|Author's Guild Sues Google for Copyright
9/20. The Author's Guild and others
filed a complaint in U.S. District Court
(SDNY) against Google alleging copyright
infringement in connection with the Google Print project. The plaintiffs seek class
The Author's Guild stated in a
that "Google is reproducing works still under the protection of copyright as
well as public domain works". It accuses Google of "massive copyright
infringement" in "its unauthorized scanning and copying of books through its
Google Library program".
On December 14, 2004, Google announced that it "is working with the libraries
of Harvard, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and the University of Oxford
as well as The New York Public Library to digitally scan books from their
collections so that users worldwide can search them in Google." See, Google
See also, Oxford release
titled "Google checks out Bodleian Library books".
The 2004 Google release describes a program identified as "Google Print".
The release adds that "Users searching with Google will see links in their search
results page when there are books relevant to their query. Clicking on a title
delivers a Google Print page where users can browse the full text of public
domain works and brief excerpts and/or bibliographic data of copyrighted
material. Library content will be displayed in keeping with copyright law."
Google responded in a September 20, 2005,
release that "any copyright holder can exclude their books from the
program". Google added that "Google doesn't show even a single page to users who
find copyrighted books through this program (unless the copyright holder gives
us permission to show more). At most we show only a brief snippet of text where
their search term appears, along with basic bibliographic information and
several links to online booksellers and libraries."
Hence, it asserts that its copying of copyrighted works is protected by the
fair use doctrine, which is codified at
17 U.S.C. § 107.
See also, story titled "University Publishers Accuse Google of Systematic
Infringement of Copyright on a Massive Scale" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,142, May 25, 2005.
|2nd Circuit Stays District Court Injunction
in National Security Letter Case
9/20. The U.S. Court of Appeals
(2ndCir) heard oral argument on the Department
of Justice's (DOJ) Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Expedited Appeal in
Doe v. Gonzales, a case pertaining to National Security Letter authority under
18 U.S.C. § 2709. The Court of Appeals granted a stay of the District Court's
ruling of September 9 which enjoined the gag provisions of § 2709.
The Court of Appeals also announced the schedule for an expedited appeal process.
The DOJ's brief is due by September 27. The ACLU's brief is due by October 4. (The
ACLU is a named plaintiff, and the ACLU Foundation is counsel for plaintiffs.) The
DOJ's reply brief is due by October 10. See, ACLU
of September 20.
Section 2709. § 2709 is titled "Counterintelligence access to telephone
toll and transactional records". It provides that the FBI may "request the name,
address, length of service, and local and long distance toll billing records of a person
or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic
communication service provider to which the request is made that the name,
address, length of service, and toll billing records sought are relevant to an
authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or
clandestine intelligence activities". (Parentheses in original.)
This section further requires service providers to comply with any such request,
which is more commonly referred to as a National Security Letter or NSL. It further
imposes a gag on communications about such NSLs. It provides that "No wire or
electronic communication service provider, or officer, employee, or agent thereof,
shall disclose to any person that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or
obtained access to information or records under this section." The District
Court ruling under review pertains to this gag provision.
There is no requirement in this section that the FBI first obtain a court
order. There is no notice to the affected individuals that their privacy has
been compromised. There is no procedure for the recipient, or affected
individuals, to contest the validity of the NSL.
However, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has
conceded that there are constitutional limitations on the gag order authority. Moreover,
two different bills approved by the House and Senate in July to extend the expiring provisions
of the PATRIOT Act contain amendments to Section 2709 that would limit gag order authority.
See, HR 3199,
the "USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005", and
S 1389, the
"USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005". See also,
"House Approves PATRIOT Act Extension Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,180, July
District Court Proceedings. On August 9, 2005, a plaintiff identified
as John Doe filed a
complaint [18 page
PDF scan of redacted copy] in U.S. District Court (DConn) against Attorney General Alberto
Gonzales and others seeking a declaratory judgment that 18 U.S.C. § 2709 violates the First,
Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, and an injunction barring the FBI from
enforcing a National Security Letter. The plaintiffs also seek preliminary relief. The
District Court unsealed the redacted complaint on August 24. See,
titled "Suit Challenges Constitutionality of
National Security Letters" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,202, August 26, 2005.
The unredacted portions of the complaint suggest that the lead plaintiff is
an employee of a library that provides internet access to its users. For
example, it states that "The vast majority of libraries around the country are
"electronic communication service providers" under Section 2709 because they use
online service to track circulation and cataloging of library materials, to
track patron borrowing, and to provide Internet access to library patrons. As a
result, libraries maintain a wide range of sensitive information about the
reading habits and Internet usage of library patrons."
The District Court promptly heard oral arguments on August 31. It granted injunctive
relief as to the gag provisions of § 2709 on September 9, but stayed its effect
until September 20, to allow expedited review by the Court of Appeals. See,
[29 page redacted PDF scan] of September 9, and ACLU
of September 9.
The District Court held that "the application of § 2709(c) to the plaintiffs
in this case on the topic of Doe's identity does not pass strict scrutiny. The defendants
have failed to show a compelling state interest that is served by gagging the plaintiffs
with regard to Doe's identity. If the government's interest is more broadly defined as
preventing an unknown subject of the government's investigation from learning of the
government's investigation, which would support a finding of a compelling interest, the
gag provision as to Doe's identity is not narrowly tailored to serve that interest. Because
§ 2709(c) as applied cannot survive strict scrutiny, the plaintiffs have shown a
substantial likelihood of success on the merits, as well a irreparable harm.
Therefore, the court grants their motion to enjoin enforcement of § 2709(c)
against them with regard to Doe's identity."
The District Court case is John Doe, et al. v. Alberto Gonzales, et al., U.S.
District Court for the District of Connecticut, D.C. No. 3:05cv1256 JCH, Judge Janet Hall
Court of Appeals Proceedings. The DOJ brought the present expedited appeal.
It wrote in its September 15
memorandum [21 pages in PDF] that "When the Federal Bureau of Investigation
investigates international terrorism and clandestine foreign intelligence activities,
18 U.S.C. § 2709 authorizes the FBI to issue National Security Letters (“NSLs”) to obtain
relevant subscriber information and transactional records from wire and electronic
communication service providers. To protect the integrity of such sensitive investigations,
Section 2709 prohibits recipients of NSLs from disclosing that the government
has sought or obtained information from the recipient pursuant to the NSL.
Absent such a prohibition, disclosure of information about the NSL, including
the identity of the NSL’s recipient, can seriously jeopardize the investigation
itself -- for example, by alerting the target of the investigation that his
activities are subject to scrutiny, and allowing the target to hide, move his
activities to another provider, provide misinformation to the government, or
otherwise frustrate the FBI's investigation."
It added that "Disclosure can also cause more
general harm to the government’s counter-terrorism and counterintelligence
efforts by allowing terrorist organizations and foreign intelligence operatives
to monitor the government’s investigatory activities and look for information
and patterns that can be used to evade detection and otherwise frustrate future
It argued that the gag provisions of § 2709 are constitutional, and hence,
the District Court's ruling should be stayed pending consideration of the issue
upon full briefing.
The Court of Appeals granted the stay requested by the DOJ.
The Court of Appeals case is Doe, et al. v. Gonzales, et al., U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Judges Sotomayor, Wesley and Brieant
|CDT Releases Paper on Broadcast Flag
9/19. The Center for Democracy and Technology
(CDT) released a
paper [18 pages in PDF] titled "Lessons of the FCC Broadcast Flag Process:
Background for the Legislative Debate".
The paper argues that "The creation of any significant new regulatory regime
-- especially one that affects rapidly evolving technology industries -- raises
concerns that over time the regulatory approval process may be used by
established companies in the regulated industry or by third parties with related
interests to protect established market interests or block disruptive
technologies. The history of the first round of the flag process suggests that,
as the regime was implemented in its first trial phase, it was susceptible to
this kind of misuse."
The CDT also released an updated version of its
pages in PDF] titled "Broadcast Flag Authorization Legislation: Key
Considerations for Congress". It concludes that "A broadcast flag regime would
have significant and lasting consequences. It would create an ongoing role for
the FCC in approving a wide range of digital technologies and would have a major
impact on the way the public can use digital television. CDT believes that the
policy issues surrounding the flag should not be left to unguided FCC
discretion. If Congress chooses to authorize implementation of a broadcast flag
regime, it should do so pursuant to careful limits and safeguards concerning the
FCC’s authority and process; the public's ability to comment on news and public
affairs programming; and interoperability problems that the flag may pose for
Also, on September 19, three interest groups, the
Public Knowledge, Consumers Union,
and Consumer Federation of America, wrote a
letter to Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK),
the Chairman of the Senate Commerce
Committee and a senior member of the
Senate Appropriations Committee,
urging the Senate "not to pass as part of an appropriations or budget package
any legislation giving the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority
to impose its ``broadcast-flag´´ technology mandate."
They argued that "any jurisdictional grant to the FCC of the power to
implement a broadcast-flag regulation necessitates giving broad, unprecedented
power to the FCC to dictate product design, and to determine the future course
of our digital economy. By imposing government-agency control over the design of
digital electronics and, potentially, over computer operating systems and other
software, the scheme will inevitably slow or stifle the development of
innovative consumer electronics and other products. The Commission is not
equipped by experience or tradition to be the gatekeeper on this unprecedentedly
broad range of technologies."
Background on the Broadcast Flag. A broadcast flag is digital code
embedded in a digital broadcasting stream. It signals digital television (DTV)
reception equipment to limit redistribution. For it to be effective, DTV
equipment must give effect to a broadcast flag. Hence, the FCC wrote rules that
contains technology mandates for equipment manufacturers. However, while the FCC
has statutory authority to license and regulate the use of electromagnetic
spectrum, including devices that transmit and receive radio frequency signals,
it does not have statutory authority to protect copyrights, or to regulate
consumer electronic equipment for the purpose of protecting copyrights. The
Court of Appeals reminded the FCC of this limitation in May of this year.
The FCC adopted its broadcast flag notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on
August 8, 2002. The FCC released the
text [12 pages in PDF] of this NPRM on August 9, 2002. See, stories titled "FCC
Issues NPRM on Broadcast Flag" and "FCC Debates Its Authority to Promulgate
Broadcast Flag Rule" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 489, August 12, 2002.
The FCC adopted and released, on November 4, 2003, its rules mandating the
broadcast flag in its
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [72 pages in
story titled "FCC Releases Broadcast Flag Rule" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 772, November 5, 2003, and story titled "More Reaction to the FCC
Broadcast Flag Item" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 773, November 6, 2003.
On May 6, 2005, the U.S.Court of Appeals
(DCCir) issued its
opinion [34 pages in PDF] in American Library Association v. FCC,
overturning the FCC's broadcast flag rules. See,
titled "DC Circuit Reverses FCC's Broadcast Flag Rules" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,131, May 9, 2005.
|People and Appointments
9/20. Maximilian Grant,
Norton were named to the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office's (USPTO) Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) for three
year terms. Grant is an associate in the Washington DC office of the law firm of
Latham & Watkins, and the local chair of its
intellectual property and technology practice group. He represents, among other clients,
Veritas Software (now part of Symantec). Mossinghoff
is Senior Counsel at the Alexandria, Virginia, law firm of
Oblon Spivak. He is a former Assistant Secretary
of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks and former President of the
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Norton is an associate in the
Washington DC office of the law firm of
DLA Piper Rudnick Gray & Cary. She
previously worked for Sen. Bob Bennett
(R-UT). See, USPTO
9/20. Ayala Deutsch, Van Leichliter, and Albert Tramposch
were named to the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office's (USPTO) Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC) for three year terms.
Deutsch is VP and Senior Intellectual Property Counsel at NBA Properties. Leichliter
works for DuPont. Tramposch is Director of Trademark Registry Services at the Washington
DC law firm of Morgan Lewis & Bockius. From
1993 to 2001, he worked for the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO) in Geneva, Switzerland. See, USPTO
9/19. President Bush nominated Alice Fisher to be an Assistant Attorney
General in charge of the Criminal Division.
See, White House
release. The Criminal Division is responsible for many matters related to the CALEA,
cybercrime, enforcement of intellectual property laws, wiretaps, and electronic
surveillance, searches and seizures involving new information technologies. She currently
holds this position by recess appointment. Bush first nominated her back on March 29, 2005.
See, story titled "Bush to Nominate Alice Fisher to Head DOJ's Criminal Division"
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No.
1,107, April 1, 2005. However, the Senate did not vote on her nomination. The delay
relates to the partisan politics of Guantanamo Bay, not technology related issues.
9/20. The Federal Election Commission (FEC)
fined the Metro Goldwyn Mayer Political Action Committee for the late filing of
a 2004 year end report. See, FEC
|Washington Tech Calendar
New items are highlighted in red.
|Wednesday, September 21
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business.
The House will likely take up
the "Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act of 2005", at about
1:00 PM. See,
Republican Whip Notice.
The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM for morning business. It will then
resume consideration of
the agriculture appropriations bill.
The Supreme Court is between terms. The opening conference of its October
2005 Term will be held on September 26.
9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary
Committee may hold a hearing titled "Able Danger and Intelligence
Information Sharing". The witnesses will be
Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), Mark Zaid, Erik
Kleinsmith (former Army officer), Gary Bald (FBI), and William Dugan (Department of
Defense). See, notice.
This involves data mining. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225,
David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. The SJC
frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen
10:00 AM. The
House Judiciary Committee (HJC) will
meet to mark up
HR 3648, a bill to impose additional fees with respect to immigration services
for intracompany transferees. The meeting will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff
Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
Network Reliability and Interoperability Council
(NRIC) will meet. See,
notice in the Federal Register, August 31, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 168, at Page
51814. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-305. See,
notice [PDF] of cancellation.
10:30 AM - 1:30 PM. The Progress and Freedom
Foundation (PFF) will host an event titled "Net Neutrality or Net Neutering
in a Post- Brand X World: Self-Regulation, Policy Principles, and Legal Mandates in the
Broadband Marketplace". The speakers will include Tom Tauke
(Verizon), Randolph May (PFF), Peter Pitsch
(Intel), Dan Brenner (National Cable and
Telecommunications Association), Gigi Sohn
(Public Knowledge), David McClure
(U.S. Internet Industry Association), and Adam Thierer (PFF). Lunch will be served. See,
pages. Location: Capital Hilton, 1001 16th Street, NW.
12:00 NOON -1:30 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) International Practice Committee will host
a brown bag lunch. The topic will be Mobile Satellite Services/Ancillary Terrestial
Component (MSS/ATC). The speakers will be Anna Gomez (Deputy Chief of the FCC's
International Bureau), Howard Griboff (FCC
International Bureau), Jennifer Manner (VP Regulatory Affairs of
Mobile Satellite Ventures), and Tim Farrar
(Telecom, Media and Finance Associates, Inc.). No RSVP requested. Location: Hogan
& Hartson, 555 13th St., NW, 13th Floor.
12:00 NOON - 1:15 PM. The DC
Bar Association will host a seminar titled "Current Topics in Patent Law:
Interference Practice and Patent Reform". The speaker will be Charles Gholz
(Oblon Spivak McClelland Maier & Neustadt). The price to attend ranges from $10-$30.
For more information, call 202-626-3463. See,
Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.
6:30 - 8:30 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Happy Hour".
Location: 14K Restaurant at the Hamilton Crowne Plaza Hotel, 14th and K
EXTENDED FROM AUGUST 22. Extended deadline to submit reply comments to
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response
to it notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding low power FM rules. The FCC adopted
its order and NPRM on March 16, 2005, and released it on March 17, 2005. It is FCC 05-75
in MM Docket No. 99-25. See, original
notice in the Federal Register, July 7, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 129, at Pages
39217 - 39227. See also, FCC
notice [PDF] extending the deadlines.
|Thursday, September 22
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See,
Republican Whip Notice.
9:00 AM. The House
Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual
Property will hold a hearing titled "Reducing Peer-To-Peer Piracy (P2P) on
University Campuses: A Progress Update". The hearing will be
webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or
Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
9:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS) Transportation Security
Administration's (TSA) Aviation Security Advisory Committee (ASAC) will meet. The
agenda includes "final report and recommendations of the Secure Flight Privacy/IT
Working Group". See,
notice in the Federal Register, September 1, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 169, at
Page 52119. Location: Residence Inn by Marriott, Pentagon City, 550 Army Navy
Drive, Arlington, VA.
9:30 AM. The
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a business
meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 1725, the "Assure Emergency
and Interoperable Communications for First Responders Act of 2005", and the
nomination of Stewart Baker to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security. See,
notice [PDF]. Location: Room
342, Dirksen Building.
9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary
Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes
consideration of Judge John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the United States,
and Timothy Flanigan to be the Deputy Attorney General. The agenda also includes
numerous bills, including
S 1088, the "Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005", S _, the
"Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005", and
S 751, the
"Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act", and
S 1326, the
"Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act". The SJC frequently cancels
or postpones meetings without notice. The SJC rarely follows its published agenda. Press
contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242
or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. See,
Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The Senate Banking
Committee will hold a hearing on "Examining the Financial Services Industry’s
Responsibilities and Role in Preventing Identity Theft and Protecting Sensitive Financial
Information". The witnesses will be
Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR), Stuart Pratt (Consumer Data
Industry Association), Edmund Mierzwinski (USPIRG), Ira Hammerman (Securities Industry
Association), Gilbert Schwartz (Schwartz & Ballen), Oliver Ireland (Morrison
and Foerster). See,
notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The House Financial
Services Committee's Subcommittee on Financial Institutions will hold a hearing on
HR 3505, the
"Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2005". See also, story
titled "House Subcommittee to Hold Hearing on Financial Services Regulatory Relief
Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1215, September 15, 2005. Location: Room 2128,
10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce
Committee (SCC) will hold the first of two hearings titled "Communications in
Disaster". The witnesses will be
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman
Kevin Martin, Bill Smith
(BellSouth), Paul Roth (Cingular Wireless), Jeffrey Citron
(Vonage), and Hossein Eslambolchi (AT&T). See,
The hearing will be webcast by the SCC. Press contact: Melanie Alvord (Stevens) 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 562, Dirksen
10:00 AM. The President's Export Council Subcommittee
on Export Administration (PECSEA) will meet. See,
notice in the Federal Register, July 21, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 139, at Pages
42027 - 42028. Location: Room 4832, Department of Commerce, 14th Street
between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.
11:00 AM. The
House Judiciary Committee's (HJC)
Subcommittee on the Constitution will hold a hearing titled "The Supreme
Court's Kelo Decision and Potential Congressional Responses". See, the June 23, 2005,
[58 pages in PDF] of the Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London, a takings
clause case. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492.
Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
4:00 PM. The Cato Institute will host a panel
discussion titled "Mr. Smith Leaves Washington". The speakers will be
(Capital University School of Law), Rep. Mike
Pence (R-IN), and John Samples (Cato). Smith was until recently a Commissioner of
the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He was a
leading opponent of government regulation of internet based speech. See,
notice and registration page.
A reception will follow the program. Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts
5:00 - 7:00 PM.
William Baumol will give a lecture titled "How Regulators Can Be Misled
By Simplistic Theory". He is the author of, among other works, the book titled
Free Market Innovation Machine" [Amazon]. The event is hosted by
the AEI Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies. See,
notice. Location: American Enterprise Institute, 12th
floor, 1150 17th St., NW.
EXTENDED FROM SEPTEMBER 1. Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the
Copyright Office regarding its first report to the
Congress required by the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of
2004. See, original notice
in the Federal Register, July 7, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 129, at Pages 39343 - 39345.
notice extending deadlines in the Federal Register, August 15, 2005, Vol.
70, No. 156, at Page 47857.
|Friday, September 23
The House may meet at 9:00 AM for legislative
business. See, Republican
8:00 AM. The American Bar Association's (ABA)
Committee on Law and National Security will host a breakfast. The speaker will be Nuala
Kelly, Chief Privacy Officer at the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). The title of her speech will be "Challenges in Preserving
Privacy while Protecting Homeland Security". The price to attend is $20.
and registration form [PDF]. Location: University Club, 1135 16th
EXTENDED FROM SEPTEMBER 9. Extended extended deadline to submit reply
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, original
notice in the Federal Register, June 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 109, at Pages 33679 -
33687. See also,
notice of extension of deadlines, in the Federal Register, July 6, 2005,
Vol. 70, No. 128, at Pages 38848 - 38849. See also,
notice [PDF] of further extension.
|Sunday, September 25
Deadline to submit requests to participate as a panelist in the Department
of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division's and the
Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) October 25, 2005,
workshop titled "Competition and Real Estate Workshop". See, FTC
in the Federal Register, September 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 173, at Pages 53362 -
|Monday, September 26
The Supreme Court will hold
the opening conference of the October Term 2005. See,
Xuan-Thao Nguyen (Southern Methodist University School of Law) will deliver a
paper titled "Collateralizing Intellectual Property". This event is
a part of the George Washington University Law
School's (GWULS) intellectual property workshop series. RSVP by Tuesday, September
20, to Rosalie Kouassi at rkouassi at law dot gwu dot edu. Location: GWULS, Faculty
Conference Center, 5th Floor Burns, 716 20th St., NW.
12:15 PM. The Federal Communications
Bar Association's (FCBA) Cable Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. This
will be an organizational meeting. For more information, contact Frank Buono at fbuono
at willkie dot com. Location: Willkie Farr &
Gallagher, 875 K Street, NW.
Deadline to register for the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) pre-auction
seminar for the MVDDS Auction (Auction No. 63), to be held on September 28, 2005. See,
and registration form [PDF].
|Tuesday, September 27
9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of
Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in American Association of Paging
Carriers v. FCC, No. 04-1359. This petition for review pertains to paging
carriers and licensing by itinerant mobile radio transmitters on a nationwide,
non-coordinated basis. The AAPC challenges the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
Memorandum Opinion and Order (MOO) adopted September 1, 2004, and released on September
8, 2004. This MOO is FCC 04-212 in WT Docket No. 01-146. See,
brief [43 pages in PDF] of the AAPC.
Judges Henderson, Garland and Griffith will preside. Location: Prettyman Courthouse,
333 Constitution Ave., NW.
1:00 PM. The
House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
will hold a hearing on
the "Business Activity Tax Simplification Act of 2005". The meeting
will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492.
Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
6:00 - 9:15 PM. The DC Bar Association
will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "How to Litigate a
Patent Infringement Case". The speakers will be
Patrick Coyne and
Jerry Ivey (both of
Finnegan Henderson). The price to attend ranges from
$80-$125. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See,
Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.
|Wednesday, September 28
10:00 AM - 2:00 PM. The
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a
pre-auction seminar for the MVDDS Auction (Auction No. 63). See,
and registration form [PDF]. Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW.
12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar
Association will host a seminar titled "Electronic Filing At The Trademark
Office". The speaker will be Craig Morris (US Patent and Trademark Office). The
price to attend ranges from $20-$40. For more information, call 202 626-3463. See,
Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.
12:30 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Professional Responsibility Committee will
host a brown bag lunch. This will be an organizational and planning meeting. RSVP to
Tina Screven at escreven at wbklaw dot com. Location:
Wilkinson Barker Knauer, 2300 N
St., NW, 7th floor large conference room.
Extended effective date of the Federal
Communications Commission's (FCC) VOIP customer lockout order. See, the order
contained in the FCC's document titled
Notice' [PDF], numbered DA 05-2085, and released on July 26, 2005. It requires, among
other things, that every interconnected voice over internet protocol (VOIP) service provider
must send every one of its subscribers an FCC mandated statement regarding E911, and that
every interconnected VOIP service provider must send to every one of its customers the FCC
mandated VOIP warning stickers. This order further requires that every interconnected VOIP
service provider obtain acknowledgement from every one of its subscribers, and that it
"disconnect, no later than August 30, 2005, all subscribers from whom it has not
received such acknowledgements". See, extension
order [4 pages in PDF].
|About Tech Law Journal
Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and
subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription
to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year. However, there
are discounts for subscribers with multiple recipients. Free one
month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free
subscriptions are available for journalists,
federal elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and
executive branch. The TLJ web site is
free access. However, copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert are not
published in the web site until one month after writing. See, subscription
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.
Copyright 1998 - 2005 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All