3/1. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a notice [162 pages in DF] to be published in the Federal Register, that announces and describes a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding rules implementing the REAL ID Act, a bill that federalized state identification systems.

Summary. The notice is long. It offers extensions of the compliance deadline. However, it leaves key implementation issues unresolved.

The DHS notice states that "This rule proposes standards to meet the minimum requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005, including: information and security features that must be incorporated into each card; application information to establish the identity and immigration status of an applicant before a card can be issued; and physical security standards for locations where driver’s licenses and applicable identification cards are issued."

Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, stated a a news conference on March 1, 2007, that this "proposes specific minimum standards for state issued driver's licenses and identification cards to be accepted for federal purposes such as air travel." See, transcript.

The REAL ID Act relies upon states for its implementation. However, some states are resisting. See for example, story titled "Maine Rejects REAL ID Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,528, January 29, 2007.

Chertoff said that the DHS would allow a two year extension of time for states to come into compliance.

He also said that the DHS would "pitch in and help the states with some of the costs". He added that "up to 20 percent of the total state homeland security program funding available for this fiscal year, which totals about $100 million in total, will be available for states to implement Real ID".

In contrast, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) and the National Governor's Association (NGA) have estimated that the program will cost over $11 Billion in the first five years. See, NCSL/NGA report [60 pages in PDF] titled "The Real ID Act: National Impact Analysis".

Moreover, there is some support in the Congress for repealing the REAL ID Act. For example, on February 28, 2007, Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Sen. John Sununu (R-NH), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) introduced S 717, a bill to repeal Title II of the REAL ID Act. Title II contains the provisions pertaining to federalization of state identification systems. Also, on February 14, 2007, Rep. Thomas Allen (D-ME) and others introduced HR 1117, the "REAL ID Repeal and Identification Security Enhancement Act of 2007", which would also repeal Title II of the Act.

See also, letter [4 pages in PDF] to Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) supporting repeal of the REAL ID Act. It is endorsed by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights, ACLU, People for the American Way, and former Rep. Bob Barr's Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances, and other groups that have addressed technology policy. However, most of the groups endorsing the letter have not historically focused on issues involving technology or privacy. They include the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, NAACP, United Automobile Workers, National Organization for Women, and Common Cause.

Also, many of the groups endorsing the letter focus on immigration policy. While Secretary Chertoff discusses the REAL ID Act in the context of fighting terrorism, one of the primary purposes of the bill is enhanced enforceability of immigration laws. More specifically, one of its underlying purposes is to facilitate the ability of employers to verify eligibility of job applicants for employment based upon immigration status. The current availability of counterfeit documents has the effect of causing many employers to hire without regard to actual immigration status.

The federal government, which has great difficulty enforcing immigrations laws, either on the borders, or within the U.S., has mandated in the REAL ID Act that the states operate a network of state identifications systems based upon accessible electronic databases. In addition, the federal government, which has historically had difficulty in making immigration status determinations, would deputize the 51 state and District of Columbia DMVs, many of which are minimally competent to administer parallel parking tests, to make complex immigration status legal determinations. In turn, these interconnected state identification systems, and the cards issued by these states, will in theory enable the federal government to deputize employers to enforce immigration laws.

The DHS and the federal government will obtain access to new identification tools, at little cost to them. They will be able to claim credit for fighting terrorism and illegal immigration, and performing other yet to be identified missions. The financial costs of creating and maintaining the state identification systems will be borne by the states, and their taxpayers. The political costs of funding the program will be borne by the state officials who must divert state tax revenues from other state programs to fund this federal mandate. The business costs of implementing immigration status based employment screening will be borne by employers. The personal costs associated with unauthorized access to these electronic databases and machine readable cards, including misuse, fraud, and identity theft, will be borne by the individual victims of fraud and identity theft.

REAL ID Act. The original version of HR 418 (109th Congress), the "REAL ID Act of 2005", was introduced by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on January 26, 2005. The House amended and approved one version of HR 418 as a stand alone bill on February 10, 2005.

The House also approved it as an appendage to HR 1268 (109th Congress), on May 11, 2005. HR 1268 was a supplemental appropriations bill, the main purposes of which were defense and anti-terrorism funding, and additional funding for the FBI, DEA, and other agencies.

President Bush signed HR 1268 (109th) on May 11, 2005. It is now Public Law 109-13. Hence, the REAL ID Act was enacted as Division B of HR 1268. This Title B contains many provisions. Those related to the federalization of state identification systems are found at Title II of Title B, titled "Improved Security for Drivers' Licenses and Personal Identification Cards. It is Sections 201-207 of Title B.

Section 201 contains definitions. Section 202, titled "Minimum Document Requirements and Issuance Standards for Federal Recognition", contains language that has prompted opposition.

This section sets minimum standards regarding the contents of state identification documents, including machine readability, and issuance standards.

It requires that states maintain electronic databases that include "all data fields printed on drivers' licenses and identification cards issued by the State".

It also requires states to "Employ technology to capture digital images of identity source documents so that the images can be retained in electronic storage in a transferable format". It further requires that states "Provide electronic access to all other States to information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State".

The Act contains language to compel the states to implement the requirements set forth in the Act. For example, it provides that "a Federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section".

DHS's Proposed Rules. The DHS's notice states that it "proposes to issue REAL ID regulations that create minimum standards for State driver’s licenses and identification cards that Federal agencies can accept for official purposes on or after May 11, 2008. Under this proposal, States must certify that they are in compliance with these requirements, and DHS must concur, before the driver’s licenses and identification cards that the States issue may be accepted by Federal agencies for official purposes on or after May 11, 2008. Because DHS recognizes that not all driver’s licenses and identification cards can be reissued by May 11, 2008, the proposal provides a five-year phase-in period for driver’s license or identification card renewals."

It adds that "States would be required to provide electronic access to specific information contained in the motor vehicle database of the State to all other States."

The Act provides that the federal government will not accept state issued identification for an "official purpose" that does not comply with the Act. The Act defines "official purpose" as "accessing Federal facilities, boarding Federally-regulated commercial aircraft" and "any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine". The DHS notice evades this issue. It does not identify "any other purposes", but adds that the DHS "may expand this definition in the future".

However, the notice does expand the scope of the program beyond an "official purpose" to certain private sector activities. It construes the term "official purpose" to mean that the requirements would apply "when nongovernmental entities require identification for the scope of activities considered ``official purposes´´".

The DHS notice states little about the mandatory access to state electronic databases of information by other states. It states that the DHS "intends to "work closely" in the future with the states on this issue. It states that it does not state what platform or service will be used to enable this access. Nor does it define privacy protections. Rather, it states that in the future the federal government "will collaborate with states on the privacy protections and access provisions".

The Act mandates state electronic databases. The notice "proposes that each State submit as part of the REAL ID Act certification process a written, comprehensive, security plan" for protecting the electronic databases mandated by the Act from such threats as unauthorized access, misuse, fraud, and identity theft. The notice requests comments on this.

The Act mandates a machine readable technology for identification cards. The notice asks how to make this machine readable data readable by the government, but not by others. The notice suggests encryption. It requests comments on this.

As of Monday, March 5, 2007, the DHS had not yet published its notice in the Federal Register. This notice will set the comment deadline, which will be sixty days after such publication.

Reaction. Rep. Allen, the sponsor of a REAL ID Act repeal bill, stated in a release that "Secretary Chertoff’s decision to issue regulations that delay full implementation of the REAL ID Act reinforces my concern that this law is burdensome as written. But delay will not resolve the law’s fundamental flaws. A delay gives Congress time to repeal REAL ID and replace it with a policy that does not put the liberties and private information of law-abiding Americans at risk and that doesn’t impose an enormous financial burden on state taxpayers. I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress, states and groups that work to protect Americans’ freedoms and privacy to establish national standards that will protect both national security and the privacy of American citizens."

The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) wrote in its web site that "Given the Act's fundamental flaws, CDT has joined other civil liberties groups in supporting legislation introduced in recent days in the House and Senate to repeal the hastily-enacted 2005 law and return to the driver's license reform process begun by the previous Congress. CDT is especially concerned that the Act would result in the creation of a linked network of government databases of personal information, without standards or limits on access and use."

2/20. Skype Communications filed a petition [36 pages in PDF] with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requesting that the FCC "declare that wireless carrier services are subject to the Carterfone principle that consumers have the right to attach any non-harmful device of their choosing to the network and that this, by necessity, includes users' rights to run Internet applications of their choosing." Skype provides voice of internet protocol (VOIP) applications.

Introduction. The petition asks that the Carterfone principle be applied to wireless carriers. However, the petition is also in the nature of a request for application of certain network neutrality principles to wireless carriers that provide broadband internet access.

The FCC adopted a Policy Statement [3 pages in PDF] in August, 2005. This statement provides, in part, that consumers "are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network" and that "consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice". The Skype petition cites this statement.

See also, story titled "FCC Adopts a Policy Statement Regarding Network Neutrality" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,190, August 8, 2005. The FCC released the text of the Policy Statement on September 23, 2005. See, story titled "FCC Releases Policy Statement Regarding Internet Regulation" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,221, September 26, 2005.

The petition also discusses the comment [17 pages in PDF] submitted by law professors Lawrence Lessig (Stanford) and Timothy Wu (Columbia) on August 22, 2003, urging that the FCC adopt a network neutrality rule. The Lessig/Wu comment is also discussed in the story titled "Cato Study Opposes FCC Imposition of Network Neutrality" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 816, January 15, 2004.

Also, the Skype petition relies on Wu's February 15, 2007, paper titled "Wireless Net Neutrality: Cellular Carterfone and Consumer Choice in Mobile Broadband". See, summary and full text [30 pages in PDF]. See also, related story in this issue titled "Tim Wu Paper Advocates Network Neutrality Mandates for Wireless Broadband Carriers".

The petition states that "consolidation and the relationship between handset manufacturers and carriers are producing market practices that raise substantial questions about whether consumers are receiving the maximum benefits of wireless competition. For example, carriers are beginning aggressively to influence software and product design to the detriment of consumers."

The petition complains that "carriers are using their considerable influence over handset design and usage to maintain control over and limit subscribers' right to run software communications applications of their choosing. Instead of carrying subscribers' messages indifferent to content, carriers have exerted more and more control over the say consumers access the mobile Internet."

It elaborates that "Carriers are doing so, moreover, in violation of the Commission's Carterfone principle and the strictures of the Commission's original order permitting the bundling of consumer equipment and wireless service. The Commission should act now to enforce Caterfone and unlock the full benefits of wireless price competition and innovation."

Carrier Practices. The Skype petition identifies numerous practices by wireless carriers. For example, it complains about carriers' terms of service (TOS) for their customers.

It states that "Today, the major U.S. wireless carriers offer, or will soon offer, some form of 3G Internet access. However, the largest wireless operators include in their terms of service explicit limitations that make it impossible for consumers to use the full features of 3G devices to access and utilized applications and services of their choosing. These terms of service typically prohibit the use of the 3G service for VOIP applications such as Skype."

It states that the AT&T/Cingular TOS states the following: "Prohibited use include ... Voice over IP". The petition adds that Verizon's TOS prohibits "host computer applications". These restrictions, Skype argues, go beyond protecting the network from harm.

Skype also complains about disabling of Wi-Fi capability. For example, it asserts that Nokia offered its E62 smartphone in Europe with Wi-Fi capability, but when it released its US version, the E61, there was not Wi-Fi capability. The petition alleges that the purpose of this is to prevent consumers from running a VOIP application on the device, and using Wi-Fi hotspots to engage in voice communications. The petition alleges that this device strip down is an example how a carrier (Cingular, now AT&T) exercised control over devices.

Skype also complains in its petition about a similar disabling of Bluetooth data transfer capability.

It also complains about carriers' locking handsets to a particular service.

And finally, Skype's petition complains about software development. The petition states that "In stark contrast to the open development standards that exist on the Internet, wireless carriers have exerted control over devices as well as the mobile operating systems upon which they run. Many have institute an elaborate set of application locks that make running unaffiliated applications like Skype difficult if not impossible."

Request for Relief. Skype requests in this petition that the FCC "make unmistakably clear that Carterfone will be enforced in the wireless industry, to initiate a proceeding to evaluate wireless carrier practices in light of Carterfone, and to create an industry-led mechanism to ensure the openness of wireless networks. Doing so will ensure both that consumers retain a right to run the applications of their choosing and attach all non-harmful devices to the wireless network. Finally, Commission involvement will ensure that carriers cannot use illegitimate network management practices as an excuse for otherwise anti-consumer behavior."

Wireless Carrier's Reaction. Steve Largent, head of the CTIA, responded in a release that "Skype's self-interested filing contains glaring legal flaws and a complete disregard for the vast consumer benefits provided by the competitive marketplace. Skype's ``recommendations´´ will freeze the innovation and choice hundreds of millions of consumers enjoy today. The call for imposing monopoly era Carterfone rules to today's vibrant market is unmistakably the wrong number."

2/15. Timothy Wu, a law professor at Columbia University, and leading advocate of network neutrality mandates, wrote a paper titled "Wireless Net Neutrality: Cellular Carterfone and Consumer Choice in Mobile Broadband".

See, summary and full text [30 pages in PDF]. It is published in the web site of the New American Foundation (NAF).

Wu wrote that "The carriers place strong controls over ``foreign attachments,´´ like the AT&T of the 1950s. The FCC’s Carterfone rules, which allow consumers to attach devices of their choice to the wired telephone networks, do not apply to wireless networks. These controls continue to affect innovation and the development of new devices and applications for wireless networks."

Second, he argued that "carriers are in a position to exercise strong control over the design of mobile equipment. They have used that power to force equipment developers to omit or cripple many consumer-friendly features. Carriers have also forced manufacturers to include technologies, like ``walled garden´´ Internet access, that neither equipment developers nor consumers want. Finally, through under-disclosed ``phone-locking,´´ the U.S. carriers disable the ability of phones to work on more than one network."

Third, he argued that "carriers have begun to offer wireless broadband services that compete with Wi-Fi services and may compete with cable and DSL broadband services." (Wu has been less apt to concede that wireless competes with cable or DSL when he advocates imposition of network neutrality mandates on that duopoly.)

He continued that "the services are offered pursuant to undisclosed bandwidth limits and usage restrictions that violate basic network neutrality rules. Most striking is Verizon Wireless, which prominently advertises ``unlimited´´ data services. However, it and other carriers offer broadband service pursuant both to bandwidth limits, and to contractual limits that bar routine uses of the Internet, including downloading music from legitimate sites like iTunes, the use of Voice over IP, and the use of sites like YouTube."

Finally, he argued that "have imposed excessive burdens and conditions on application entry in the wireless application market, stalling what might otherwise be a powerful input into the U.S. economy."

He recommended that extension of the Carterfone "rule for wireless networks would liberate device innovation in the wireless world". He also argued that "Wireless carriers should be subject to the same core network neutrality principles under which the cable and DSL industries currently operate. Consumers have the basic right to use the applications of their choice and view the content of their choice. Wireless carriers who offer broadband services should respect the same basic freedoms."

He also argued that "The industry should re-evaluate its ``walled garden´´ approach to application development, and work together to create clear and unified standards for developers." Finally, he argued that consumer disclosure is a major problem.

2/27. The U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir) issued its opinion [15 pages in PDF] in Frankfort Digital Services v. Kistler, affirming the judgments of the Bankruptcy Appeal Panel, and the Bankruptcy Court, that Frankfort Digital Services, Ltd., engaged in the unlicensed practice of law in the state of California in connection with its selling access for a fee to web based software that fills in bankruptcy petitions and schedules.

The Court of Appeals also affirmed the judgments that Frankfort operated as a bankruptcy petition preparer within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 110, violated the requirements thereof, and engaged in fraudulent, unfair, or deceptive conduct.

Frankfort is owned and operated by Henry Ihejirika, who is not an attorney. Frankfort did business as Ziinet.com and 700law.com. Frankfort's web sites collected fees from individuals seeking automated web based support in preparing bankruptcy petitions and schedules. The users paid a fee and provided data, and the web site software then created completed forms and schedules that the user could download, print out, sign, and file. The completed documents did not disclose that Frankfort assisted in preparing the documents, or that a fee was paid.

This case is Frankfort Digital Services, Ltd. and  Henry Ihejirika v. Sara Kistler, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 04-17190.

3/2. The U.S. Court of Appeals (6thCir) issued its divided opinion [13 pages in PDF] in USA v. Rice, affirming the judgment of the District Court, suppressing the fruits of an Article III wiretap in a criminal prosecution. This case is USA v. Reginald Santez Rice, et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 06-5245, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, at Louisville, D.C. No. 04-00083, Judge Thomas Russell presiding. Judge Moore wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judge Clay joined. Judge Robert Bell, sitting by designation, wrote a dissent.

3/2. The U.S. Court of Appeals (1stCir) issued its opinion in Watson v. Trans Union and New Cingular Wireless Services. Charles Watson is a pro se plaintiff who does not know how to draft a complaint. He alleges that he is a victim of identity theft. Trans Union is a credit reporting agency. New Cingular Wireless Service is a phone company. Watson filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (DMaine) against Trans Union and New Cingular Wireless Services alleging violation of Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which is codified at 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 - 1681x. The District Court dismissed his complaint. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Perhaps Watson would not have been able to prove his claim; perhaps he did not have a claim upon which relief could be granted; or, perhaps he is a nut. But, the court dismissed without reaching any of these questions. Section 1681n puts a cap of $1,000 on statutory damages. Actual damages are lacking or hard to prove in many cases involving identity theft or violation of the FCRA. Many FCRA claimants are unable to afford counsel, or find that the expected recovery is less than expected attorneys fees. This case illustrates that federal courts, unlike many state courts, offer little recourse or leeway to small claimants, and pro se civil litigants. This leaves some parties with a cause of action under federal statutory regimes unable to avail themselves of the remedies provided by those statutes. This case is Charles Watson v. Trans Union LLC and New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, App. Ct. Nos. 05-2289 and 05-2360, appeals from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, Judge Gene Carter presiding.

3/1. The U.S. Court of Appeals (8thCir) issued its opinion [8 pages in PDF] in USA v. Alvarez, affirming a sentence that contains the special condition that the defendant not have internet access at his residence and that he have internet access in other locations only with prior approval of the probation office. The underlying conviction related to child pornography (CP). The Court of Appeals wrote that a criminal sentence that includes a complete ban on internet access is reasonably related to the statutory purposes of deterring criminal conduct and protecting the public from further crimes of the defendant where the defendant is guilty of offenses involving repeated viewings of CP over the internet. Nothing in the opinion authorizes District Courts to ban internet access in cases not involving CP or child abuse. This case is USA v. Calvin Milo Alvarez, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 06-2805, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, Judge Jimm Larry Hendren presiding.

3/1. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) approved the nomination of John Preston Bailey to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia.

3/1. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) approved the nomination of Otis Wright to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

3/1. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) approved the nomination of George Wu to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

3/1. The Department of the Treasury announced that Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson will travel to Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing and Shanghai during the week of March 5, 2007. See, release.

3/1. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held a hearing titled "Digital Future of the United States: Part I -- The Future of the World Wide Web". See, prepared testimony [9 pages in PDF] of Tim Berners-Lee. He wrote that "The success of the World Wide Web, itself built on the open Internet, has depended on three critical factors: 1) unlimited links from any part of the Web to any other; 2) open technical standards as the basis for continued growth of innovation applications, and; 3) separation of network layers, enabling independent innovation for network transport, routing and information applications." He added that "The lesson from the proliferation of new applications and services on top of the Web infrastructure is that innovation will happen provided it has a platform of open technical standards, a flexible, scalable architecture, and access to these standards on royalty-free ($0 fee patent licenses) terms."

2/27. Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the Chairman of the House Commerce Committee, gave a speech to the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) in which he discussed the DTV transition. He said that "Based on the initial proposal from NTIA, the Administration appears to view this program as little more than an unwelcome homework assignment. By law, the coupon program starts in 10 months. We don’t yet have technical standards for the boxes. We don't know when the boxes will be ready. We don't know how much personal information consumers must disclose on the application. We don’t know whether retailers will maintain an adequate supply of boxes and report redemption rates in a timely manner." See also, HR 608, the "Digital Television Consumer Education Act of 2007", sponsored by Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) and other Republicans. Rep. Dingell also stated that "I intend for our Committee to vigorously oversee the FCC as it once again turns its attention to media ownership issues."

The House will meet at 12:30 PM for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. The House will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. See, Rep. Hoyer's weekly calendar [PDF].

The Senate will meet at 1:30 PM for morning business. At 3:00 PM, it will then resume consideration of S 4, the "Improving America's Security by Implementing Unfinished Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007", a bill that pertains to the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, and unrelated matters.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Cellco Partnership v. Broadcom, App. Ct. No. 2006-1514. Location: Room 201, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Motionless Keyboard v. Microsoft, App. Ct. No. 2006-1497, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DOr) in a patent infringement case affecting, among other things, Microsoft's joy sticks and game controllers. The District Court granted defendants' motions for summary judgment of non-infringement and invalidity and entered final judgment in their favor on May 9, 2005. Then, the inventor, who is also the largest shareholder of Motionless Keyboard, moved to intervene pro se. On June 8, 2006, the Court of Appeals issued its opinion [PDF] affirming the District Court's denial of the motion to intervene. Location: Room 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

4:00 PM. Eric Solomon, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, will participate in a panel discussion titled "International Taxation Issues". Location: The Ritz-Carlton, 1150 M Street, NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to Locus Telecommunications, Inc.'s petition for a declaratory ruling that calls to a prepaid calling card provider’s toll-free customer service numbers are not subject to payphone compensation or, in the alternative, to initiate a rulemaking. See, Public Notice [3 pages in PDF] (DA 07-513). This is proceeding is RM 11354.

The House will meet at 10:30 AM for morning hour, and at 12:00 NOON for legislative business. The House will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Rep. Hoyer's weekly calendar [PDF].

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT). See, notice in the Federal Register, February 13, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 29, at Pages 6716-6717.

POSTPONED. 10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security will hold a hearing titled "Identity Theft: Innovative Solutions for an Evolving Problem". Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) will preside. Press contact: Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at Tracy_Schmaler at judiciary dot senate dot gov or 202-224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM - 5:30 PM. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will host an event titled "International Financial Reporting Standards ``Roadmap´´ Roundtable". See, SEC release. Location: SEC Headquarters, Room LL-002 (Auditorium), 100 F St., NE.

11:00 AM - 12:30 PM. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "Brussels -- Rival or Partner? The Future of US-EU Relations". The speakers will be European Parliament Members Chris Heaton-Harris, Roger Helmer, and Syed Kamall. See, notice. Location: Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding its Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking pertaining to aviation radio. The FCC adopted this item on October 4, 2006, and released it on October 10, 2006. This item is FCC 06-148 in WT Docket No. 01-289. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 6, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 234, at Pages 70710-70715.

The House and Senate will meet in joint session at 10:45 AM to hear Abdullah II bin Al Hussein, King of Jordan. See, Rep. Hoyer's weekly calendar [PDF].

8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day conference hosted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the proposed electronic Sentinel Network, to promote medical product safety. See, agenda. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 18, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 11, at Pages 2284-2285, and notice in the Federal Register, February 15, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 31, at Page 7441. The deadline to register to attend is February 28, 2007. Location: University System of Maryland Shady Grove Center, 8630 Gudelsky Dr., Rockville, MD.

9:00 - 11:00 AM. Day two of a two day meeting to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT). See, notice in the Federal Register, February 13, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 29, at Pages 6716-6717.

9:30 AM -12:30 PM. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division will hold another in their series of joint hearings regarding single firm conduct. This hearing will focus on different methods of evaluating monopoly power in single-firm conduct cases, including issues relating to market definition, the Cellophane fallacy, the use of direct evidence, single-firm markets, and technology markets. The speakers will be Andrew Gavil (Howard University School of Law), Richard Gilbert (UC Berkeley), Michael Katz (Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley), Philip Nelson (Economists, Inc.), Joseph Simons (Paul Weiss), Lawrence White (NYU's Stern School of Business). See, notice. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing to examine the policy implications of pharmaceutical reimportation from Canada. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

2:00 - 4:30 PM. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division will hold another in their series of joint hearings regarding single firm conduct. This hearing will focus on different methods of evaluating monopoly power in single-firm conduct cases, including issues relating to market definition, the Cellophane fallacy, the use of direct evidence, single-firm markets, and technology markets. The speakers will be Simon Bishop (RBB Economics), Thomas Krattenmaker (Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati), Miguel de la Mano (Directorate General for Competition, European Commission), Joe Sims (Jones Day), and Irwin Stelzer (Hudson Institute). See, notice. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

2:00 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights will hold a hearing titled "Oversight of the Enforcement of the Antitrust Laws". The witnesses will be Thomas Barnett (Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division) and Deborah Majoras (Chairman of the FTC). Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) will preside. Press contact: Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at Tracy_Schmaler at judiciary dot senate dot gov or 202-224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

2:30 PM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hold a hearing titled "Digital Future of the United States: Part II -- The Future of Radio". Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

Day one of a three day conference of the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) titled "IAPP Privacy Summit 2007". See, notice. Location: Renaissance Hotel, 999 Ninth St., NW.

TIME? The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold an auction seminar for Auction 71, the broadband PCS spectrum auction to be held on May 16, 2007. See, DA 07-30 [69 pages in PDF].

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) International Bureau (IB) regarding a proposal to remove from the Section 214 Exclusion List those non-U.S. licensed satellites that have been allowed to enter the U.S. market for satellite services pursuant to the procedure adopted in the DISCO II order. See, FCC's Public Notice [4 pages in PDF] (DA 07-100). This proceeding is IB Docket No. 95-118.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM. for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's weekly calendar [PDF].

8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day two of a two day conference hosted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the proposed electronic Sentinel Network, to promote medical product safety. See, agenda. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 18, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 11, at Pages 2284-2285, and notice in the Federal Register, February 15, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 31, at Page 7441. The deadline to register to attend is February 28, 2007. Location: University System of Maryland Shady Grove Center, 8630 Gudelsky Dr., Rockville, MD.

9:30 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security will hold a hearing titled "The McNulty Memorandum's Effect on the Right to Counsel in Corporate Investigations". See, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty's memoranda [2 MB in PDF] which provide guidelines to federal prosecutors on using prosecutions, or threats of prosecution, to coerce waivers of the attorney client privilege. These practices diminish the AC privilege, undermine the work of corporate counsel, and expose corporations to third party lawsuits. See also, June 19, 2006, opinion [PDF] of the U.S. Court of Appeals (10thCir) in In re Qwest Communications Securities Litigation, 450 F.3d 1179, certiorari denied, in which the Court rejected Qwest's argument that it could waive the AC privilege as to the government, put still assert the AC privilege in a Lerach class action. See also, "More News" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,395, June 20, 2006. See also, HJC notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

9:30 AM -12:00 NOON. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division will hold another in their series of joint hearings regarding single firm conduct. This hearing will focus on different methods of evaluating monopoly power in single-firm conduct cases, including issues relating to market definition, the Cellophane fallacy, the use of direct evidence, single-firm markets, and technology markets. The speakers will be Andrew Chin (University of North Carolina School of Law), Robert Lande (University of Baltimore School of Law), Richard Schmalensee (MIT's Sloan School of Management), Alan Silberman (Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal), and Michael Williams (ERS Group). See, notice. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. Eric Solomon, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, will participate in a panel discussion titled "Current Developments in Tax Policy" at the Tenant in Common Association's (TCIA) 2007 Spring Symposium. Location: Grand Hyatt, Constitution Ballroom, 1000 H St., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold a business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 236, the "Federal Agency Data Mining Reporting Act of 2007". The agenda also includes consideration of several judicial nominees, including Thomas Hardiman (to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit). The SJC rarely follows its published agendas. Press contract, Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202-224-2154 or Courtney Boone (Specter) at Courtney_Boone at judiciary-rep dot senate dot gov or 202-224-2984. See, notice. Location: Room S-216, Capitol Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Finance Committee (SFC) will hold a hearing titled "Perspectives on the 2007 Trade Agenda". See, notice. Location: Room 215, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Morrow v. Microsoft, App. Ct. No. 2006-1512, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (NDCal) in a patent case involving Microsoft's smart tags technology. Location: Room 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

11:30 AM - 1:00 PM. The National Science Foundation's (NSF) National Science Board's (NSB) Commission on 21st Century Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics will hold a partially closed meeting. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 22, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 35, at Page 8032. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA. The public is excluded from attending the meeting. However, audio of the meeting will be available in NSF Room 1235.

12:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled " Best Practices in Presenting (or Opposing) Transactions Before the FCC and the Antitrust Division of the US DoJ". The speakers will be Jim Bird (invited, head of the FCC's antitrust unit) and Hillary Burchuk (Department of Justice's Antitrust Division's Telecommunications and Media Enforcement Section). For more information, contact Teresa Lloyd at 202-986-8184 or tlloyd at llgm dot com. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) asserts that this event is a brown bag lunch hosted by its Transactional Practice Committee. Location: FCC, Conference Room 7 South, 445 12th Street, NW.

2:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property (SCIIP) will hold a hearing titled "An Update -- Piracy on University Networks". See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

4:00 PM. Senior Privacy Advisor Toby Levin, International Privacy Policy Director John Kropf, Privacy Technology Director Peter Sand, and Privacy Compliance Director Rebecca Richards will participate on a panel discussion at the International Association of Privacy Professionals Privacy Summit 2007, Renaissance Hotel, 999 Ninth Street, NW.

RESCHEDULED FOR MARCH 15. 2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare advice on U.S. positions for the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU) Telecommunication Standardization Sector Study Group 3 (Tariff and accounting principles including related telecommunication economic and policy issues). See, notice in the Federal Register, January 11, 2007, Vol. 72, Number 7, at Page 1363. Location: undisclosed. See, rescheduling notice in the Federal Register, February 12, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 28, at Pages 6640-6641.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM. for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's weekly calendar [PDF].

10:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee will hold a hearing titled "Combating Pretexting: H.R. 936, Prevention of Fraudulent Access to Phone Records Act". Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a panel discussion titled "Public Safety Communications: Time for a New Approach". The speakers will include Scott Wallsten (PFF moderator), Michael Calabrese (New America Foundation), Jeff Eisenach (Criterion Economics), Michael Gallagher (Perkins Coie), Steven Jones (First Response Coalition), and Janice Obuchowski (Frontline Wireless). See, notice and registration page. Location: Room B338, Rayburn Building.

8:00 AM - 6:00 PM. The Federal Bar Association will host its Annual Tax Law Conference. At 8:10 AM, there will be a panel on legislative developments. At 1:00 PM, Eric Solomon, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, will give a a luncheon speech titled "Current Developments in Tax Policy". See, conference brochure [PDF]. Location: Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) will host a webcast continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Sourcing on a Global Basis- What to Do and How to Do It". The speaker will be Robert Zahler (Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman). For more information, contact Mark Uncapher at muncapher at itaa dot org. Audio download copies will be sold after the event.

5:00 PM. Deadline to submit comments to the Copyright Office (CO) regarding the January 31, 2007, meeting of the Section 108 Study Group in Chicago, Illinois. See, 17 U.S.C. § 108 and notice in the Federal Register, December 4, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 232, at Pages 70434-70440.

Deadline to submit requests to participate as a panelist at the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) workshop titled "Proof Positive: New Directions in ID Authentication" on April 23-24, 2007. See, FTC release and notice in the Federal Register, February 26, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 37, at Pages 8381-8383.

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.