Tech Law Journal Daily E-Mail Alert
Monday, April 1, 2013, Alert No. 2,543.
Home Page | Calendar | Subscribe | Back Issues | Reference
Copyright Office to Hold Hearing on Resale Royalty Right

3/29. The Copyright Office (CO) published a notice 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 19326-19329.

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 [LOC | WW], the "Equity for Visual Artists Act of 2011" or "EVAA", and former Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) introduced S 2000 [LOC | WW], 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.

Rep. Jerrold NadlerOn 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, notice in the FR, Vol. 77, No. 182, September 19, 2012, at Pages 58175-58179. See also, story 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. See, CO 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 Guild, and comment of the American Photographic Artists (APA).

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,, and other companies.

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.

The 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 opinion and story 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 houses,, such as the EVAA, would constitute an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

What might be most significant is who filed the second comment -- Paul Clement.

Paul ClementClement (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 art".

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".

Maria Pallante, the Register of Copyright, previously worked for the Guggenheim Museum.

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) constitutional concerns."

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 letter 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 [LOC | WW], the "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."

In This Issue
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
Washington Tech Calendar
New items are highlighted in red.
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 calendar 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, April 8.

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 Place, NW.

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 Announced" in 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. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 205, October 23, 2012, at Pages 64802-64808.

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, notice 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, and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 44, March 6, 2013, at Page 14490. See for example, petition 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 Ave., NW.

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), Frances Drummond (Norton Rose Australia), Patrick Gallagher (Fulbright & Jaworski), Paul Mussell (NCS Pearson, Inc.), and Ann Wessberg (Target Corporation).

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 Michael Hayden (Chertoff Group), Ronald 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 St., NW.

Wednesday, April 3

9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a discussion of the e-book and 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). See, notice. 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 [LOC | WW | 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), Jennifer Elgin (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 Michael Nilsson (Wiltshire Grannis), Bob Garrett (Arnold & Porter), John Hane (Pillsbury Winthrop), Seth Davidson (Edwards Wildman), and Jeff Blum (DISH Network). Location: Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1500 K St., NW.

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". See, 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, notice.

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 U.S. District Court (CDCal) in a patent case. Panel K. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

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, notice and agenda.

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, notice. Location: CSIS, B1 Conference Center, 1800 K St., NW.

EXTENDED TO MAY 22. Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its 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 Exposure

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 release that 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.

People and Appointments

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 office release.

3/29. Jerry Fishman, CEO of Analog Devices, Inc. (ADI), died. See, ADI release.

3/29. The Department of Commerce (DOC) published a notice 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 Journal

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.

Solution Graphics

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 1998-2013 David Carney. All rights reserved.