 protocol, coupled with an increase in trust of IPv6 networks in Japan, Korea, China, and the 25 nations of Europe, could have a devastating impact on America's service economy. Internet Service Providers, telecommunications giants, and banks, brokers and even our defense contractors will lose business."

This, Lightman argued, warrants greater involvement by the U.S. government.

This was a hearing of the full Committee. Rep. Davis presided. He represents a northern Virginia district that is home to many internet service providers and technology companies. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking Democrat, Rep. Gil Gutnecht (R-MN), Rep. Charles Dent (R-PA), and Rep. Brian Higgins (D-NY) also participated. The hearing was held in the Committee large hearing room. The room was full.

7/1. Christopher Libertelli (at right) joined Skype as "Director, Government & Regulatory Affairs, North America". He was previously Senior Legal Advisor to former Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael Powell.

Before joining Powell's staff, he worked in the FCC's Common Carrier Bureau (Wireline Competition Bureau). Before that, he worked for the law firm of Dow Lohnes & Albertson.

Skype stated in a release that "Libertelli will represent Skype before North American government bodies and oversee initiatives to drive public policies that will grow and protect the use of innovative technologies. The Skype policy team will serve as advisors to government leaders and share technical and policy expertise." Skype makes voice over internet protocol (VOIP) software.

6/30. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report [35 pages in PDF] titled "Identity Theft: Some Outreach Efforts to Promote Awareness of New Consumer Rights Are Under Way". This report was required by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions (FACT) Act of 2003.

The FACT Act contained minor amendments to § 609(e) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to assist victims of identity theft. The report notes that the FACT Act "established the right of identity theft victims to obtain, within 30 days, copies of business records involved in transactions alleged to be the result of identity theft. Further, the FACT Act requires that FTC develop a model summary of rights to be distributed to consumers who believe that they are victims of identity theft -- including the right to obtain information available to them under section 609(e). Additionally, the act requires FTC to establish and implement a public media and distribution campaign on identity theft prevention by December 2005."

This report states that the GAO is unable at this time to assess the effectiveness of the § 609(e).

However, the report finds that "As of June 2005, a number of outreach efforts to consumers, businesses, and local law enforcement agencies on identity theft prevention and remediation by federal regulatory and enforcement agencies and others were under way."

It further finds that "Law enforcement agency officials and consumer advocacy group representatives stated that section 609(e) should help victims remedy the effects of identity theft. Law enforcement officials noted that the provision would allow victims to build stronger cases that could prompt local police agencies to open an investigation and added that the information would be useful in identifying patterns or trends in identity theft practices. Consumer advocacy groups told us that they believed that the new provision should make local police more willing to take reports on identity theft because these reports could be used to substantiate the victim’s access to information."

The House will not meet on Monday, July 4, through Friday, July 8. The House will next meet at 2:00 PM on Monday, July 11. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will not meet on Monday, July 4, through Friday, July 8. See, Senate calendar.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Sicom Systems v. Agilent Technologies, a case regarding standing to sue for patent infringement. See, October 5, 2004 Memorandum Opinion [PDF] of the U.S. District Court (Del). This is D.C. No. 03-1171-JJF, and App. Ct. No. 05-1066. Location: U.S. Court of Appeals, LaFayette Square, 717 Madison Place, Courtroom 201.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a program titled "File Sharing and Copyright Infringement after MGM Studios v. Grokster". The price to attend ranges from $10-$20. For more information, contact 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Ericsson Inc. v. Harris Corp., No. 04-1444. Location: U.S. Court of Appeals, LaFayette Square, 717 Madison Place, Courtroom 201.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the Americas Regional Preparatory Meeting for the World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC-06) in Lima, Peru, from August 9-11, 2005. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 22, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 119, Page 36224. Location: DOS, Room 2533A.

10:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "Are Bloggers and Journalists Friends or Enemies?". The speakers will be Ed Morrissey (Captain’s Quarters Blog), Jim Hill (Washington Post Writers Group), and Mark Tapscott (Heritage). See, notice. Location: Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a panel discussion titled "MGM v. Grokster: What's Next?". The speakers will be Cary Sherman (President of the Recording Industry Association of America), Sarah Deutsch (General Counsel of Verizon), Gigi Sohn (President of Public Knowledge), James Burger (Dow Lohnes), and Jim DeLong (PFF). See, notice and registration page. Lunch will be served. Location: Room 1537, Longworth Building, Capitol Hill.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of second further proposed rulemaking regarding horizontal and vertical cable ownership limits. The FCC adopted this Second Further NPRM on May 13, 2005, and released it on May 17, 2005. This item is FCC 05-96 in MM Docket No. 92-264. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 109, at Pages 33679 - 33687.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) regarding its Draft Special Publication 800-79 [49 pages in PDF], titled "Guidelines for the Certification and Accreditation of PIV Card Issuing Organizations". (PIV is Personal Identify Verification.)

The House will return from its Independence Day recess at 2:00 PM. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will return from its Independence Day recess. See, Senate calendar.

9:45 - 11:30 AM. The DC Bar Association will host a visit to and tour of the Copyright Office. The price to attend ranges from $15-$25. For more information, contact 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: Copyright Office, Room 401, James Madison Memorial Building, First Street & Independence Avenue, SE.

1:30 - 4:30 PM. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) will meet. Location: National Press Club.

TIME? The State Department's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee's (ITAC) U.S. Study Group B will meet to prepare positions for the next meeting of the ITU-T Study Group 16. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 13, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 112, at Pages 34175 - 34176. Location: Communication Technologies, Inc., 14151 Newbrook Drive, Suite 400, Chantilly, VA.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST), Computer Security Division titled "Federal Computer Security Program Manager's Forum Annual Off-Site Meeting". See, notice. Location: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD.

Day two of a two day conference hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST), Computer Security Division titled "Federal Computer Security Program Manager's Forum Annual Off-Site Meeting". See, notice. Location: Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, North Bethesda, MD.

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 Natalie Roisman at natalie dot roisman at fcc dot gov or 202 418-1655, or Jason Friedrich at jason dot friedrich at dbr dot com or 202-354-1340. Location: McCormick & Schmick's, 1652 K Street, NW.

8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT) will hold a partially close meeting. The agenda includes presentations on science and technology priorities of the administration and research and development spending trends in the federal government. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 24, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 99, at Page 29721. Location: Employees Lounge, Administration Building, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.

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).

9:45 - 11:30 AM. The DC Bar Association will host a visit to and tour of the Copyright Office. The price to attend ranges from $15-$25. For more information, contact 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: Copyright Office, Room 401, James Madison Memorial Building, First Street & Independence Avenue, SE.

10:00 AM - 4:15 PM. The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) will host an event titled "IPTV Interface Discovery Group". See, notice. Location: Clarendon Ballroom, Arlington, VA.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the Americas Regional Preparatory Meeting for the World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC-06) in Lima, Peru, from August 9-11, 2005. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 22, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 119, Page 36224. Location: DOS, Room 2533A.

12:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Mass Media Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speaker will be Kris Monteith of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Enforcement Bureau. For more information, Ann Bobeck at ABobeck at nab dot org. Location: National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), 1771 N Street, NW.

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

TIME? The American Intellectual Property Law Association's (AIPLA) Board or Directors will meet. Location: Arlington, VA.

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.