7/14. The state of California, and a majority of the other states, filed a thirty-two count civil complaint [PDF] in U.S. District Court (NDCal) against Infineon, Hynix, Micron, Mosel Vitelic, Nanya Technology, Elpida Memory, and NEC Electronics alleging violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, as well as various state antitrust, consumer protection and unfair competition laws, in connection with the fixing of prices for the sale of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) semiconductors.

Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1, provides, in part, that "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine ..."

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has long been investigating and criminally prosecuting individuals and corporations for DRAM price fixing. The just filed state action builds on these earlier actions.

The complaint alleges that "In or around 1998, the defendant DRAM Manufacturers began discussing and coordinating the prices that they charged to the large computer manufacturers, commonly known as OEMs ("Original Equipment Manufacturers"), and to their other customers."

It alleges price fixing, bid rigging, allocation of markets, and production allocation in violation of the Sherman Act.

It continues that the plaintiff states, "as purchasers of electronic products, are among the DRAM cartel's victims, as indeed are the State's end user consumers. Accordingly, the States bring this action on their own behalf, and on behalf of state agencies, political subdivisions, natural persons and/or businesses as warranted by federal and state laws, to recover as damages, restitution, and/or disgorgement of the illegal overcharges that consumers paid as a result of the DRAM manufacturers' price fixing."

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer stated in a release that "The defendants in this case conspired to rig the U.S. market for this essential computer product, working together to keep prices artificially high. In the process, they victimized individual consumers, governmental agencies, schools and taxpayers. This lawsuit seeks compensation for those victims and to ensure the defendants never again violate fundamental tenets that make our economy work properly."

The state of Texas, which is home to Dell, wrote in a release that "As a group, the companies were virtually the sole sources for the acquisition of DRAM chips by computer manufacturers such as Dell Corp., a major supplier of computers for Texas public schools, universities and state agencies. The suit alleges the companies’ deliberate scheme to systematically trim production to inflate chip prices caused computer manufacturers to increase their wholesale prices for units, resulting in an inflationary ripple effect in the marketplace. Worldwide sales of these chips jumped from $14 billion in 2001 to $17 billion in 2003, with the U.S. accounting for a significant slice of the market."

DOJ Criminal Actions. On January 30, 2006, the DOJ charged Elpida (which was formed in 2001 by Hitachi and NEC Corporation) with bid rigging and price fixing. See, story titled "DOJ Brings Another DRAM Price Fixing Action" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,300, January 31, 2006.

On October 13, 2005, the DOJ charged Samsung with price fixing in the U.S. District Court (NDCal). See, story titled "DOJ Charges Samsung with DRAM Price Fixing" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,233, October 14, 2005.

On April 21, 2005, the DOJ charged Hynix with price fixing in the U.S. District Court (NDCal). See, story titled "DOJ Charges Hynix with DRAM Price Fixing" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,121, April 22, 2005.

On December 2, 2004, the DOJ charged four executives of Infineon Technologies AG, and its subsidiary, Infineon Technologies North America Corporation. See, story titled "DOJ Brings More DRAM Price Fixing Charges" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No.1,030, December 3, 2004.

On September 15, 2004, the DOJ filed a criminal information in the U.S. District Court (NDCal) against Infineon Technologies AG. On October 20, 2004, Infineon pled guilty. See also, story titled "DOJ Charges Infineon With Felony Price Fixing; Infineon Pleads Guilty" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 978, September 16, 2004.

Also, on December 17, 2003, the DOJ announced that it charged Alfred P. Censullo, a former employee of Micron Technology Inc., with violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503 in connection with his "altering and concealing documents containing competitor pricing information, which were requested in a federal grand jury subpoena".

This case is California, et al. v. Infineon Technologies AG, et al., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, D.C. No. C 06 4333.

7/6. The U.S. District Court (DColo) issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order [16 pages in PDF] in Clean Flicks v. Soderbergh, a dispute between motion picture studios and businesses that edit for sex, violence, profanity, and other content the motion picture studio's movies.

These editing parties created and distributed, or obtained and distributed, edited copies of movies. The District Court granted summary judgment to the motion picture studios on some of their copyright infringement claims, and on the affirmative defenses of fair use and first sale.

This opinion addresses editing objectionable content out of copyrighted movies in a manner that results in the creation and distribution of fixed copies of the altered movies. The opinion thus addresses practices not protected by the recently enacted Family Movie Act.

Family Movie Act. This case concerns only practices not exempted by the Family Movie Act, which was enacted in early 2005. The Congress enacted the "Family Movie Act of 2005" as part of the S 167, the "Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2005", or FECA. The FECA is now Public Law No. 109-9. See also, story titled "House Approves Copyright Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,119, April 20, 2005.

The FECA added a new paragraph (11) to 17 U.S.C. § 110. The exclusive rights of copyright are listed in 17 U.S.C. § 106. Section 110 provides that "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, the following are not infringements of copyright: ..." The FECA added this: "(11) the making imperceptible, by or at the direction of a member of a private household, of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture, during a performance in or transmitted to that household for private home viewing, from an authorized copy of the motion picture, or the creation or provision of a computer program or other technology that enables such making imperceptible and that is designed and marketed to be used, at the direction of a member of a private household, for such making imperceptible, if no fixed copy of the altered version of the motion picture is created by such computer program or other technology".

The FECA added that the term "making imperceptible" does not include "the addition of audio or video content that is performed or displayed over or in place of existing content in a motion picture".

The FECA also included a related amendment to the Trademark Act of 1946 to provide an exemption from trademark infringement.

That is, the Family Movie Act component of the FECA provides that technology that enables content skipping, at the direction of the consumer, that does not create a fixed copy of the altered version of the motion picture, is not copyright infringement.

Background of the District Court's Opinion. The District Court's just issued opinion deals with business practices that fall outside of the exemption of the Family Movie Act. It pertains to content skipping, and other editing, at the direction of the editor, that results in the creation of a fixed copy of the altered version, that is the sold or leased to consumers.

The motion picture studio parties include MetroGoldwynMayer Studios Inc., Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. (successor in interest to Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P.), Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., DreamWorks L.L.C., Universal City Studios LLLP, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, and Paramount Pictures Corporation.

The four editing parties are CleanFlicks, LLC, Family Flix, U.S.A., L.L.C., ASR Management Corporation, dba CleanFilms and fka MyCleanFlicks, and Play It Clean Video, LLC.

The District Court offered this description of ClearFlicks' actions. "CleanFlicks first obtains an original copy of the movie from its customer or by its own purchase from an authorized retailer. It then makes a digital copy of the entire movie onto the hard drive of a computer, overcoming such technology as a digital content scrambling protection system in the acquired DVD, that is designed to prevent copying. After using software to make the edits, the company downloads from the computer an edited master copy which is then used to create a new recordable DVDR to be sold to the public, directly or indirectly through a retailer. Thus, the content of the authorized DVD has been changed and the encryption removed."

The District Court wrote that Family Flix used methods comparable to ClearFlicks. It then "sells or rents its DVDRs directly to subscribers and to retailers. The original DVD is disabled and generally mounted inside the case with the DVDR. The Family Flix logo with a disclaimer sticker is put on the case. There are no technical obstructions to copying the DVDRs."

CleanFilms and Play it Clean both rent and sell edited versions of the movies obtained from Family Flix.

The motion picture studios argued that CleanFlicks and Family Flix are infringing their exclusive right to reproduce their copyrighted works in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 106(1), that CleanFlicks and Family Flix are violating their right to create derivative works in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 106(2), and that all four of the editing parties are infringing their exclusive right of distribution of copies in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 106(3).

The editing parties argued that their activities fall within the scope of the fair use doctrine, which is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 107, and the first sale doctrine, which is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 109(a)

District Court's Holding. The District Court held that CleanFlicks and Family Flix infringed the studios' exclusive reproduction rights under § 106(1), and that all four of the editing parties infringed the studios' exclusion distribution rights under § 106(3). However, the District Court held that CleanFlicks and Family Flix did not infringe the studios' exclusive right to create derivative works under § 106(2). The District Court rejected both the fair use and first sale defenses. And, the District Court granted partial summary judgment accordingly. Finally, the District Court granted broad injunctive relief to the studios, and ordered the four editing parties to promptly turn over to the studios the infringing materials.

The Court briefly reasoned that CleanFlicks and Family Flix infringed the studios' exclusive reproduction rights under § 106(1) simply because they reproduced copies. The Court added that this conclusion is not altered their assertion that they made copies only on a one to one ratio with purchased originals.

The § 106(3) distribution rights claim was not disputed by the editing parties.

The Court ruled for the editing parties only on the § 106(2) derivative works claim.

17 U.S.C. § 101, the definitional section of the Copyright Act, provides that a "derivative work" is "a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a ``derivative work´´."

The Court reasoned that the copies in this case are not used in a transformative manner. It wrote that "The transformative nature of the use of copyrighted material requires such a contribution of originality as may be of such public benefit as would serve the underlying purpose of providing copyright protection". Hence, it concluded that the copies are not derivative works, and since they are not derivative works, there can be no violation of § 106(2).

The Court then addressed at length the fair use defense. The Court followed the four part test specified by § 107. This section provides that notwithstanding § 106, "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of a copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

The Court wrote first that it is not the function of the courts to make policy determinations. It noted that the editing parties asked the Court to "establish a public policy test that they are criticizing the objectionable content commonly found in current movies and that they are providing more socially acceptable alternatives to enable families to view the films together, without exposing children to the presumed harmful effects emanating from the objectionable content."

The Court concluded that public policy is a legislative function. Moreover, the Congress considered this topic when in drafted the Family Movie Act. It choose to exempt technology based content skipping that does not create any fixed copies, but not to exempt editing the creates altered versions in fixed copies.

The Court then addressed the four part fair use test. It first wrote that the first part of the test includes consideration of whether the infringing work in transformative. The Court concluded that the copies are not transformative. The use is also commercial. Hence, this prong weighs in favor of the studios.

The Court also concluded that the third prong, "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole", weighs in favor of the studios because "the movies are copied in almost their entirety for nontransformative use".

The Court also concluded that the fourth prong, "the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work", also weighs in favor of the studios. The Court referred to the "the intrinsic value of the right to control the content of the copyrighted work which is the essence of the law of copyright."

It added that "Whether these films should be edited in a manner that would make them acceptable to more of the public playing them on DVD in a home environment is more than merely a matter of marketing; it is a question of what audience the copyright owner wants to reach."

Finally, the Court addressed the first sale defense. It wrote that this "doctrine protects the purchaser in any use of the authorized copy acquired but does not permit the making of additional copies."

More on the Family Movie Act. The Congress enacted legislation containing the Family Movie Act early in the 109th Congress. However, there were also hearings, debates, and draft bills in the 108th Congress. On May 20, 2004, the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property (CIIP) held a hearing titled "Derivative Rights, Moral Rights, and Movie Filtering Technology". See, story titled "House CIIP Subcommittee Holds Hearing on DVD Filtering Technology" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 903, May 21, 2004.

On July 21, 2004, the House Judiciary Committee approved HR 4586, the "Family Movie Act of 2004" by a vote of 18-9. See, story titled "House Judiciary Committee Passes Family Movie Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 944, July 23, 2004.

On September 28, 2004, the House approved HR 4077, the "Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004 ", by a voice vote. See story titled "House Approves Copyright Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 986, September 29, 2004.

This case is Clean Flicks of Colorado, LLC., et al. v. Steven Soderbergh, et al., U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, D.C. No. 02cv01662RPM, Judge Richard Matsch presiding.

7/14. President Bush nominated Nora Fischer to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. See, White House release.

7/14. President Bush nominated Sara Lioi to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. See, White House release.

7/14. Joe Brenckle was named Communications Director of the Senate Commerce Committee (SCC). He previously worked for Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ). Before that, he worked for former Sen. Frank Murkowski (R-AK). He replaces Melanie Alvord, who was named Assistant Staff Director of the SCC. Brian Eaton was named Press Assistant for the SCC. He just graduated from Penn State University. Aaron Saunders moved to Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-AK) personal staff. Dan Neumann was named Staff Assistant for the SCC. See, SCC release.

7/17. The House approved HR 3729, the "Federal Judiciary Emergency Tolling Act of 2005", by a vote of 363-0. See, Roll Call No. 377. This bill would permit the Chief Judge of any U.S. District Court to extend deadlines in the event of a natural disaster, civil disobedience, or other emergency.

7/14. The U.S. District Court (WDVa), at Roanoke, sentenced Gregory John Mitchel to 150 years in prison in connection with his operation of child pornography websites.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for morning hour, and at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider numerous non-technology related items. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:45 AM. It will consider en bloc of S 3504, S 2754, and HR 810, the stem cell bills.

8:30 - 10:00 AM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a book launch for Net Neutrality or Net Neutering: Should Broadband Internet Services be Regulated? This book is a collection of essays. The speakers will be Thomas Lenard (PFF), David Farber (University of Pennsylvania), Randy May (Maryland Free State Foundation), and Adam Thierer (PFF). See, notice and registration page. A continental breakfast will be served. Location: Holeman Lounge, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

8:30 AM - 1:30 PM. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's National Chamber Foundation will host an event titled "The State of the American Judiciary". The keynote speaker will be Justice Antonin Scalia. See, notice. For more information, contact Danielle Walker at 202-463-5500 or ncfevents at uschamber dot com. Location: U.S. Chamber, 1615 H Street, NW.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an hearing titled "Department of Justice Oversight". Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is scheduled to testify. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) wrote in a letter to Gonzales that the SJC is interested in surveillance of communications and financial transaction, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, prosecution of journalists, and related issues. Location: Room 216, Hart Building.

10:00 AM. The House Financial Services Committee's (HFSC) Subcommittee on Financial Institutions will hold a hearing titled "Hearing entitled "ICANN and the Whois Database: Providing Access to Protect Consumers from Phishing". The witnesses will include Eileen Harrington (Federal Trade Commission). Location: Room 2128, Rayburn Building.

10:15 AM. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a status conference in Agence France Presse v. Google, D.C. No. 1:2005-cv-00546-GK, Judge Kessler presiding. Location: Courtroom 26A, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "Trademarks and the Internet". The speakers will include David Kelly (Finnegan Henderson). The price to attend ranges from $15-$30. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) will host an event titled "Transatlantic Dialogue on the Digital Economy". The speakers will include member of the European Parliament. See, notice. RSVP to rsvp at netcaucus dot org or 202-638-4370. Location: Room 1300, Longworth Building.

1:00 - 3:00 PM. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee will meet to prepare for ITU Radiocommunication Sector's Special Committee on Regulatory/Procedural Matters that will take place on December 4-8, 2006, in Geneva, Switzerland. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 4, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 86, at Pages 26397-26398. Location: Boeing Company, 1200 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA.

1:30 - 5:00 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will hold their third joint public hearing on "whether and when specific types of single-firm conduct may violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act by harming competition and consumer welfare and when they are pro-competitive or benign". This hearing will focus on refusals to deal. The presenters will be Stephen Donovan (International Paper), William Kolasky (WilmerHale), Hewitt Pate (Hunton & Williams), Robert Pitofsky (Georgetown University Law Center), Steven Salop (Georgetown University Law Center), and Mark Whitener (General Electric). Location: Conference Room C, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

2:00 PM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection will hold a hearing titled "Motor Vehicle Technology and the Consumer: Views from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration". See, notice. Press contact: Larry Neal (Barton) at 202-225-5735. Location: Room 2322, Rayburn Building.

2:30 - 2:45 PM. Robert Cresanti, the Department of Commerce's Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology, will present a report titled "Recycling Technology Products: An Overview of E-Waste Policy Issues" at a meeting of the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc. (ISRI). Press contact: Marjorie dot Weisskohl at technology dot gov 202-482-0149. Location: Room Constitution A, Grand Hyatt Hotel, 1000 H St., NW.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ant the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) titled "Options for Action Summit: Addressing U.S. Competitiveness in Global Standardization". See, notice. Location: NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

Day one of a two day closed meeting of the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on Information Management for Net-Centric Operations. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 69, Page 18292. Location: 3601 Wilson Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Arlington, VA.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It may consider HR 5684, the "United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act". See, Republican Whip Notice.

10:00 AM. The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing titled "The Federal Reserve's Second Monetary Policy Report to Congress for 2006". The witness will be Federal Reserve Board (FRB) Chairman Ben Bernanke. See, notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Finance Committee (SFC) will hold a closed meeting with U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Susan Schwab to discuss Doha round negotiations and bilateral trade agreements. The SFC notice for reporters states that "stake-outs are possible". Location: Room 215, Dirksen Building.

TIME CHANGE. 11:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee's (SCC) Subcommittee Technology, Innovation, and Competitiveness will hold a hearing titled "High-Performance Computing". The witnesses will be Simon Szykman (National Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development), Irving Wladasky-Berger (IBM), Christopher Jehn (Cray Inc.), Jack Waters (Level 3 Communications), Joseph Lombardo (University of Nevada, Las Vegas), Michael Garrett (Boeing Company), and Stanley Burt (Advanced Biomedical Computing Center). See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the SCC. Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) will preside. Press contact: Aaron Saunders (Stevens) at 202-224-3991 or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202-224-4546. Location: Room 562, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON. The Cato Institute will host a panel discussion titled "U.S.-China Trade, Exchange Rates, and the U.S. Economy". The speakers will be Nicholas Lardy (Institute for International Economics), Frank Vargo (National Association of Manufacturers), and Daniel Griswold (Cato). Lunch will follow the program. See, notice. Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. Brad Smith, Microsoft's General Counsel, will speak at a closed event titled "How Will Microsoft Enhance Windows While Promoting Competition?" For more information, contact Sarah Brennan at 202-986-4901 or brennan at newamerica dot net. See, notice. Location: National Press Club, 13th Floor, 52914th Street, NW.

12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host a ceremony honoring former FCC Commissioner Benjamin Hooks. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, TW-C305 at 445 12th St., SW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The The House Science Committee (HSC) and the House Administration Committee will hold a joint hearing titled "Voting Machines: Will New Standards and Guidelines Prevent Future Problems?" Location: Room 2138, Rayburn Building.

2:00 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. See, notice. The SJC frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. The SJC rarely follows its published agenda. Press contact: Courtney Boone at 202-224-5225. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

2:15 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold a hearing on judicial nominations. See, notice. The SJC frequently cancels or postpones hearings without notice. The SJC rarely follows its published agenda. Press contact: Courtney Boone at 202-224-5225. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

2:15 - 5:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Practical Law Office Technology for Solos and Small Firms". The speakers will include Reid Trautz and Lisa Weatherspoon. The price to attend ranges from $50-$125. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

6:30 - 8:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host an event titled "Summer Associate Happy Hour". For more information, contact Chris Fedeli at cfedeli at crblaw dot com or 202-828-9874. Location: Location: Helix Lounge, 1430 Rhode Island Ave., NW.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ant the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) titled "Options for Action Summit: Addressing U.S. Competitiveness in Global Standardization". See, notice. Location: NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

Day two of a two day closed meeting of the Defense Science Board 2006 Summer Study on Information Management for Net-Centric Operations. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 11, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 69, Page 18292. Location: 3601 Wilson Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Arlington, VA.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It may consider HR 5684, the "United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act". See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. See, notice. The SJC frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. The SJC rarely follows its published agenda. Press contact: Courtney Boone at 202-224-5225. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hold a hearing on HR 5785, the "Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act of 2006". Press contact: Larry Neal (Barton) at 202-225-5735 or Sean Bonyun (Upton) at 202-225-3761. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The House Financial Services Committee (HFSC) will hold a hearing to hear testimony from Federal Reserve Board (FRB) Chairman Ben Bernanke. Location: Room 2128, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The House International Relations Committee (HIRC) will hold a hearing titled "Asian Free Trade Agreements:  Are They Good for the USA?" The witness will include Karan Bhatia, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative. See, notice. Location: Room 2172, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Science Committee will hold a hearing titled "How Can Technologies Help Secure Our Borders?" Location: Room 2138, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Technological Advisory Council will hold a meeting. See, FCC notice [PDF] and notice in the Federal Register, July 12, 2006, Vol. 71, No.133, at Page 39322. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, TW-C305 at 445 12th St., SW.

11:30 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will hold a hearing titled "Legislative Hearing on H.R. 682, the Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act". See, HR 682 and notice of hearing. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202-225-2492.Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

12:00 NOON. The Cato Institute will host an event titled "U.S. Trade Policy in the Wake of Doha: Why Unilateral Liberalization Makes Sense". The speakers will include Dan Ikenson (Cato) and Will Martin, lead economist at the World Bank's Development Research Group. Lunch will be served. See, notice and registration page. Location: Room B-339, Rayburn Building, Capitol Hill.

The Republican Whip Notice states that "the House will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business".

10:00 AM. The House Homeland Security Committee's Subcommittee on Intelligence, Information Sharing, and Terrorism Risk Assessment will hold a hearing titled "The Homeland Security Information Network: An Update on DHS Information Sharing Efforts". The witnesses will include Charles Allen (DHS Chief Intelligence Officer). Location: Room 311, Cannon Building.

9:30 AM - 5:30 PM. The Antitrust Modernization Commission (AMC) will hold a meeting to deliberate on possible recommendations regarding the antitrust laws to Congress and the President. The meeting is open to the public, but registration is required. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 23, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 121, at Pages 36059-36060.

11:30 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will hold an oversight hearing titled "The 60th Anniversary of the Administrative Procedure Act: Where Do We Go From Here?" See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202-225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

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 - 2006 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.