5/26. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and others introduced S 1103 [LOC | WW], an untitled bill to extend the term of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Robert Mueller by two years.

By statute, FBI Directors are appointed by the President, and confirmed by the Senate for one ten year term, and "may not serve more than one ten-year term". See, 28 U.S.C. § 532 note.

S 1103 is a short but carefully worded bill that would extend Mueller's term to twelve years. All subsequent Directors would have ten year terms.

Mueller (at left) began service on September 4, 2001. He was appointed by a Republican President, and confirmed by a vote of 98-0. See, Roll Call No. 272 (107th Congress, 1st Session).

President Obama requested this extension. See, story titled "Obama Wants to Extend Mueller's Term" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,240, May 13, 2011.

The Obama administration's policies are indistinguishable from the Bush administration's policies in a number of areas, including the USA PATRIOT Act's expansion or FISA powers, wiretaps, seizure of email, access to cloud stored records, CALEA, the state secrets doctrine, and other electronic surveillance related matters. Allowing President Obama's request to extend Mueller's tenure would facilitate ongoing continuity in policy.

Section 1101 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (Public Law No. 90-351) provided that when the then FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover ceased service, subsequent FBI Directors would be limited to one ten year term. Hoover died in office in 1972.

Since then, no FBI Director has served his entire ten year term, although Louis Freeh and William Webster came close.

Subsection (b) of the statute limits the FBI Director's term to ten years. This bill would amend the statute by adding an additional subsection (c) that provides as follows:

"With respect to the individual who is the incumbent in the office of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the date of enactment of this subsection--
  (1) subsection (b) shall be applied--
    (A) in the first sentence, by substituting `12 years´ for `ten years´; and
    (B) in the second sentence, by substituting `12-year term´ for `10-year´ term; and
  (2) the third sentence of subsection (b) shall not apply."

Sen. Leahy, who is the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC), stated that President Obama, and not Mueller, requested this extension. Sen. Leahy also praised Mueller's service, and noted that extension of his term enjoys the support of Republicans, including Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (HJC).

The SJC's agenda for its executive business meeting of June 9, 2011, lists consideration of S 1103. The SJC will hold a hearing on this matter on June 8, 2011.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the SJC, is an original cosponsor of this bill. He stated in the Senate that Mueller's term should be extended, and that he "has done an admirable job of reforming an agency under difficult circumstances". However, he proceeded to excoriate the FBI. See, Congressional Record, May 26, 2011, at Pages S3437-8.

Sen. Grassley said that "the FBI has also had its share of failures. These include maintaining secret files on elected officials, the investigation of civil rights leaders, the tragedies at Ruby Ridge and Waco, missing internal spy Robert Hanssen, the corruption and misuse of mob informants in the Boston field office, and the failure to connect the dots leading up to the 9/11 attacks. The FBI has also had problems in failing to manage high-profile projects, such as the procurement of information technology upgrades. They have failed to address personnel problems, such as the double standard for discipline that the Justice Department inspector general found agents believe exists. And there were the serious issues that required reform at the FBI crime lab. These are black marks on the history of the FBI."

He also referenced the FBI's "unwillingness to own up to mistakes. Too often, officials sought to protect the agency's reputation at the expense of the truth. My concerns are magnified by the way the FBI treats internal whistleblowers who come forward and report fraud and abuse. All too often, instead of owning up to problems and fixing them, they circle the wagons and shoot the messenger. The FBI is all too often the exact opposite of an agency that can accept constructive criticism, from both those inside and out."

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Rep. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) are also original cosponsors of the bill.

5/26. On May 12, 2011, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and others introduced S 978 [LOC | WW], an untitled bill to amend 18 U.S.C. § 2319 and 17 U.S.C. § 506 to toughen penalties for criminal copyright infringement by streaming.

The statute already provides a maximum five year sentence for those who commercially provide infringing works via internet downloading. This bill would also provide a maximum five year sentence for those who provide infringing works by streaming. Currently, infringement by streaming is subject to a maximum sentence of one year.

On March 15, 2011, Victoria Espinel, the U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, offered twenty legislative recommendations to Congress regarding intellectual property law. It proposed the change that is contained in this bill. Although, this bill provides more specific language.

Espinel's report recommended this. "Ensure that, in appropriate circumstances, infringement by streaming, or by means of other similar new technology, is a felony". See also, story titled "Espinel Offers 20 IP Legislative Recommendations" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,212, March 30, 2011.

The Independent Film & Television Alliance (IFTA), Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) issued a release in which they praised this bill. See also, release of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

Sandra Aistars of the Copyright Alliance stated in a release that this bill "would make the illegal streaming of copyrighted works a felony, the same penalty as uploading or downloading infringing files. With the growth in popularity of streaming content, especially live content, this legislation represents a logical and positive step toward combating the overall problem of online infringement."

The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) agenda for its executive business meeting of June 9, 2011, lists consideration of S 1103. It was on the agenda for the SJC's May 26 meeting, but was held over.

The two original cosponsors of this bill are Sen. Christopher Coons (D-DE) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX).

Bill Summary. 17 U.S.C. § 506 is the Copyright Act's section that pertains to "Criminal Offenses". It provides, in part, that "Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under" 18 U.S.C. § 2319.

18 U.S.C. § 2319 is the section of the Criminal Code titled "Criminal Infringement of a Copyright". Subsection 2319(b) sets the maximum prison terms for violation of 17 U.S.C. § 506. Subsection 2319(b)(3) sets the basic rule -- one year maximum, and misdemeanor status. Subsections 2319(b)(1) and (2) provide for higher maximums, and felony status, under two sets of circumstances.

Subsection 2319(b)(2) provides for a maximum sentence of ten years if the offense is a felony, and its is the defendant's second criminal copyright offense.

Subsection 2319(b)(1) provides for a maximum sentence of five years "if the offense consists of the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of at least 10 copies or phonorecords, of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $2,500". Notably, this does not include "public performance" or "streaming".

This bill would set a five year maximum sentence for another set of circumstances, involving "public performances", if`"(A) the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works; and (B)(i) the total retail value of the performances, or the total economic value of such public performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, would exceed $2,500; or (ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000".

This bill would also amend subsection 2319(f), which contains definitions. It provides that "public performance" refers back to the exclusive rights of copyright codified at 17 U.S.C. § 106(4) and (6). That is, "the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following ... (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly ... (6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission". Currently, subsection 2319(f) only refers to "reproduction" and "distribution", and subsection 106(1) and (3), which codify exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute.

The bill would also add references to public performance in 17 U.S.C. § 506.

17 U.S.C. § 101 contains definitions for the Copyright Act. It defines both "perform" and "publicly". The latter includes "to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work ... by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times".

In sum, while this bill does not use the colloquial term "streaming", it uses the legal term "public performances by electronic means", which encompasses the concept of streaming.

5/20. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted and released the seventh in a series of reports required by Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 regarding "the availability of advanced telecommunications capability".

This report [99 pages in PF] concludes that because "26 million Americans live in areas unserved by broadband", and because "approximately one-third of Americans do not subscribe", "broadband is not being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion".

This report's conclusion was predictable, because it was necessary for the Commission's majority to continue their goal of instituting a regulatory regime for, among other things, broadband internet access service (BIAS) providers.

Section 706 requires that the FCC conduct studies, and write reports, that "determine whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion". It also states that if the FCC's "determination is negative, it shall take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market". Thus, a negative conclusion gives the FCC a pretext for taking action.

The FCC has express statutory authority to do some of the things that the FCC is doing, and could do, to remove barriers and promote competition.

However, the FCC's majority has searched for a pretext to regulate BIAS providers, because the Congress has enacted no statute that expressly delegates authority to the FCC to regulate the BIAS providers.

The FCC's August 2008 order [67 pages in PDF] regarding Comcast, which asserted regulatory authority under its August 2005 policy statement [3 pages in PDF] was rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) in its April 6, 2010, opinion [36 pages in PDF] in Comcast v. FCC.

In 2010, the FCC considered reclassifying BIAS as Title II telecommunications service, which the FCC has broad authority to regulate, but did not do so. Rather, the FCC issued a Section 706 report [143 pages in PDF] in July of 2010 asserting that broadband is not being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion. Then, it adopted rules regulating BIAS providers in December of 2010, asserting authority under Section 706, and the finding of its July 2010 report.

The December 2010 Report and Order (R&O) [194 pages in PDF] asserts that Section 706 "authorizes the Commission to address practices, such as blocking VoIP communications, degrading or raising the cost of online video, or denying end users material information about their broadband service, that have the potential to stifle overall investment in Internet infrastructure and limit competition in telecommunications markets." (See, R&O at Paragraph 120. That R&O is FCC 10-201 in GN Docket No. 09-191 and WC Docket No. 07-52.)

The December 2010 rules will be subjected to judicial review. The FCC's already tenuous legal argument would have been further impeached had it not reached the conclusion that it did in the just released report.

The R&O asserts that Section 706 "provides the Commission a specific delegation of legislative authority to promote the deployment of advanced services, including by means of the open Internet rules adopted today". (See, Paragraph 122.)

Moreover, Section 706 authority "was triggered" by the July 2010 report. (See, Paragraph 123.)

The just released report states that "Since last year's broadband progress report, the Commission has taken a number of actions to fulfill Congress's mandate to accelerate deployment by removing barriers to investment and promoting competition. For example, the Commission ... adopted the Open Internet Order ..." (See, Paragraph 6.)

In order to reach the conclusion that broadband is not being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion, the just released FCC report engages in linguistic sleight of hand in order to give the words of Section 706 meanings that are contrary to their plain meanings. For example, the statute does not use the term "broadband". Rather, the statute concerns "advanced telecommunications". The report treats this as "broadband". Also, the statute states that if the FCC makes a negative finding, it shall take action to increase competition in the "telecommunication" market. The FCC construes this too as though it were "broadband", even though the FCC has declared that broadband internet access is an information service and not a telecommunications service.

However, the FCC report's most significant departure from the plain meaning of the statute pertains to the words "availability" and "capability" in the phrase "availability of advanced telecommunications capability". The report treats these words as though they were "subscription". That is, there exists broadband internet capability that is available to well over 90% of the population. However, many persons for whom service is available do not subscribe.

In addition, this report excludes mobile broadband from broadband. It states that "we exclude mobile wireless data from our conclusions in this report", event though it finds that "mobile services capable of actual speeds above the 4 Mbps/1 Mbps benchmark are becoming increasingly common". (See, Paragraphs 26 and 27.)

Chairman Genachowski wrote in his statement that "approximately one third of Americans -- more than 100 million people -- don't subscribe to broadband. America's broadband adoption rate is approximately 67 percent". He concluded that "too many Americans are still being left behind".

FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell dissented, writing his his statement that this report contains "flawed analyses and conclusions".

Former FCC Chairman Michael Powell called the report's conclusion "regrettable and wrong".

Powell, who is now the head of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA), stated in a release that the report's conclusions "are regrettable and wrong -- not only because they fly in the face of the $250 billion investment made by broadband providers since 2008 to improve and extend networks, but also because they appear to ignore the Commission’s own facts. The Commission’s own research shows that 95 percent of U.S homes have access to high-speed broadband service and more than 90 percent of consumers are satisfied with the speed of their service."

Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Technology, stated in a release that "It's difficult to understand how an objective look at the facts can lead the FCC to conclude that our progress on broadband is lacking. Congress has tasked the Commission in section 706 with examining the ‘availability’ and ‘deployment’ of high-speed broadband, and the numbers don’t lie. Even the FCC has confessed that wired broadband is available to 95 percent of Americans and that wireless broadband is available to 98 percent. This doesn’t even account for new satellite broadband offerings, which the FCC has recognized as a potentially efficient way of ensuring universal coverage. Even the small percent of homes that don’t have access is shrinking. Last year the FCC estimated that 8.9 million out of 130 million households did not have high-speed broadband available; using the same analysis, the FCC itself estimates that number has dropped to 4.6 million."

Walter McCormack, head of the US Telecom, stated in a release that "The FCC's own data show that 95 percent of Americans have access to wired broadband, and 93 percent are happy with their service. Moreover, private sector investment in broadband grew from $63 billion to $66 billion from 2009-10, according to USTelecom and Yankee Group data. Clearly the private sector is doing its part -- broadband has been deployed to virtually every corner of America where a business case can be made for investment."

McCormack added that "It is now important for government to do its part as well -- by taking action to remove barriers to investment, eliminate uneconomic regulation, make additional spectrum available, and provide financial assistance to areas where it is economically unfeasible to provide broadband on an unsupported basis."

This report is required by Section 706 of the 1996 Act, and is codified at 47 U.S.C. § 157 notes. The statute provides, in part, that the FCC shall regularly "initiate a notice of inquiry concerning the availability of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans (including, in particular, elementary and secondary schools and classrooms) ... In the inquiry, the Commission shall determine whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion. If the Commission's determination is negative, it shall take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market." (Parentheses in original.)

For prior reports, see:

• 1st report [WordPerfect] released in January of 1999.
• 2nd report [157 pages in PDF] released in August of 2000.
• 3rd report [118 pages in PDF] released in February of 2002.
• 4th report [60 pages in PDF] released in September of 2004. See also, story titled "FCC Releases Report on Availability of Broadband" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 976, September 14, 2004.
• 5th report [76 pages in PDF] released in June of 2008. See also, story titled "FCC Report Concludes Broadband Services Are Being Deployed in a Reasonable and Timely Fashion" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,734, March 20, 2008.
• 6th report [143 pages in PDF] released July 20, 2010. See also, story titled "FCC Releases 6th Section 706 Report" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,114, July 29, 2010.

The just released report is FCC 11-78 in GN Docket No. 10-159.

The House will meet in pro forma session only. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for the week.

The Senate will meet in pro forma session only.

5:00 PM. Deadline to submit notices of intent to testify at the Copyright Office's (CO) June 10 public hearing in its inquiry in to possible mechanisms, methods, and recommendations for phasing out the statutory licensing requirements set forth in 17 U.S.C. § 111, § 119, and § 122. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 90, May 10, 2011, at Pages 27091-27092. See also, story titled "Copyright Office to Hold Hearing on Phasing Out Statutory Licensing Requirements" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,238, May 11, 2011.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regarding its April 28, 2011, event titled "Public Workshop: Debt Collection 2.0: Protecting Consumers as Technologies Change". See, notice in the Federal Register, March 15, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 50, at Pages 14010-14014, and story titled "FTC Workshop to Address Use of Facebook and Other New Technologies for Debt Collection" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,204, March 15, 2011.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [52 pages in PDF] regarding retransmission consent negotiations. The FCC adopted and released this NPRM on March 3, 2011. It is FCC 11-31 in MB Docket No. 10-71. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 28, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 59, at Pages 17071-17088.

Deadline to submit comments regarding, and deadline to register to attend the open portion of, the Executive Office of the President's (EOP) National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee's (NSTAC) meeting on June 2 at 2:00 PM. The agenda includes government use of cloud computing, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) communications, communications resiliency, commercial satellite mission assurance, implementation of a national public safety broadband network, and secure communications for mobile devices. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 95, Tuesday, May 17, 2011, at Pages 28443-28444.

Three provisions of surveillance law are scheduled to sunset. The three provisions are codified in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). They pertain to (1) treating lone wolf individuals like agents of foreign governments or terrorists organizations (see, 50 U.S.C. § 1801(b)'s definition of the term "agent of a foreign power"), (2) access to business records, including library records (see, 50 U.S.C. § 1861 as amended by Section 215 of the 2001 surveillance act), and (3) roving wiretaps (see, 50 U.S.C. § 1805).

Memorial Day. This is a federal holiday. See, OPM list of 2011 federal holidays.

The House will not meet. However, it will meet the rest of the week. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

The Senate will not meet.

Supreme Court holiday.

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

The Senate will meet in pro forma session only.

5:30 PM. The American Constitution Society (ACS), National LGBT Bar Association, and other interest groups will host a news conference and reception to condemn the filibuster of the nomination of Goodwin Liu to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir), and address judicial nominations. RSVP to press at acslaw dot org. Location: Jones Day, 51 Louisiana Ave.,  NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) regarding amending its aviation service regulations regarding audio visual warning systems (AVWS). This FCC adopted this item on February 22, 2011, and released the text on March 4, 2011. It is FCC 11-25 in WT Docket No. 10-61. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 30, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 61, at Pages 17613-17615.

Deadline to submit petitions to deny AT&T's acquisition of T-Mobile USA to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). See, FCC Public Notice (PN). It is DA 11-799 in WT Docket No. 11-65. See also, story titled "FCC Sets Comments Deadlines for AT&T T-Mobile USA Antitrust Merger Review" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,229, April 29, 2011.

9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Governments Should Neither Subsidize nor Operate Broadband Networks to Compete with Commercial Ones". The speakers will be James Baller (Baller Herbst Law Group), Jeffrey Eisenach (Navigant Economics), Harold Feld (Public Knowledge), and Robert Atkinson (ITIF). See, notice and registration page. Location: ITIF/ITIC, Suite 610A, 1101 K St., NW.

9:30 - 11:30 AM. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing titled "Cybersecurity: Assessing The Nation's Ability To Address The Growing Cyber Threat". See, notice. Location: Room 2154, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on the Constitution will hold an oversight hearing on the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division. See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

10:30 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will hold a hearing titled "Promoting Broadband, Jobs and Economic Growth Through Commercial Spectrum Auctions". The witnesses will be Christopher McCabe (CTIA), Michelle Connolly (Duke University), Dean Brenner (Qualcomm), Harold Feld (Public Knowledge), Todd Schurz (Schurz Communications), and Bert Ellis (Titan Broadcasting Management). See, notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

11:30 AM. Cisco Systems will host an event to release and discuss a report titled "Forecast of Global Internet Traffic, 2010 - 2015". Registration and lunch begin at 11:30 AM. At 12:00 NOON Surag Shetty (Cisco) will present the report. At 12:30 PM there will be a panel discussion titled "The Impact of Internet Growth". The speakers will be Blair Levin (Aspen Institute), John Horrigan (TechNet), Carlos Rodríguez (Telefónica Internacional USA Inc.), Philippe Dongier (World Bank), and Robert Pepper (Cisco). RSVP to CiscoRSVP at 463 dot com. For more information, contact Lauren Sacks 202-463-0013 ext.207. Location: National Press Club, 13th floor, 529 14th St.,  NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "Copy Owners v. Copyright Owners: Is the First-Sale Doctrine Dead in the Digital Era?". The speakers will be Scott Bain (Software & Information Industry Association), Jonathan Band (Policybandwidth.com), Gregory Beck (Public Citizen Litigation Group), Seth Greenstein (Constantine Cannon), Matthew McGill (Gibson Dunn), John Mitchell (Interaction Law), and Daniel Volchok (Wilmer Hale). The price to attend ranges from $10 to $45. No CLE credits. The DC Bar has a history of barring reporters from its events. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: DC Bar, 1101 K St., NW.

1:30 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet will hold a hearing titled "Promoting Investment and Protecting Commerce Online: The ART Act, the NET Act and Illegal Streaming". See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

1:30 PM. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will hold a hearing regarding its ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 25, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 79, at Pages 22854-22861. See also, story titled "USPTO to Hold Hearing on Inter Partes Reexamination Proceedings" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,226, April 26, 2011. Location: USPTO, South Auditorium of Madison West, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) regarding internet based telecommunications relay services (TRS). The FCC adopted this item on April 5, 2011, and released it on April 6, 2011. It is FCC 11-54 in CG Docket No. 10-51. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 2, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 84, at Pages 24437-24442.

Supreme Court conference day (discussion of argued cases, and decision on cert petitions). Closed.

9:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade will hold a hearing titled "Sony and Epsilon: Lessons for Data Security Legislation". See, notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the Copyright Office (CO) regarding bringing sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 under federal jurisdiction. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 89, Monday, May 9, 2011, at Pages 26769-26771. See also, notice in the Federal Register, November 3, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 212, at Pages 67777-67781, and story titled "Library of Congress Issues NOI on Extending Copyright Act to Pre 1972 Sound Recordings" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,150, November 8, 2011. Location: Copyright Hearing Room, Room LM-408, Madison Building, 101 Independence Ave., SE.

10:00 AM. The House Small Business Committee's (SBC) Subcommittee on Healthcare and Technology will hold a hearing titled "Not What the Doctor Ordered: Health IT Barriers for Small Medical Practices". See, notice. Location: Room 2360, Rayburn Building.

10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Executive Office of the President's (EOP) National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will hold a closed meeting. The NSTAC will "review information on implementation of the National Public Safety Broadband Network as well as secure communications for mobile devices". See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 95, Tuesday, May 17, 2011, at Pages 28443-28444. Location: undisclosed.

1:00 PM. The US Telecom will host a webcast seminar titled "IPv6 and Telecom Networks". The speaker will be Dan York (Voxeo). This event is free. See, notice.

10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Executive Office of the President's (EOP) National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will hold a meeting that is open to the public. The agenda includes government use of cloud computing, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) communications, communications resiliency, and commercial satellite mission assurance. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 95, Tuesday, May 17, 2011, at Pages 28443-28444. Location: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 1615 H St., NW.

12:30 - 2:30 AM. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's (HOGRC) Subcommittee on Government Organization will hold a hearing titled "IRS E-File And Identity Theft". See, notice. Location: Room 2247, Rayburn Building.

Day one of a two day meeting of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women. The agenda includes discussion of "stalking and technology". See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 92, Thursday, May 12, 2011, at Pages 27664-27665. The deadline to register is May 27. Location: Fairfax at Embassy Row Hotel, 2100 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

9:00 AM - 1:30 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the Copyright Office (CO) regarding bringing sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 under federal jurisdiction. Location: Copyright Hearing Room, Room LM-408, Madison Building, 101 Independence Ave., SE.

Day two of a two day meeting of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women. The agenda includes discussion of "stalking and technology". See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 92, Thursday, May 12, 2011, at Pages 27664-27665. Location: Fairfax at Embassy Row Hotel, 2100 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

Deadline to register to attend the June 8-9 meeting of the Department of the Interior's (DOI) National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC). See, NGAC notice and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 95, Tuesday, May 17, 2011, at Pages 28449-28450.

5/19. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) released a paper [18 pages PDF] titled "University Research Funding: The United States is Behind and Falling". It laments the level of funding of research at U.S. universities. It argues that federal and state governments should spend more, and Congress should give businesses a greater tax credit for research at universities than for in house research.

This paper asserts that "our innovation system is faltering". It states that "in 2008 the United States ranked 22nd out of 30 countries in government-funded university research and 21st in business-funded university research".

The solution, this paper argues, is for the federal government and the states to give more money to universities. In addition, to incent businesses to give more money to universities, the paper argues that the Congress should enact a "collaborative R&D tax credit that provides companies with a generous tax credit for expenditures on research conducted at universities".

It adds that "Congress should allow firms to take a flat credit of 20 percent for all collaborative research conducted at universities (and at federal laboratories and research consortia)". (Parentheses in original.)

This paper is silent on research conducted by businesses in house, and state and federal policies that may inhibit such research, such not increasing, modernizing, and making permanent the R&D tax credit.

There already is an R&D tax credit, albeit scheduled to sunset at the end of this year. Moreover, it covers collaborative research conducted at universities. This paper does not explain with particularity that what it is advocating is creating a greater incentive for businesses to fund university research than to conduct research in house.

That is, the existing credit has two calculation formulas. First, the basic credit rate is 20%. But it only applies to research over a certain base amount related to the business's historical research intensity, which is the ratio of its research spending to gross receipts back in the 1980s. It is outdated and obsolete. Second, the alternative simplified credit (ASC) rate is 14%. It applies only to qualified research expenses that exceed 50 percent of the average qualified research expenses for the three preceding taxable years.

For a more detailed explanation of this topic, see the Department of the Treasury's March 25, 2011, report [13 pages in PDF] titled "Investing in U.S. Competitiveness: The Benefits of Enhancing the Research and Experimentation (R&E) Tax Credit"

In contrast, the ITIF proposes at credit rate of 20%. Moreover, the ITIF proposes that it apply to all collaborative research conducted at universities, federal laboratories and research consortia.

The authors of this paper are Robert Atkinson and Luke Stewart, both of the ITIF.

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 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
3034 Newark St. NW, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2011 David Carney. All rights reserved.