|Copyright Office to Hold Hearing
on Resale Royalty Right
3/29. The Copyright Office (CO) published a
in the Federal Register (FR) that announces that it will hold a public hearing
regarding creating a resale royalty right (RRR) in the United States.
The hearing will be held on April 23, 2013 from 1:00 to 5:00 PM in the CO
Hearing Room, LM-408 of the Madison Building, Library of Congress, 101
Independence Ave., SE. This notice does not state a deadline for
requesting to testify. It lists in detail the topics on which the CO seeks
"further input". See, FR, Vol. 78, No. 61, March 29, 2013, at Pages
Outline of this Article:
Comments of Artists and Creators.
Comments from the Tech Sector.
Comments of Auction Houses.
Comments of Museums.
Agenda for CO Hearing.
Introduction. The general concept is that a RRR is a government
created rule that the creator of certain works of visual art and other physical
things, after he has sold all of his interest in the work, and in the absence of
any contract, is nevertheless entitled to receive a portion of the sales price
for all subsequent second secondary sales. Moreover, this RRR is inalienable.
In the 112th Congress. Rep. Jerrold
Nadler (D-NY) introduced HR 3688
the "Equity for Visual Artists Act of 2011" or "EVAA", and
former Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) introduced S 2000
the companion bill in the Senate.
These bills purport to create a resale royalty right (RRR). In fact, they would
create a process that would be more accurately described as a tax and subsidy program,
in which a small number of high value auction house sales would be heavily taxed, and
non-profit museums would be subsidized pursuant to CO regulation and oversight.
On May 17, 2012, Rep. Nadler
(at right) and Sen. Kohl sent a letter to the CO asking that it "assess how
existing law affects and supports visual artists, and how a federal resale royalty
provision would affect copyright law, visual
artists and those involved in the sale of art work".
The CO issued a notice of inquiry (NOI) in September of 2012. See,
in the FR, Vol. 77, No. 182, September 19, 2012, at Pages 58175-58179. See also,
titled "Copyright Office Requests Comments on Creating a Resale Royalty Right
for Visual Artists" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 2,464, October 18, 2012. (This article also addresses in some
detail the relevant provisions of the Berne convention, implementation of the
RRR in Europe, and the EVAA.)
The CO has published all comments in response to this NOI in its web site.
web page with hyperlinks to comments.
Comments of Artists and Creators. Several groups that represent artists and other
creators of visual works submitted comments urging the creation of a RRR,
although not the proposal embodied in the EVAA.
The Artists Rights Society (ARS) wrote in its
comment [8 pages in PDF] that unlike composers, song writers, playwrights,
screenwriters, and actors, "visual artists are the only members of the creative
community in the U.S. who do not receive residual payments for their works".
Instead, "The benefits derived from the appreciation in their works accrue
predominantly to collectors, auction houses, and galleries."
The American Society of Media Photographers
(ASMP) wrote in its
comment that "fundamental fairness requires some kind
of royalty to the creators of visual artworks upon subsequent sales, when the
artworks have reached at least a certain value. Factors such as changes in a
photographer's stature and reputation and market forces often create significant
increases in values between sales of a given work of visual art. Generally, at
least part of those increases result from the photographer’s lifetime efforts to
build a career -- efforts that are not always directly compensated."
The ASMP also argues that a RRR should "should apply to
all categories of visual artworks without limitation", and not just the limited
categories identified in the EVAA. It also argues that the price threshold
should be $5,000, and that a 5% rate would be reasonable.
The American Society of Illustrators
Partnership (ASIP) wrote in its
comment [24 pages in PDF] that the Congress should enact legislation that
provides "a 7% federal resale royalty right, with half of the royalties
collected to be distributed to the artist and half used to promote the interests
of living artists by subsidizing museum purchases of contemporary works."
The ASIP continued that the RRR "restores a measure of equity by
allowing the artist to share in the increased value of his or her works. It also
recognizes the ongoing stake an artist has in the economic value of their work.
Royalties received within an artist’s lifetime help sustain a career to continue
creating new works. A lifetime spent creating a body of work also means the
burden of creating and maintaining an archive. This burden is inevitably passed
onto the artist’s estate. A resale royalty stream can help support the
considerable work that heirs contribute to the creation and maintenance of an
art market, including preservation and cataloguing, promotion, and establishing
provenance and authenticity."
See also, in support of creating a RRR,
comment of the Graphic Artists
comment of the American Photographic
Comments from the Tech Sector. eBay wrote in its
comment [4 pages in PDF] that a RRR would undermine the first sale doctrine,
and harm the digital economy.
It wrote that it "opposes barriers to and restrictions on free commerce and
defends the free alienability of property that individuals legally acquire. Such free
alienability of property is part of the fabric of the U.S. economic system and
underlies the common sense understanding that Americans have about the goods they
buy, the property they own and how their possessions are affected by the interests
of third parties."
eBay added that "as the U.S. moves increasingly towards a digital economy
there will be important first sale issues that will arise. It is important that
barriers are not erected to impede future innovative e-commerce models focused on
the digital economy."
The Internet Association (IA) and
Computer and Communications Industry Association
(CCIA) wrote in a
joint comment [5 pages in PDF] that a RRR is not needed.
"Enacting a federal resale royalty right would significantly erode the
first sale doctrine." Moreover, "The first sale doctrine has allowed
secondary markets to flourish. Those markets provide consumers with ready access
to affordable goods and provide economic incentives for valuable goods unwanted by
their initial owners to remain in the stream of commerce."
In addition, the IA and CCIA wrote that creating a RRR would "exacerbate
existing unresolved problems with copyright law, such as the lawful exploitation
of so-called ``orphan works.´´"
The IA is a newly formed group, or reorganization of an old group, that lists
as its members Google, Amazon, eBay, Facebook, LinkedIn, Salesforce.com, and other
It does not list any of its directors or staff in its web site. Erik Stallman
signed the comment as counsel for the IA. Other persons associated with the IA
include Markham Erickson and Michael Beckerman.
Comments of Auction Houses. Creation of a RRR would affect the operations of
auction houses. However, the EVAA targets the art auctions of a handful of major
U.S. auction businesses.
Two high end art auction houses,
Christie's and Sotheby's,
vociferously oppose the EVAA and the creation of a RRR. They submitted two
lengthy comments. The
first comment [16 pages in PDF] addressed the policy merits.
second comment [21 pages in PDF] argues that creation of a resale royalty
right would violate several Constitutional rights of owners of works of art, if
applied retroactively to works that have already been created. This comment
argues that retroactivity would violate both the due process and takings clauses.
This comment does not argue that retroactive application of a RRR would
violate the intellectual property clause. The clause clearly provides that the
purpose of copyright is to incent creation ("To promote the Progress of Science
and useful Arts"), and retroactive application would do nothing to incent
creation of works that have already been created. However, the Supreme Court
rejected a challenge to a retroactive copyright statute in Eldred v. Ashcroft,
537 U.S. 186. See, January 15, 2003
titled "Supreme Court Upholds CTEA in Eldred v. Ashcroft" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 584, January 16, 2003.
This comment also argues that a RRR that applies only to a few auction
such as the EVAA, would constitute an unconstitutional bill of attainder.
What might be most significant is who filed the second comment --
(at right) is a former Solicitor General of the United States, and one of the
premier federal appellate litigators. His filing puts the CO and Congress on
notice that if a RRR is enacted into law, it will likely face a
formidable challenge in the courts.
Clement long ago clerked for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. He is now
a partner in the Washington DC law firm of Bancroft.
Clement represented states that challenged the constitutionality of the
Congressional statute that created the ObamaCare regime. He also represented House
Republicans before the Supreme Court in defense of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Such work has endeared Clement to House Republicans, who it should be recalled, control
the House Judiciary Committee (HJC), which
will stand in judgment of any RRR bill.
Comments of Museums. Some proposals for creating a RRR in the U.S.
provide that some of the "royalties" from covered secondary sales be
distributed to museums. However, the Association of
Art Museum Directors (AAMD) submitted a
comment in which it argued that RRR "systems ultimately do little to help
living artists", and that "such a royalty regime will not assist living
artists or encourage the creation and dissemination to the public of new works of
Moreover, the AAMD raised numerous objections to the EVAA. It wrote that "the
bill may in fact have harmful consequences for artists, the museums that exhibit
their artwork, and ultimately the public".
the Register of Copyright, previously worked for the
Agenda for CO Hearing. The FR notice states that the CO seeks further
input on issues raised by the written comments.
The notice states that hearing "will cover the following topics: (1) The
changing legal landscape; (2) portability of the secondary art market; (3)
effect on the primary art market and the incentive to create new works; (4)
first sale and the free alienability of property; (5) visual artists and sales
of works; (6) the Equity for Visual Artists Act; (7) effect on museums; and (8)
Portability refers to the possibility that if the U.S. enacted a RRR statute people
would take their art works abroad for resale. The CO asks "What factors, other
than implementation of a resale royalty right, affect the portability of the art
market? What are the experiences in countries following the implementation of a
resale royalty where one did not exist previously? For example, if China implements
a resale royalty, how would this impact the worldwide market?"
Regarding the first sale doctrine, the CO asks "To what extent, if any, are
the first sale doctrine and a resale royalty right incompatible? Would a resale
royalty have a detrimental effect on the initial sale of the artwork? Should the
right to claim royalties on secondary sales be waivable and, if so, what effect
would that have on initial sales of artwork?"
Regarding the EVAA, the CO notice states that it "is interested in hearing
more about what provisions should or should not appear in any resale royalty
legislation and, more specifically, views on the following EVAA provisions:"
works covered, types of transactions covered, threshold price, percentage assessed,
and other things.
Since some proposals would transfer some RRR collections to museums, but the
CO received only one comment from a museum or museum group, the CO requests
"more about the impact of these grants on museums' purchasing behavior".
Finally, the CO notice states that it is interested in hearing more about the
constitutional objections raised by Christie's and Sotheby's: due process,
takings, and bill of attainder.
|Public Knowledge Advocates Permanent Fix for
Cell Phone Unlocking
3/28. The Public Knowledge (PK),
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and others sent a
to the House Judiciary Committee (HJC)
and Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC)
regarding legislation that would address assertion of the anti-circumvention
provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to prevent unlocking
of cell phones.
They argued that "copyright law should not stand in the way of consumers
using their own phones with the wireless network of their choice".
They elaborated that "Codifying an unlocking exemption brings the law in
line with common sense and will prevent yet another return to a flawed process that
creates a perpetual re-lobbying of many settled issues every three years."
S 517 [LOC
| WW] and
HR 1123 [LOC
| WW], both
titled the "Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act", would
have the effect of reinstating a unlocking exemption for three years. See, stories
titled "Sen. Leahy Introduces Bill to Reinstate Librarian of Congress's Cell
Phone Unlocking Exemption" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,533, March 11, 2013,
and House Judiciary Committee Members Introduce Cell Phone Unlocking Bill" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,536, March 19, 2013.
The letter continues that "While some Congressional proposals would return
this decision to the Library of Congress, more permanent proposals from Senators
Wyden and Klobuchar ensure that solutions to this problem will be lasting. We urge
the Congress to remove wireless unlocking from this bureaucratic treadmill and enact
language similar to the proposals from these legislators."
Actually, these two bills are quite different.
Sen. Ron Wyden's (D-OR) S 467
"Wireless Device Independence Act of 2013", would provide a permanent
change in the DMCA. See, story titled "Sen. Wyden Introduces Bill to Amend
DMCA to Create an Exemption for Unlocking" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,533,
March 11, 2013.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar's (D-MN)
S 481 [LOC
| WW |
PDF], the "Wireless Consumer Choice Act", would direct the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) to write regulations. See, story titled "Sen.
Klobuchar Introduces Bill to Authorize FCC to Direct Wireless Device Unlocking",
also in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,533, March 11, 2013.
The PK letter also states that "These proposals enact sound
public policy that can be made consistent with our existing international
agreements. To the extent that a perceived conflict may exist between them and
any free trade agreements, Congress can instruct the U.S. Trade Representative
to renegotiate any such ill-advised provisions and ensure that our trade
agreements reflect our domestic law and policy."
|This issue contains the following items:
• Copyright Office to Hold Hearing on Resale Royalty Right
• Public Knowledge Advocates Permanent Fix for Cell Phone Unlocking
• FCC Addresses Cellphone RF Exposure
• People and Appointments
New items are highlighted in
|Monday, April 1
The House will not meet the week of April 1 through
April 5, except for pro forma sessions. The House will return on Tuesday,
April 9. See, House
for 113th Congress, 1st Session.
The Senate will not meet the week of April 1 through
April 5, except for pro forma sessions. The Senate will return on Monday,
10:00 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Chrimar Systems v.
Foundry Networks, App. Ct. No. 2012-1641, an appeal from the
U.S. District Court
(EDMich) in a patent case. Panel A. Location: Courtroom 201, 717 Madison
Deadline to submit nominations to the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation. See,
notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 1, January 2, 2013, at Page
90. See also, "National Medal of Technology and Innovation Recipients
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,498, December 26, 2012. (The USPTO announced
in an earlier notice
that the deadline is 5:00 PM on March 31.)
Tentative date for the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC) to announce the winners of its competition regarding
developing a solution for blocking illegal robocalls on landlines and mobile phones.
notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 205, October 23, 2012, at
Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission's
(FCC) Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) in response to its
Public Notice (PN) regarding "Rate of Return for Connect America Cost
Model". The FCC released this PN on February 28, 2013. It is DA 13-311 in WC
Docket No. 10-90. See also,
in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 56, March 22, 2013, at Pages 17624-17625.
Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) replies
to oppositions to the petitions for reconsideration filed in the FCC's low power
radio service proceeding, MB Docket No. 99-25. See, FCC
notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 44, March 6, 2013, at Page
14490. See for example,
filed by the Prometheus Radio Project.
|Tuesday, April 2
The Senate will meet at 10:45 AM in pro
forma session only.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court
of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Cisco Systems v.
Alberta Telecommunications Research Center, App. Ct. No. 2012-1687, an
appeal from the U.S. District Court
(NDCal) in a patent case involving technology for telecommunications networks.
Panel D. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.
12:00 NOON. The
Cato Institute will host an panel discussion titled "Travel Surveillance,
Travel Intrusion". The speakers will be Edward Hasbrouck (author of the
book titled "Practical Nomad"), Ginger McCall
(Electronic Privacy Information
Center), and Jim Harper
(Cato). Lunch will be served after the program. Webcast. See,
notice. Location: Cato, Hayek Auditorium, 1000 Massachusetts
1:00 - 2:00 PM. The law firm of
Fulbright & Jaworski will host a
webcast seminar titled "International Brand Management -- How to Protect
Your Company's Most Important Asset Worldwide". The speakers will be
Travis Bachman (Carlson Companies),
Drummond (Norton Rose Australia),
Patrick Gallagher (Fulbright
& Jaworski), Paul Mussell (NCS Pearson, Inc.), and Ann Wessberg (Target
6:00 - 9:00 PM. The
DC Bar Association will host a reception
and panel discussion titled "Defending Against Cyber-Intrusions from
Both State-Sponsored and Civilian Hackers". The speakers will be
Lee (Arnold & Porter),
Suzanne Spaulding (DHS
National Protection and Programs Directorate), and
Steven Cash (Deck Prism).
The price to attend ranges from free to $20. No CLE credits. The reception will be
from 6:00 - 7:00 PM. See,
notice. For more information, call 202-626-3463. The DC Bar has a history
of barring reporters from its events. Location: Arnold & Porter, 555 12th
|Wednesday, April 3
9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information
Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a discussion of the
book titled "The Need for Speed: A New Framework for
Telecommunications Policy for the 21st Century". The speakers
will be the co-authors, Robert Litan and Hal Singer, and
Robert Atkinson (ITIF).
Location: ITIF/ITIC, Suite 610A, 1101 K St., NW.
10:00 AM. The Center for Democracy
& Technology (CDT) will host an on site and teleconferenced news
briefing regarding HR 624
PDF], the "Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act"
or "CISPA", and potential amendments to the Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act (CFAA), which is codified at
18 U.S.C. § 1030.
See, story titled "Rep. Rogers and Rep. Ruppersberger Re-Introduce CISPA"
in TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 2,525, February 19, 2013. The speakers will be Leslie Harris, Greg
Nojeim, and Kevin Bankston. For more information, contact Mark Stanley mark at
cdt dot org. Location: CDT, 11th floor, 1634 I St., NW.
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled
"Production and Distribution of Video Programming: Basics and Advanced
Issues". Prices vary. CLE credits. See,
notice. The first panel is titled "Basic Rights and
Clearance Issues for Video Programming and Distribution". The speakers will be
Ben Golant (USPTO), Mike Beller (PBS),
(Wiley Rein), Michael Turner (Discovery Communications), and Ben Ivins
(National Association of Broadcasters). The second
panel is titled "Advanced Issues in Video Programming and Distribution".
The speakers will be
Nilsson (Wiltshire Grannis),
(Arnold & Porter), John Hane
Davidson (Edwards Wildman), and Jeff Blum (DISH Network). Location:
Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1500 K
|Thursday, April 4
9:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The U.S. China
Economic and Security Review Commission will host a hearing titled
"China’s Maritime Disputes in the East and South China Seas".
notice. Free. Open to the public. Location: Room G-50, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of
Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Interdigital Communications
v. ITC, App. Ct. No. 2012-1628. LG Electronics is the intervenor. This is
an appeal from the U.S. International Trade
Commission (USITC) in No. 337-TA-800. Panel H. Location: Courtroom 402, 717
Madison Place, NW.
1:00 PM. The US Telecom will
host a webcast seminar titled "Monitoring & Optimizing Real Time IP
Networks". Free. See,
1:00 - 5:00 PM. The National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will hold another
in its series of meetings regarding mobile application transparency. See,
notice. This event will also be teleconferenced. Location: American
Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Ave., NW.
2:00 - 4:15 PM. The
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) will host a panel
discussion titled "Chinese Financial Reform". The speakers will be
Timothy Adams (Institute of International Finance), Markus Rodlauer
(International Monetary Fund), Robert Dohner (Department of the Treasury),
John Dearie (Financial Services Forum), Matthew Goodman (CSIS), and John Hamre
(CSIS). See, notice.
Location: CSIS, B 1 Conference Center, 1800 K St., NW.
Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
petitions to deny AT&T's acquisition of Atlantic Tele-Network's U.S. retail
wireless operations. See, AT&T
release of January 22, 2013, and FCC
Public Notice [5 pages in PDF], DA 13-352 in WT Docket No. 13-54.
|Friday, April 5
The Senate will meet at 3:00 PM in pro forma session only.
8:30 AM. The Department of Labor's (DOL)
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is
scheduled to release its March 2013 unemployment data.
10:00 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Creative Integrated
Systems v. Nintendo, App. Ct. No. 2012-1579, an appeal from the
Court (CDCal) in a patent case. Panel K. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison
12:15 - 1:30 PM. The
Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) newly formed Telemedicine
Ad Hoc Committee will host a brown bag lunch on the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) and wireless and wireline health technologies. Location:
Wilkinson Barker Knauer, Suite 700, 2300
N St., NW.
Extended deadline to submit comments to the Department of
Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division and
the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in connection
with their joint workshop on December 10, 2012, titled "Patent Assertion
Entity Activities". See,
Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) in response to its
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding small cell operations in
the 3550-3650 MHz band. The FCC adopted and released this NPRM on
December 12, 2012. It is FCC 12-148 in GN Docket No. 12-354. See, Public
Notice, DA 12-298, released on February 28, 2013, extending the reply comment
deadline. See also,
notice of extension in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 53, March 19,
2013, at Pages 16827-16828.
|Monday, April 8
The House will not meet.
The Senate will return from its Spring recess. It will meet
at 2:00 PM.
10:00 - 11:30 AM. The
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) will host a panel
discussion titled "China's Defense Budget". The speakers will be
Andrew Erickson (Harvard University), James Mulvenon (Defense Group, Inc.),
Jack Georgieff (CSIS), and Christopher Johnson (CSIS). See,
Location: CSIS, B1 Conference Center, 1800 K St., NW.
EXTENDED TO MAY 22.
to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding elevating the allocation
status of Earth Stations Aboard Aircraft (ESAA) in the 14.0-14.5 GHz band from
secondary to primary and whether giving ESAA licensees primary status in the
14.0-14.5 GHz band would require a change to the technical rules. The FCC
adopted this NPRM on December 20, 2012, and released it on December 28, 2012.
It is FCC 12-161 in IB Docket No. 12-376. See, original
notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 46, March 8, 2013, at Pages
14952-14957. See also, second
notice in the FR, Vol. 78, No. 61, March 29, 2013, at Page 19172.
|FCC Addresses Cellphone RF
3/29. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a
First Report and Order, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Notice of
Inquiry [201 pages in PDF] regarding the health and safety of radiofrequency
(RF) emissions from radio transmitters.
The R&O portion resolves "several issues regarding compliance
with our regulations for conducting environmental reviews under NEPA as they
relate to the guidelines for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. More
specifically, we clarify evaluation procedures and references to determine
compliance with our limits, including specific absorption rate (SAR) as a
primary metric for compliance, consideration of the pinna (outer ear) as an
extremity, and measurement of medical implant exposure. We also elaborate on
mitigation procedures to ensure compliance with our limits, including labeling
and other requirements for occupational exposure classification, clarification
of compliance responsibility at multiple transmitter sites, and labeling of
fixed consumer transmitters." (Parentheses in original. The NEPA is the National
Environmental Policy Act.)
The FNPRM portion seeks "comment on new proposals developed in
the course of this proceeding regarding compliance with our guidelines for human
exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. Our proposals reflect an effort to
provide more efficient, practical, and consistent application of evaluation
procedures to ensure compliance with our guidelines limiting human exposure to
RF energy from Commission-regulated transmitters and devices."
The NOI addresses "whether there is a need for reassessment of the Commission
radiofrequency (RF) exposure limits and policies. The Inquiry focuses on three
elements: the propriety of our existing standards and policies, possible options
for precautionary exposure reduction, and possible improvements to our equipment
authorization process and policies as they relate to RF exposure."
John Walls of the CTIA stated in a
the "CTIA welcomes the FCC's focus on cellphones and health effects. In
establishing RF emission requirements for wireless devices, the FCC has always
been guided by science and the evidence produced by impartial health
organizations and the scientific community."
He wrote, "As the GAO stated in its July 2012 report, `Scientific research
to date has not demonstrated adverse human health effects of exposure to
radio-frequency energy from mobile phone use, but research is ongoing that may
increase understanding of any possible effects.´ The U.S. Food and Drug
Administration and the National Institutes of Health have reached similar
conclusions about the state of the science."
Initial comments in response to the FNPRM and NOI will be due within 90 days
of publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Reply comments will be due
within 150 days of such publication. The FCC adopted this item on March 27, and
released it on March 29, 2013. This item is FCC 13-39 in ET Docket No. 13-84 and
ET Docket No. 03-137.
4/1. President Obama announced his intent to nominate Brian Deese to
be Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget. See, White House news
3/29. Jerry Fishman, CEO of Analog
Devices, Inc. (ADI), died. See, ADI
3/29. The Department of Commerce (DOC) published a
in the Federal Register (FR) requesting nominations for membership on its
Federal Economic Statistics Advisory Committee. The deadline is April 29, 2013.
See, FR, Vol. 78, No. 61, March 29, 2013, at Pages 19191-19192.
|About Tech Law
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
card payments page.
TLJ is published by
carney at techlawjournal dot com
3034 Newark St. NW, Washington DC, 20008.
Copyright 1998-2013 David Carney. All rights reserved.