10/19. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) released a draft bill [9 pages in PDF] titled the "Retransmission Negotiation Reform and Transparency Act of 2010".

Sen. Kerry (at left) also sent a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. He explained that "News Corp. (FOX) and Cablevision failed to reach an agreement on Friday for the retransmission of WNYW (NY channel 5), WWOR (NJ channel 9) and WTXF (Philadelphia channel 29). As a result, approximately 3 million Cablevision subscribers in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut were left without access to these broadcast channels, including the widely watched New York Giants game this weekend." (Parentheses in original.)

He argued that the current regime "works least of all for consumers" and "is broken and in need of reform".

Sen. Kerry described his bill thus: "The process we are trying to effect is two party negotiations that have a big impact on an unrepresented third party; consumers. The goal is to offer a path to potential resolution of differences and protect consumers. It would stave off the termination of carriage on expiration of an agreement and allow signals to continue transmitting until the FCC evaluates the behavior of the parties and recommends or does not recommend binding arbitration during which carriage would continue. At the end of the day, the broadcaster would retain the right to pull the signal when there is a good faith impasse on terms, but it would not be able to do so without much greater transparency in process and a more systemic effort at reaching agreement without consumers getting caught in the middle."

The retransmission consent regulatory regime was established by the Cable Act of 1992, and is further implemented by rules promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

47 U.S.C. § 325 provides that "No cable system or other multichannel video programming distributor shall retransmit the signal of a broadcasting station, or any part thereof, except ... with the express authority of the originating station".

That is, broadcasters can charge cable companies and other MVPDs for retransmission of their programming. The companies have been negotiating retransmission consent contracts for 18 years.

Unlike in 1992, there are now usually multiple MVPDs in each market. When one MVPD has permission to retransmit a particular program, but another does not, consumers can switch providers. However, there are switching costs. Subscribers of a particular MVPDs can experience unexpected disruption of programming that they want to watch if a new retransmission consent agreement is not reached.

MVPDs and some other non-broadcasters involved in ongoing debates about the retransmission consent regime argue that the broadcasters never paid for the spectrum that they use, and benefit from the government imposed must carry regime, and should not now be allowed to engage in brinksmanship and threats of service blackouts when retransmission consent contracts expire.

Broadcasters argue that the existing retransmission consent regime works and should continue, and that market negotiations for new retransmission consent agreements should be allowed to run their course. They argue that a new regime that provided for FCC intervention would reduce incentives to negotiate agreements in the marketplace.

Bill Summary. Sen. Kerry's bill would leave the underlying retransmission consent provision in place. It would only attempt to address what happens after the expiration of an existing agreement. It provides that the MVPD shall continue temporarily to carry the signal, and both parties shall submit their "last best offer" to the FCC, which would then be charged with making, within 20 days, determinations regarding whether each such offer was consistent with a "duty to negotiate in good faith" and "market conditions".

That is, what constitutes "market conditions" would not be what market participants do in the marketplace, but rather what government regulators decide. This draft bill does not define "market conditions".

Then, depending on what the FCC determines regarding each side's consistency with "good faith" and "market conditions", the FCC would require the parties to submit to binding arbitration while the expired contract remains in effect, request binding arbitration, or order the MVPD to agree to broadcaster's "last best offer" or terminate the carriage of the signal after giving two weeks notice to consumers. The FCC would also have the authority to impose fines under certain determinations. The FCC would not have the authority to order the broadcaster to agree to the MVPD's "last best offer" under any set of determinations.

The bill would create no compulsory license for broadcasters' signals. It would not give the FCC power to compel broadcasters to license any programs. It would not give the FCC or any other governmental entity broad authority to mandate retransmission prices and terms, comparable for example, to the 1996 Act's grant to the states of interconnection authority, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 252. Nor would it impose any duty upon a broadcaster to license retransmission of a program to one MVPD at the same or similar rate that it had previously licensed it to that MVPD, or another MVPD.

If this bill were enacted, and a broadcaster and MVPD were unable to reach a new agreement upon the expiration of an existing agreement, the FCC would most likely in most cases finds that neither party had acted in inconsistently with its "duty to negotiate in good faith" and "market conditions". In this scenario, under this draft bill, the FCC would merely "request" arbitration. But, either party could refuse. In this case, the main effects of the bill would be to impose a short extension of the old agreement while the FCC examined the matter, and the FCC's release of a "notice" to consumers.

That is, the bill would consume significant FCC resources, but have only limited impact retransmission consent agreements.

Under this draft bill, in the unlikely scenario that the FCC found that both sides were bad (had negotiated inconsistently with obligations of good faith and market conditions), the FCC could require arbitration. If the FCC found that the MVPD had been good (consistent with good faith and market conditions), and the broadcaster bad, the FCC could require arbitration. If the FCC found that the MVPD had been bad, and the broadcaster good, the FCC could require the MVPD to accept the broadcasters last best offer.

Reaction. Dennis Wharton, of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), stated in a release on October 19 that "As history has shown, 99.9 percent of these deals are reached without disruption. We don't have a broken system; we have a broken pay-TV company that likes to play Washington games. Broadcasters and pay-TV operators share a mutual interest in reaching a fair, market-oriented carriage deal. Only when one party shifts their focus, pleading to government instead of negotiating fairly, does that mutual desire dissolve."

Gigi Sohn, head of the Public Knowledge (PK), stated in a release on October 19 that Sen. Kerry "was quite right to propose legislation to fix what is obviously a broken system that penalizes consumers when cable operators and broadcasters can’t agree on payments for programming."

	Gigi Sohn Copyright PK

Sohn (at right) continued that Sen. Kerry "was also correct to scold the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for its failure to start action on a petition submitted by Public Knowledge and many others this March that seeks to revise the retransmission consent process."

On March 9, 2010, numerous MVPDs (including Time Warner Cable, Verizon, DirectTV, and Dish Network), and numerous groups (including the American Cable Association (ACA), PK, and New America Foundation) filed a petition for rulemaking with the FCC.

The FCC has not instituted a rulemaking proceeding. That proceeding is Docket No. 10-71.

She added that disputes, such at the current one between Cablevision and Fox, "will only increase, and will require prompt FCC action."

She also argued that "Cable operators and broadcasters must at some point be required to submit to arbitration, with failure to do so a sign they have not negotiated in good faith as the law requires. That failure would trigger active FCC involvement to resolve the dispute."

For a recent short summary of the NAB's position regarding this petition for rulemaking, see the NAB's notice of ex parte communication [4 pages in PDF] dated August 26, 2010. See also, the broadcasters' May 17 filing in opposition [139 pages in PDF].

The ACA stated in a release on October 20 that "a full-blown FCC probe is appropriate, one that questions whether TV station owners that drop huge rate increases on unsuspecting small cable companies are obeying the law, and whether TV stations that formed real and virtual duopolies did so to exercise undue market power over small pay-TV providers."

The ACA added that "Fox's decision to cut off Cablevision broadband subscribers from Fox-affiliated Web content -- including the free website Hulu.com, co-owned by NBC Universal -- confirmed the need for FCC conditions that prevent Comcast-NBCU from engaging in copycat misconduct that threatens fair competition and the open Internet."

Moreover, the ACA expressed its concern "about the future of the Internet if a communications colossus like Comcast-NBCU has the incentive and ability to harm consumers and competition with impunity. To void a repetition of the Fox episode, the FCC should protect all pay-TV subscribers' access to online content in reviewing the proposed Comcast-NBCU merger."

10/20. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Michael Copps released a statement regarding retransmission consent debates.

He wrote that "Retransmission consent developed in another world in a vastly different media environment. The idea was to ensure that consumers could receive broadcast programs on cable and to protect both small broadcasters and small cable companies from being run over by the big guys. Now, in too many instances, retransmission consent has degenerated into a fight between huge monied interests to see who can milk who the most -- and consumers are left holding an empty pail. What we are dealing with here is a fast-changing media landscape with the big players maneuvering to see how they can create new business models that will give them the upper hand over their rivals going forward."

Copps (at right) continued that "The FCC’s role has been limited. That’s partly due to the statute under which we operate, which generally confines our role to encouraging ‘good faith’ negotiations between the private parties. We have interpreted this charge very cautiously. But the FCC is a consumer protection agency and, if the Fox-Cablevision dispute proves anything, it is that consumers are clearly not being protected. I believe the Commission should take a very serious look at whether ‘good faith’ negotiations are indeed occurring. What, indeed, does `good faith´ mean in the dog-eat-dog world of big media? If such talks are not taking place, we should move promptly to protect consumers."

He concluded that "We must also understand that these seemingly `old media´ debates can be used against the new media of the digital age, too. For a broadcaster to pull programming from the Internet for a cable company’s subscribers, as apparently happened here, directly threatens the open Internet. This was yet another instance revealing how vulnerable the Internet is to discrimination and gate-keeper control absent clear rules of the road."

10/19. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Meredith Baker gave a speech [5 pages in PDF] in Washington DC regarding development and deployment of fourth generation (4G) wireless technologies.

10/18. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register that sets comment deadlines for its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) regarding the appropriate date for the termination of analog operations in the low power television and Class A television services. The FCC adopted and released this item on September 17, 2010. This item is FCC 10-172 in MB Docket No. 03-185. See, Federal Register, October 18, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 200, at Pages 63766-63773. Initial comments are due by December 17, 2010. Reply comments are due by January 18, 2011.

10/13. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register announces, describes, recites, and sets the effective date (October 13, 2010) for, numerous changes to its Table of Frequency Allocations and other rules. See, Federal Register, October 13, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 197, at Pages 62923-63031.

10/14. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) released a paper [8 pages in PDF] titled "Better Enforcement of Online Copyright Would Help, Not Harm, Consumers". The author is the ITIF's Daniel Castro.

This paper praises S 3804 [LOC | WW], the "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act", or "COICA", which Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced on September 20, 2010.

See, story titled Senators Introduce Bill to Enable DOJ to Shut Down Web Sites Dedicated to Infringement", "Bill Summary: Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act", and "Commentary: Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,132, September 21, 2010.

This ITIF paper rebuts criticism of the bill leveled by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and others as "fundamental Internet exceptionalist ideology". See also, stories titled "Tech Groups Oppose Domain Name Seizure Bill" and "CDT Argues that Domain Name Seizure Bill Implicates Freedom of Speech" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,135, September 29, 2010.

This paper argues that "Because of their overriding focus on individual freedom and not on collective benefit, critics of the legislation fail to understand that stronger enforcement of intellectual property would be beneficial to American consumers and businesses. For example, delivering video content to the TV is expected to be the next driver of broadband access and services but for this business model to work, content owners and creators should be able to ensure their rights are protected. Online piracy not only results in the unauthorized distribution of content, it hurts the ability of content producers to create legitimate business models for selling digital content."

It concludes that "the government should make a serious effort to combat piracy through reasonable approaches like COICA. The extent of piracy is so large, and the costs of enforcement quite reasonable, that it is clearly in the public interest to take more aggressive steps to curb it. Legislation such as COICA provides an opportunity for the U.S. government to get serious about enforcing intellectual property rights online."

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and a subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year for a single recipient. 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 two months after writing.

For information about subscriptions, see subscription information page.

Tech Law Journal now accepts credit card payments. See, TLJ credit card payments page.

TLJ is published by David Carney
Contact: 202-364-8882.
carney at techlawjournal dot com
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2010 David Carney. All rights reserved.

The House is in recess until November 15.

The Senate is in recess until November 12, except for pro forma sessions.

8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day partially closed meeting of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Emerging Technology and Research Advisory Committee (ETRAC). This meeting will be held on site, and by teleconference. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 12, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 196, at Pages 62508-62509. Location: DOC, Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.

10:00 AM - 2:45 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Spectrum Summit". See, notice and agenda. The FCC will webcast this event. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, Ruth Milkman (Chief of the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau), and John Leibovitz (Deputy Chief of the WTB) will give opening remarks. At 10:40 AM there will be a panel titled "Economic Imperative for New Broadband Spectrum". The speakers will be Simon Flannery (Morgan Stanley), Peggy Johnson (Qualcomm), Liam Quinn (Dell), Neville Ray (T-Mobile USA) and Jason Furman (National Economic Council). The lunch speakers will be FCC Commissioner Meredith Baker and Aneesh Chopra (CTO in the Executive Office of the President). At 1:00 PM, FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell will speak. At 1:10 PM there will be a panel titled "Policy Solutions to Spectrum Demand". The speakers will be Danny Sepulveda (Office of Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)), Amy Levine (House Commerce Committee Democratic staff), Peter Pitsch (Intel), John Chapin (MIT), Mary Brown (Cisco Systems), Jonathan Blake (Covington & Burling), and Tom Wheeler (Core Capital Partners). Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room.

12:00 NOON - 1:15 PM. The American Bar Association's (ABA) will host a teleconferenced panel discussion titled "Can You Afford to Ignore Social Media? How to Market Your Mediation Practice in 2010". See, notice. Prices vary. CLE credits. The deadline to register is October 18.

12:00 NOON The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a lunch. The speaker will be Lawrence Strickling, head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Prices vary. Registrations and cancellations are due by 12:00 NOON on October 19. Location: Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Ave., NW.

12:30 - 1:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a teleconferenced panel discussion titled "Representing Third Party Clients Subject to an Antitrust Agency's Formal Information Request". The speakers will be Matthew Bester (DOJ Antitrust Division), Eric Enson (Jones Day), Sandeep Joshi (Torys), and Carla Hine (McDermott Will & Emery). See, notice. Free.

2:40 PM. The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Bureau of Economics will host a presentation titled "The Democratization of Research and Development". The speakers will be Bob Hunt (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia) and Leonard Nakamura (FRB Philadelphia). For more information, contact Loren Smith at lsmith2 at ftc dot gov or Tammy John at tjohn at ftc dot gov. Location: ground floor Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

Day two of a two day event hosted by TechAmerica titled "2010 Vision Conference". Location: Waterford Conference Center, Springfield, VA.

Day one of a three day event hosted by the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) titled "AIPLA 2010 Annual Meeting". See, conference brochure and schedule [PDF]. Location: Marriott Wardman Park.

9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. Concurrent Track 1: "The Ins and Outs of IP Indemnification".

9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. Concurrent Track 2: "e-Commerce 2.0 and IP Practice Management: Real Solutions to Workflow for Patent and Trademark Practitioners".

9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. Concurrent Track 3: "KSR and the Ripple Effect: Examining the Broad and Increasing Impact of KSR on Patent Litigation and Practice".

12:30 - 2:00 PM. Lunch. The speaker will be David Kappos, head of the USPTO.

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 1: "Ethical Perspectives on Client Relationships in Intellectual Property Law Practice".

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 2: "Oral Arguments in TT AB Proceedings: A Live Demonstration and Best Practices".

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 3: "Effective IP Case Management and Cost Control Both Before and During Litigation".

3:30 - 5:30 PM. Session titled "Amicus". The speakers will include Paul Clement, Paul Michel, Randall Rader, and Seth Waxman.

3:30 - 5:30 PM. Session titled "Industrial Designs".

8:30 - 10:45 AM. Day two of a two day partially closed meeting of the Department of Commerce's (DOC) Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Emerging Technology and Research Advisory Committee (ETRAC). This meeting will be held on site, and by teleconference. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 12, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 196, at Pages 62508-62509. Location: DOC, Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.

9:00 - 11:00 AM. The New America Foundation (NAF) will host an event titled "The Emerging Threat to Online Trust: The Role of Public Policy and Browser Certificates". The speakers will be Sascha Meinrath (NAF), Edward Felten (Princeton University), Stephen Schultze (Princeton), Andrew McLaughlin (White House Deputy Chief Techonology Officer, Internet Policy), Adam Langley (Google), Scott Rea (DigiCert), Paul Vixie (Internet Software Consortium), Peter Eckersley (Electronic Frontier Foundation), Ari Schwartz (National Institute of Standards and Technology), and Andy Steingruebl (PayPal). See, notice and registration page. This event is free and open to the public. Location: NAF, 4th floor, 1899 L St., NW.

9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Technology Policy Institute (TPI) will host a conference titled "Antitrust and the Dynamics of Competition in High-Tech Industries". Four papers will be presented: (1) "Antitrust in High-Tech Industries: The Three Major Recent Monopolization Cases", by Robert Crandall (Brookings Institution) and Charles Jackson (Adjunct Professor of Electrical Engineering, George Washington University); (2) "Antitrust and Vertical Integration in ``New Economy´´ Industries", by Bruce Owen (Stanford University); (3) "Does Antitrust Enforcement in High Tech Markets Benefit Consumers? Stock Price Evidence from FTC v. Intel", by Joshua Wright (George Mason University Law School); and (4) "Cloud Computing: Architectural and Policy Implications", by Christopher Yoo (University of Pennsylvania Law School). Four persons will discuss these papers: (1) Joseph Farrell (Director of the Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Economics); (2) Carl Shapiro (Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economics at the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division); (3) Tim Brennan (University of Maryland, Baltimore County); and (4) Michael Salinger (Boston University School of Management). See, notice. Location: Polaris Suite, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center.

9:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) North American Numbering Council (NANC) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 4, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 191, Page 61140-61141. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.

12:15 - 1:45 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a brown bag lunch regarding the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) data systems. Location: Sidley Austin, 1501 K St., NW.

Day two of a three day event hosted by the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) titled "AIPLA 2010 Annual Meeting". See, conference brochure and schedule [PDF]. Location: Marriott Wardman Park.

8:45 - 11:45 AM. Concurrent Track 1: "Hot Topics in Intellectual Property Procurement and Enforcement in East Asia".

8:45 - 11:45 AM. Concurrent Track 2: "Cheaper by the Dozen: A Lively Discussion of Multidefendant Patent Litigation Strategies and Realities".

8:45 - 11:45 AM. Concurrent Track 3: "Best Practices to Mitigate Trade Secret Litigation Risks Arising from Employee Mobility and Commercial Dealings".

12:15 - 1:45 PM. Lunch. The speaker will be Judge Arthur Gajarsa, U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir).

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 1: "Patent Remedies at the Fringes".

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 2: "Blog On! Thoughts on Patent Blogging from Inside and Outside the Blogosphere".

2:00 - 3:30 PM. Concurrent Track 3: "Trademark Triple Play - Winning Your Trademark Case on Injunction, Summary Judgment and at Trial".

3:30 - 4:30 PM. Session titled "Special Committee on Standards and Open Source".

3:30 - 5:30 PM. Session titled "Anti-Counterfeiting and Anti-Piracy/IP Practice in Latin America/Trademark Internet/Trademark Law/Trademark Treaties and International Law".

3:30 - 5:30 PM. Session titled "Corporate Practice/Inventor Issues/Licensing and Management of IP Assets".

Day three of a three day event hosted by the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) titled "AIPLA 2010 Annual Meeting". From 9:00 AM to 12:00 NOON there will be a session titled "Year in Review". See, conference brochure and schedule [PDF]. Location: Marriott Wardman Park.

8:45 - 11:30 AM. The New America Foundation (NAF) will host an event titled "The Internet's Midlife Crisis". The speakers will be Sascha Meinrath (NAF), Tim Wu (Columbia University law school), Bruce Gottlieb (Atlantic Media Company), Link Hoewing (Verizon), and Andres Martinez (NAF). See, notice and registration page. This event is free and open to the public. Location: NAF, 4th floor, 1899 L St., NW.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a meeting that pertains to its open rulemaking proceeding titled "In the Matter of Amendment of the Commission's Ex Parte Rules and Other Procedural Rules". The FCC adopted its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [27 pages in PDF] on February 18, 2010, and released the text on February 22, 2010. It is FCC 10-31 in GC Docket No. 10-43. The FCC officials responsible for this rule making proceeding, and who will participate in this meeting, include Austin Schlick (FCC General Counsel) and Joel Kaufman (Chief of the FCC's OGC's Administrative Law Division). The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) asserts that this is an FCBA event titled "Ethics, Social Media, and Administrative Procedure: Ex Parte Rules for a Digital Age". See, FCBA notice and registration form. The deadline to register is 12:00 NOON on October 25, 2010. Prices vary. The FCBA bars reporters from some of its events. Location: Holland & Knight, 2099 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) [79 pages in PDF] regarding expanding the FCC's disability access technology mandates. The FCC adopted and released this item on August 5, 2010. It is FCC 10-145 in WT Docket No. 07-250. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 8, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 173, at Pages 54546-54560, and story titled "FCC Adopts Disability Access Policy Statement, Order, and NPRM" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,120, August 6, 2010. See also, S 3304 [LOC | WW], previously titled the "Equal Access to 21st Century Communications Act", and then S 3828 [LOC | WW], the "Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010", signed into law on October 8, 2010. The FCC published a second notice in the Federal Register requesting comments on the effects of this Act, if any, on this proceeding. See, Federal Register, October 18, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 200, at Pages 63764-63766.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry [102 pages in PDF] regarding the use of microwave for wireless backhaul. The FCC adopted and released this item on August 5, 2010. It is FCC 10-146 in WT Docket Nos. 10-153, 09-106, and 07-121. See, story titled "FCC Adopts Wireless Backhaul NPRM and NOI" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,120, August 6, 2010, and notice in the Federal Register, August 24, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 163, at Pages 52185-52209.

9:00 AM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC) will hold a partially closed meeting. This meeting will be held on site, and by teleconference. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 12, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 196, at Page 62508. Location: DOC, Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.

10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "What If Anything Will the Congress Do About Cybersecurity?". The speakers will be Brandon Milhorn (Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Republican staff), Michelle Richardson (ACLU), John Kneuer (Fairfax Media Partners), and Paul Rosenzweig (Heritage). This event is free and open to the pubic. See, notice. Location: Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

11:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Advisory Committee for the 2012 World Radiocommunication Conference will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register: October 6, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 193, at Pages 61756-61757. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305445 12th St., SW.

2:00 - 3:30 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division will host a presentation titled "Supersize It: The Growth of Retail Chains and the Rise of the Big Box Retail Format". The speaker will be Emek Basker (University of Missouri) one co-author of a paper [PDF] with the same title. For more information, contact Thomas Jeitschko at 202-532-4826 or atr dot eag at usdoj dot gov. Location: Liberty Square Building, 450 5th St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:00 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a teleconferenced panel discussion titled "Protecting Business Secrets and Key Personnel: How How Far Can Companies Go?". This panel will address USA v. Adobe, et al., D.C. No. 1:10-CV-01629. See, story titled "DOJ Stops Tech Companies' Anticompetitive Hiring Practices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,133, September 27, 2010. The speakers will be Melvin Schwartz (Marsh McLennan), Veronica Lewis (Vinson Elkins), and Eric Welsh (Parker Poe). See, notice. Free.

12:30 - 1:30 PM. The Center for American Progress (CAP) will host an event titled "American Religion and Politics in the Digital Age". The main speaker will be Susan Thistlethwaite, author of the book [Amazon] titled "Dreaming of Eden: American Religion and Politics in a Wired World". This event is free and open to the public. See, notice and registration page. Location: CAP, 10th floor, 1333 H St., NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding competitive bidding procedures for Auction 91. This auction, which is scheduled to commence on March 29, 2011, pertains to FM Broadcast Construction Permits. See, September 21, 2010, FCC Public Notice (DA 10-1711 in AU Docket No. 10-183) and notice in the Federal Register, October 6, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 193, at Pages 61752-61756.

Deadline for Facebook to respond to the October 18, 2010, letter [PDF] from Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) that propounds interrogatories and requests documents regarding reports that third party applications in Facebook's web site gathered and transmitted personally identifiable information about Facebook users and those users' friends to third parties. See, story titled "Representatives Markey and Barton Write Facebook About User Privacy" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2, 143, October 20, 2010.

2:40 PM. The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Bureau of Economics will host a presentation titled "Supersize It: The Growth of Retail Chains and the Rise of the Big Box Retail Format". The speaker will be Emek Basker (University of Missouri) one co-author of a paper [PDF] with the same title. For more information, contact Loren Smith at lsmith2 at ftc dot gov or Tammy John at tjohn at ftc dot gov. Location: ground floor Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

4:00 - 5:30 PM. Vivek Wadhwa will give lecture titled "What is a Tech Entrepreneur, and How Can We Make More of Them?". This event is free and open to the public. To register, e-mail iep dot gmu at gmail dot com. Location: Room 120, George Mason University School of Law, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA.

7:00 - 9:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee and the FCBA Foundation will host an event titled "21st Annual Charity Auction". For more information, contact Micah Caldwell at FCBAAuction at gmail dot com. Location: Hamilton Crowne Plaza Hotel, 1315 K St., NW.

Deadline to register for the two day event hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) titled "Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop II". See, event web page and notice in the Federal Register, October 19, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 201, at Page 64258.