|Bush Signs Trademark Dilution
10/6. President Bush signed
HR 683, the
"Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006". See, White House
Moseley v. V Secret. This bill responds to the
Supreme Court's March 4, 2003
[21 pages in PDF] in Moseley v. V Secret, a case involving whether the
plaintiff in a lawsuit for violation of the Federal Trademark Dilution Act (FTDA)
must show actual economic loss. The Sixth Circuit held that economic harm may be
inferred. The Supreme Court reversed. Its opinion is also reported at 537 U.S. 418.
The Supreme Court wrote that "The relevant text of the FTDA ... provides that
``the owner of a famous mark´´ is entitled to injunctive relief against another
person's commercial use of a mark or trade name if that use ``causes dilution
of the distinctive quality´´ of the famous mark. 15 U. S. C. §1125(c)(1)
(emphasis added). This text unambiguously requires a showing of actual dilution,
rather than a likelihood of dilution."
See also, story titled "Supreme Court Rules in Trademark Dilution Case" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 618, March 6, 2003.
Legislative History. Rep. Lamar
Smith (R-TX), the Chairman of the House Judiciary
Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property (CIIP),
introduced this bill on February 9, 2005.
The CIIP Subcommittee held a hearing on February 17, 2005. See, story titled
"CIIP Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Trademark Dilution Revision Act" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,081, February 23, 2005.
The CIIP Subcommittee approved the bill on March 3, 2005, and the full HJC
amended and approved the bill on March 17, 2005. See also,
Report No. 109-23.
The House approved the bill under suspension of the rules on April 19, 2005, by a vote
of 411-8. See, Roll
Call No. 109.
The Senate then approved a different version of the bill on March 8, 2006. On
September 25, the House approved the Senate version.
Bill Summary. The FTDA is codified at
15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). It is also known as Section 43(c) of the Lanham Act.
Subsection (c)(1) previously provided that "The owner of
a famous mark shall be entitled, subject to the principles of equity and upon
such terms as the court deems reasonable, to an injunction against another
person’s commercial use in commerce of a mark or trade name, if such use begins
after the mark has become famous and causes dilution of the distinctive quality
of the mark, and to obtain such other relief as is provided in this subsection."
It then enumerated several factors that the court may consider in determining
whether a mark is distinctive and famous.
HR 683 amended this, so that it now provides, "Subject to the principles
of equity, the owner of a famous mark that is distinctive, inherently or through
acquired distinctiveness, shall be entitled to an injunction against another
person who, at any time after the owner's mark has become famous, commences use
of a mark or trade name in commerce that is likely to cause dilution by
blurring or dilution by tarnishment of the famous mark, regardless of the
presence or absence of actual or likely confusion, of competition, or of actual
economic injury." (Emphasis added.)
The bill further provides that "a mark is famous if it is widely recognized
by the general consuming public of the United States as a designation of source
of the goods or services of the mark's owner. In determining whether a mark
possesses the requisite degree of recognition, the court may consider all
relevant factors, including the following:
(i) The duration, extent, and geographic reach of advertising and publicity of
the mark, whether advertised or publicized by the owner or third parties.
(ii) The amount, volume, and geographic extent of sales of goods or services
offered under the mark.
(iii) The extent of actual recognition of the mark.
(iv) Whether the mark was registered under the Act of March 3, 1881, or
the Act of February 20, 1905, or on the principal register."
The bill further provides that "dilution by blurring" is "association
arising from the similarity between a mark or trade name and a famous mark that impairs
the distinctiveness of the famous mark. In determining whether a mark or trade name is
likely to cause dilution by blurring, the court may consider all relevant factors,
including the following:
(i) The degree of similarity between the mark or trade name and the famous mark.
(ii) The degree of inherent or acquired distinctiveness of the famous mark.
(iii) The extent to which the owner of the famous mark is engaging in
substantially exclusive use of the mark.
(iv) The degree of recognition of the famous mark.
(v) Whether the user of the mark or trade name intended to create an association
with the famous mark.
(vi) Any actual association between the mark or trade name and the famous mark."
Also, it provides that "dilution by tarnishment" is "association arising from
the similarity between a mark or trade name and a famous mark that harms the
reputation of the famous mark".
The bill also modified the list of exemptions. The bill provides that "The
following shall not be actionable as dilution by blurring or dilution by
tarnishment under this subsection:
(A) Any fair use, including a nominative or descriptive fair use, or
facilitation of such fair use, of a famous mark by another person other than as
a designation of source for the person's own goods or services, including use in
connection with--(i) advertising or promotion that permits consumers to compare
goods or services; or (ii) identifying and parodying, criticizing, or commenting
upon the famous mark owner or the goods or services of the famous mark owner.
(B) All forms of news reporting and news commentary.
(C) Any noncommercial use of a mark."
Reaction. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
praised the bill in a
The Bruce Josten stated in this release that "Without it, American brand owners would be
susceptible to having their reputations tarnished and the distinctiveness of their
trademarks blurred". He added that "Since the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in the case of
Moseley v. V Secret, America's famous mark owners have been left without effective
protection for their trademark. This bill will protect brand owners by providing a more
precise and limited definition for what constitutes a famous trademark".
|FCC Releases Agenda for October
10/5. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
agenda [PDF] for its event on Thursday, October 12, 2006, titled "Open
Meeting". The FCC is scheduled to adopt several significant items.
AT&T BellSouth Merger. The FCC will consider a Memorandum Opinion and Order
regarding the merger of AT&T and BellSouth, which is nominally an approval of the
transfer of FCC licenses. See also, the FCC's
web page for
this merger review. This proceeding is WC Docket No.06-74.
White Space. The FCC will consider a First Report and Order and Further Notice
of Proposed Rule Making in its proceeding titled "Unlicensed Operation in the TV
Broadcast Bands", and numbered ET Docket No. 04-186. That is, this is the FCC's long
awaited next step in its white space proceeding.
On May 13, 2004, the FCC adopted a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
regarding use by unlicensed devices of broadcast television spectrum where the
spectrum is not in use by broadcasters. The FCC released the
text [38 pages in PDF] of this item on May 25, 2004. This NPRM is FCC 04-113
in ET Docket Nos. 04-186 and 02-380.
See also, story
titled "FCC Adopts NPRM Regarding Unlicensed Use of Broadcast TV Spectrum" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 898, May 14, 2004.
There are also stand alone bills pending in the House and Senate that address
this issue. See, for example,
S 2327, the
"Wireless Innovation Act of 2006", introduced on February 17, 2006, by
Sen. George Allen (R-VA) and others. See
also, story titled "Sen. Allen Introduces Bill to Allow Unlicensed Wireless Use
of Broadcast White Space" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,314, February 21, 2006.
Also, the large communications regulation reform bill approved by the
Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) on
July 28, 2006,
HR 5252 RS, contains white space provisions.
Title VI of the SCC bill would require the FCC to complete its broadcast
white space rulemaking proceeding, to permit unlicensed, non-exclusive use of
unassigned, non-licensed television broadcast channels. It states that "Within
270 days after the date of enactment of that Act, the Commission shall adopt
technical and device rules in ET Docket No. 04–186 to facilitate the efficient
use of eligible broadcast television frequencies by certified unlicensed
devices, which shall include rules and procedures -- (1) to protect licensees
from harmful interference from certified unlicensed devices; (2) to require
certification of unlicensed devices designed to be operated in the eligible
broadcast television frequencies ... (3) to require manufacturers of such
devices to include a means of disabling or modifying the device remotely if the
Commission determines that certain certified unlicensed devices may cause harmful
interference to licensees; ..."
See also, story titled "Mark Up of Title
VI -- Use of Broadcast White Space" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,404, July 5, 2006.
NOI on Broadband Industry Practices. The FCC will consider a Notice
of Inquiry (NOI) regarding broadband industry practices. The FCC's agenda
provides no elaboration on this item.
Interference in the 700 MHz Band. The FCC will consider an
order regarding Qualcomm's request for declaratory ruling regarding the interference
protection requirements applicable to the 700 MHz Band.
On January 14, 2005, Qualcomm filed Petition for Declaratory
Ruling with the FCC. This proceeding is WT Docket No. 05-7. See, pages
26-50, and pages
51-56 [PDF page numbers].
Qualcomm wrote in its petition that it "requests that the FCC
issue a declaratory ruling that the interference calculation procedures
contained in the Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 69 ("OET-69")
are acceptable to demonstrate compliance with the TV/DTV interference protection
criteria of Section 27.60 of the FCC Rules. Grant of the request will speed the
deployment of QUALCOMM's innovative MediaFLOTM service, a
nationwide "mediacast" network delivering many channels of high quality video
and audio content, as well as innovative mobile data applications, to third
generation mobile phones a mass market prices on Channel 55, part of the Lower
700 MHz spectrum that the Commission auctioned in 2002 and 2003. In some areas
of the country, until the DTV transition ends, QUALCOMM can only launch this new
innovative service if it can coexist with the TV/DTV channels operating on
channels adjacent to the or co-channel with QUALCOMM's Channel 55."
NOI on Video Competition. Finally, the FCC will
consider a NOI seeking information to assist it in preparing its annual report on the
status of competition in the market for the delivery of video programming.
This event is scheduled for 9:30 AM on Thursday, October 12, 2006 in the FCC's
Commission Meeting Room, Room TW-C305, 445 12th Street, SW. The event will be webcast by
the FCC. The FCC does not always consider all of the items on its published agenda. The
FCC sometimes adds items to the agenda without providing the "one week" notice
5 U.S.C. § 552b. The FCC does not always start its monthly meetings at the
scheduled time. The FCC usually does not release at its meetings copies of the
items that it adopts at its meetings.
|US and EU Enter Into New PNR
10/6. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
and the European Union (EU) released an
agreement [3 pages in PDF] regarding the expanded use of passenger name
record (PNR) data.
Secretary of Homeland Security
Chertoff stated in a release
that under this agreement, the "U.S. Customs and Border Protection will have new
flexibility to share PNR data with other counter-terrorism agencies within the
U.S. government, carrying out the President’s mandate to remove obstacles to
counter-terrorism information sharing. The new flexibility will apply to
agencies within DHS as well as to the Department of Justice, the FBI, and other
agencies with counter-terrorism responsibilities; sharing will be allowed for
the investigation, analysis, and prevention of terrorism and related crimes."
Chertoff (at left) added that
"the agreement will allow the department to receive PNR data earlier, thus increasing
our ability to identify potential terrorists".
The EU wrote in its
"The interim agreement enables PNR data in the reservation systems of air
carriers to continue to be transferred to the US in the same way as under the
previous Agreement. The US Administration may access electronically PNR data
from air carriers' reservation/departure control systems located within the
territory of the EU Member States, in accordance with specific undertakings.
This system will be replaced in due course by one under which airlines in the EU
will send the required data to the US. Under the interim Agreement, the EU will
ensure that air carriers operating passenger flights in foreign air
transportation to or from the US process PNR data contained in their automated
reservation systems as required by the US Administration."
On May 30, 2006, the EU's Court of Justice (COJ) issued its
judgment in European Parliament v. Council of the European Union,
annulling the 2004 PNR
agreement [7 pages in PDF] between the US and the EU. See also, COJ
release [PDF] explaining the judgment. This annuled the Council of the
European Union's decision (No. 2004/496/EC) dated May 17, 2004, regarding the
"Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on
the processing and transfer of PNR data by Air Carriers to the United States
Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection". It
also annuls the European Commission's decision (No. 2004/535/EC) dated May 14,
2004 on the "adequate protection of personal data contained in the Passenger
Name Record of air passengers transferred to the United States Bureau of Customs
and Border Protection".
The Electronic Privacy Information Center
(EPIC) wrote in its web site that "The new agreement gives the Europeans greater
control over the disclosure of passenger data to the United States. However, it
leaves unresolved whether the United States has adequate privacy protections to
safeguard the private information of European consumers."
|IG Reports on Porn Surfing and Online
Gambling at the Department of the Interior
10/4. The Department of the Interior's (DOI)
Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
report [15 pages in PDF] titled "Excessive Indulgences: Personal Use of the
Internet at the Department of the Interior".
The report was written by Earl Devaney,
who has been the Inspector General for the DOI since August
He wrote in a cover memorandum to the Secretary of the Interior that
"We discovered that computer users at the Department have continued to access
sexually explicit and gambling websites due to the lack of consistency in
Department controls over Internet use. While not specifically prohibited, we
also discovered that computer users spent significant time at Internet auction
and on-line gaming websites, costing an estimated 104,221 hours in
potential lost productivity over the course of a year."
However, the DOI is a huge agency, with about 80,000 employees. 104,221
hours, divided by 80,000 employees, comes to an average of about 1.3 wasted
hours per employee.
The methodology was to study web site access logs for only one week. However, data was
not collected for all components of the DOI, so the IG's estimate may be low.
The report states that "We collected Internet usage logs from six Bureaus and
offices (Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), Minerals Management
Service (MMS), National Park Service (NPS), Office of Surface Mining (OSM), and US
Geological Survey (USGS)) for a specific 7-day period. We then extracted
and analyzed log entries, which are generated each time a computer accesses a
website, using widely-accepted lists of keywords and popular Internet addresses
for each category. These lists were not exhaustive, as website addresses
can frequently change. Both Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National
Business Center (NBC) were unable to provide the data we requested. The
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was not included in our review because of the
Cobell Court’s injunction against Internet use by BIA."
The report also states that "we discovered over 1,000,000 log entries where 7,763
Department computer users spent over 2,004 hours accessing game and auction
sites during that same week. Over a period of 1 year, these veritable shopping
and gaming binges could account for 104,221 hours of lost productivity."
The report also found that filtering software failed to block access. It
states that "We found the use of the web filtering tools provide some level of
protection for the Bureaus that used them, but users were still able to gain
access to prohibited sites despite the employment of web filtering software.
In a final spot check in August 2006, we attempted access to eight known
sexually explicit and gambling websites on each system. We were able to
access sexually explicit photographs through BLM, FWS, and OSM computer systems,
but not through the BOR computer system. Additionally, we were able to
access gambling sites using BOR, FWS, and OSM computers, but not through the BLM
computer system. Based on our findings, we believe that the Department and
Bureaus would do well to not be lulled into a false sense of security that these
filtering tools provide a significant level of protection."
|Washington Tech Calendar
New items are highlighted in red.
|Monday, October 9
The House will not meet. It may return from it elections recess on
Monday, November 13, 2006. The adjournment resolution,
provides for returning on Thursday, November 9, at 2:00 PM.
The Senate will not meet. See,
The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and other federal offices will be closed. See, Office of Personnel Management's
(OPM) list of federal holidays.
|Tuesday, October 10
10:00 AM. The Supreme
Court will hear oral argument in Global Crossing v. Metrophones, Sup.
Ct. No. 05-705, a case regarding whether 47 U.S.C. § 201(b) creates a private right of
action for a provider of payphone services to sue a long distance carrier for alleged
violations of the FCC's regulations concerning compensation for coinless payphone
Stuart Levey, the
Department of the Treasury's Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence,
will give a luncheon speech at the 2006 ABA/ABA Money Laundering Enforcement Conference.
Location: Marriott Wardman Park Hotel, 2660 Woodley Road, NW.
12:15 - 2:00 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Mass Media Practice Committee will
host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be the "Digital Television
Transition". The speaker will be Meredith Baker, Senior Advisor at the
National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA). For more information contact Erin Dozier at edozier at
sheppardmullin dot com or 202-772-5312. Location: Fleischman and Walsh, Suite 600, 1919
Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
1:30 - 4:30 PM. The Department of
Homeland Security's (DHS)
Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC) will hold a meeting. The agenda includes an
item titled "Convergence of Physical and Cyber Technologies and Related Security
Management Challenges". The speakers will include John Chambers (P/CEO of Cisco
Systems), George Conrades (Executive Chairman of Akamai Technologies), and Gregory Peters
(former P/CEO of Internap Network Services). The NIAC also accepts written public comments.
notice in the Federal Register, September 27, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 187, at
Pages 56541-56542. Location: National Press Club, 529 14th Street, NW.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to
of Proposed Rulemaking [22 pages in PDF] in a new proceeding titled "In the Matter
of Amendment of Section 90.20(e)(6) of the Commission's Rules". This is a reaction to
Lojack's petition for rulemaking relating to the use
of spectrum for stolen vehicle recovery systems (SVRS). The FCC proposes to revise
section 90.20(e)(6) of its rules "to permit increased mobile output power, to permit
digital emissions in addition to the analog emissions currently authorized by the Rules,
and to relax the limitations on duty cycles", among other things. The FCC adopted
this item on July 19, 2006, and released it on July 24, 2006. It is FCC 06-107, in WT
Docket No. 06-142. See,
notice in the Federal Register, August 23, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 163, at
Deadline to submit initial comments to the
Federal Communications Commission's (FCC)
Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service in response to the FCC's
notice [PDF] requesting comments regarding the use of reverse auctions to determine
high cost universal service funding to eligible telecommunications carriers.
This proceeding is WC Docket No. 05-337 and CC Docket No. 96-45. See,
notice in the Federal Register, August 25, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 165, at
|Wednesday, October 11
6:00 - 8:00 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a continuing legal education
(CLE) seminar titled "FCC's Media Ownership Rules". Registrations and
cancellations are due by 5:00 PM on October 9. The price to attend ranges from $50 to
registration form [PDF]. Location: Dow Lohnes,
Suite 800, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.
|Thursday, October 12
9:00 AM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC)
Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS)
Deemed Export Advisory Committee (DEAC) will meet. See,
notice in the Federal Register, September 22, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 184, at
Pages 55429. Location: main lobby of the DOC's Hoover Building,
14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues, NW.
9:30 AM. The Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) will hold a meeting. The event will be webcast by the FCC.
Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW, Room TW-C05 (Commission Meeting Room).
9:30 AM. The U.S. Court
of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in BellSouth Telecommunications v.
FCC, App. Ct. No. 05-1032. The case pertains to whether BellSouth discriminated
in favor of its long distance subsidiary in violation of
47 U.S.C. § 272. However, the precise nature of either the facts or issues in this
proceeding is not public information. See for example, heavily redacted
[81 pages in PDF] of the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC). Judges Tatel, Kavanaugh and Williams will preside. Location:
Courtroom 20, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.
12:30 - 1:45 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Transactional Practice Committee
will host a brown bag lunch. The FCBA states that the topic will be the "forms of
financing available to communications companies -- angel, VC, mezzanine, private equity,
traditional loans, public offerings". The speakers will include Tara Giunta (Paul
Hastings Janofsky & Walker) and Rebecca Arbogast (Stifel Nicolaus). RSVP to Christine
Crowe at ccrowe at wbklaw dot com or 202-383-3334. Location: Paul Hastings, 875 15th
2:00 - 3:00 PM. The
President's National Security
Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will hold a partially closed meeting by
teleconference. The open portion of the meeting will pertain to the Emergency Communications
and Interoperability Task Force (ECITF). The closed portion of the meeting will include a
discussion of, and vote on, the Global Infrastructure Resiliency (GIR) Report. See,
notice in the Federal Register, October 2, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 190, at Page
6:30 - 8:30 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Legislative Practice Committee and
Young Lawyers Committee will host an event title "Happy Hour". For more
information, contact Paula Timmons at paula at paulatimmonsconsulting dot com or
202-255-1627 or Chris Fedeli at cfedeli at crblaw dot com or 202-828-9874. Location:
Lounge 201, 201 Massachusetts Ave., NE.
Day one of a two day conference titled "Standards
Bodies and Patent Pools: Key Legal and Business Developments". FTC
Commissioner Pamela Harbour will give a speech titled "Standards Bodies and
Patent Pools: Key Legal and Business Developments" on October 12. See,
agenda. Location: Wyndham Washington DC Hotel, 1400 M St., NW.
|Friday, October 13
9:00 - 11:00 AM. The
Progress & Freedom Foundation's (PFF)
Digital Age Communications Act Project (DACA)
will release a report containing recommendations of its Institutional Reform Working
Group. The speakers will include Randolph May
(Free State Foundation) and
John Duffy (George
Washington University School of Law). See,
page. See also,
titled "PFF Announces Digital Age Communications Act Project" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No.
1,068, February 2, 2005. Breakfast will be served. Location: First Amendment Lounge,
National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th
12:15 - 1:45 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) HLS/Emergency Communications Committee
will host a brown bag lunch to plan future events. For more information contact Jennifer
Manner at 703-390-2730 or jmanner at msvlp dot com. Location: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw
Pittman, 2400 N St., NW.
Day two of a two day conference titled
"Standards Bodies and Patent Pools: Key Legal and Business Developments".
See, notice and
agenda. Location: Wyndham Washington DC Hotel, 1400 M St., NW.
|Monday, October 16
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a continuing legal education
(CLE) seminar titled "Client Creation, Conflicts and Confidentiality in the
Administrative Process". The price to attend ranges from $50 to $125. See,
[PDF]. The deadline to register is 5:00 PM on October 12. Location: Wiley Rein & Fielding, 1776 K St., NW.
6:00 - 9:15 PM. The DC Bar Association
will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "How to Protect and
Enforce Trademark Rights: A Primer". The speakers will include Shauna Wertheim
(Roberts Mardula & Wertheim) and Steven Hollman (Hogan & Hartson). The price to
attend ranges from $90-$135. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See,
Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.
Deadline to submit comments to the European Commission (EC) in response
to its public consultation regarding possible regulation of "the use of mobile
phones by children and young people". The EC seeks comments "linked to content
and behaviour, such as access to harmful or illegal content, bullying (e.g. distribution
of abusive or compromising messages and photos amongst children), grooming (e.g. strangers
“making friends” with children with a view to meeting them), risks to the privacy of
children, and the risk of unexpectedly high expense." See, EC
10/6. President Bush signed
the "Copyright Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections Act".
See, White House
10/6. The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) released a
Opinion and Order [7 pages in PDF] in its proceeding titled "In the Matter of K.
Rupert Murdoch (Transferor) and Fox Entertainment Group (Transferree) Applications for
Transfer of Control of Fox Television Stations, Inc." The MOO states that "we
grant these applications to transfer control". This MOO further states that "we
also grant applicants’ request for waiver of the local ownership rule and grant applicants
a permanent waiver of the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership prohibition to
permit continued ownership of The New York Post and WNYW(TV), and a temporary
waiver of the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership prohibition to permit
continued ownership of The New York Post and WWOR-TV." This MOO is FCC 06-122.
10/6. The National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) released its
Special Publication 800-103 [70 pages in PDF] titled "An Ontology of
Identity Credentials, Part I: Background and Formulation". The deadline to
submit comments to the NIST is 5:00 PM on Wednesday, November 15, 2006.
10/4. The U.S. Court of Appeals (11thCir)
issued its opinion
[20 pages in PDF] in USA v. Eckhardt, affirming a conviction for violation
of the Communications Decency Act in connection with leaving lewd and lascivious
messages on a telephone answering machine. Eckhardt was convicted for violation of
47 U.S.C. § 223(a)(1)(C), which provides that "Whoever ... in interstate or
foreign communications ... makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications
device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his
identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called
number or who receives the communications ... shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned
not more than two years, or both". The Court of Appeals held that the statute is not
void for vagueness or overbreadth. This case is USA v. Robert Eckhardt, U.S. Court
of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 05-12211, an appeal from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
|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 - 2006 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All