| Trade Promotion Authority
Bill Introduced |
6/26. Sen. Bob Graham
(D-FL) and Sen. Frank
Murkowski (R-AK) introduced a bill to provide the
President with trade promotion authority, formerly known as
fast track authority. Graham and Murkowski stated that the
bill includes "worker rights, environment, information
technologies, and compliance and enforcement to standard list
of principal negotiating objectives." See, Graham release
and Murkowski
release. See also, State
Department release.
Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX),
who is a cosponsor, stated in a release that "The
president, without fast-track authority, has been helplessly
sidelined in terms of trying to expand American markets
through major trade negotiations. This bill gives us a very
effective way to get America back in the game -- a game that
we are experts at playing and a game that we can win. This
bill allows trade agreements, under fast-track procedures, to
include clearly trade- related labor and environmental
concerns. But it does it in a very restrained and careful way
so that no president can go out and negotiate in a trade
agreement provisions that write domestic law." |
|
|
| 4th Circuit Rules on Class
Action Certification |
6/26. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (4thCir) issued its opinion
in Lienhart
v. Dryvit Systems, a case regarding standards
for granting a petition to appeal class certification under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f). The Appeals Court
adopted a five factor sliding scale test to guide the
consideration of such petitions. It followed, with
elaboration, the test adopted by the 11th Circuit in Prado-Steiman
v. Bush, 221 F.3d 1266 (2000). It also granted the
petition in the present case, and held that certification of
the class was inappropriate.
Rule 23(f) provides that "A court of appeals may in its
discretion permit an appeal from an order of a district court
granting or denying class action certification under this rule
if application is made to it within ten days after entry of
the order. An appeal does not stay proceedings in the district
court unless the district judge or the court of appeals so
orders." |
|
|
| ASCENT v. FCC |
| 6/26. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (DCCir) issued its opinion
in ASCENT
v. FCC, a petition for review of an FCC order.
In 1999 the FCC issued an order
in which it determined that the discount for resale provision
of Section
251(c)(4) applies when an ILEC
offers DSL service to an
end user, but not when it offers DSL service to an ISP. ASCENT filed a petition for
review of the FCC order, claiming that it is contrary to the
Communications Act, and unreasonable. The Appeals Court denied
the petition. |
|
|
| Privacy News |
6/26. The Center
for Digital Democracy released a report
[PDF] on interactive television (ITV) and privacy. The
report is titled "TV That Watches You: The Prying Eyes of
Interactive Television." It concludes that
"technology is now being put into place with the goal of
collecting information from individual consumers and families.
This information will be harvested in data profiles, which
will then be used to target individual consumers with
personalized advertising. The same technologies that threaten
privacy on the Internet, including data mining, user modeling,
and intelligent agents are now being adopted by the U.S.
television industry."
6/26. The Association
for Competitive Technology (ACT) released information
regarding a public opinion poll on attitudes regarding
privacy. The ACT stated that "76% of consumers feel that
privacy protection is a priority, but not a top priority.
Consumers put the issue of strengthening privacy protections
behind improving education, fighting crime and drug abuse,
reforming health care, dealing with the energy problem,
protecting the environment and reforming Social Security and
Medicare. Privacy was ranked 7th out of nine issues of social
concern." See, ACT release
and summary.
The ACT did not publish the poll questions. |
|
|
| What Digital Divide? |
| 6/26. The Progressive
Policy Institute (PPI), a Democratic think tank, released
a report
[PDF] titled "Clear Thinking on the Digital Divide".
The reports states that "there is no compelling rationale
for the government to subsidize computer purchases and
Internet access for individuals. Broad subsidization is not
warranted at a stage when many non-users could afford to
become users if they wished to." The report concludes
that "It's easy to forget that the Internet and the World
Wide Web are still in their infancy -- a decade ago, there
were less than 50 Web sites in existence. At such an early
stage, we would expect differential rates of takeup by
different groups of Americans. But that doesn't mean that
public policy should not work to increase Americans' access to
these key technologies. We believe that the best way to do
this for now is to help expand community access, especially by
leveraging private sector funding, leadership, and
volunteers." Andrew Leigh and Robert Atkinson wrote the
report. See also, PPI
release. |
|
|
|
| Subcommittee Holds Hearing
on Internet Taxes |
6/26. The House
Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Commercial and
Administrative Law held a hearing on HR
1552 and HR
1675, both of which are titled the "Internet Tax
Nondiscrimination Act." These two bills would prevent
state and local governments from imposing taxes on Internet
access. HR 1552 would also extend the existing ban on multiple
or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce for five years,
while HR 1675 would make it permanent. Gov. Tommy Engler and
Democrats on the Subcommittee also advocated allowing states
to impose sales taxes on e-commerce.
In late 1998 the Congress passed, and President Clinton
signed, the Internet
Tax Freedom Act (ITFA). It imposed a three year moratorium
on multiple or discriminatory taxes on e-commerce, and
Internet access taxes. This ban expires on October 21 of this
year. At the Subcommittee hearing there was no debate over
whether the existing moratorium should be extended, either
temporarily or permanently. Instead, the debate focused on
whether, and if so how, the Congress should also address the
question of allowing state and local governments to impose
sales taxes on remote sellers -- both catalogue and Internet.
Rep. Mel Watt (D-NC)
stated that he is concerned about "the unlevel playing
field between retailers who sell over the Internet and
retailers who have fixed locations within the state." He
added that "those problems will only get worse, not
better, over time." Rep. John Conyers
(D-MI), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Anthony Weiner
(D-NY), expressed similar concerns.
Rep. Chris Cox (R-CA),
sponsor of the ITFA in 1998, as well as HR 1552 and 1675,
testified regarding the various tax plans to "shake down
the Net" that the ITFA precluded. Rep. Cox. stated that
"the questions of sales tax simplification are
important" but "are intellectually separable
from" the extension of the ITFA moratorium. He stated
that since "time is of the essence", the Congress
should pass legislation extending the existing ban. See also, prepared
statement of Rep. Cox.
Gov. James Gilmore (R-VA) testified in favor of passage of HR
1552 or 1675. Gov. Tommy Engler (R-MI) recommended that
Congress "enact legislation giving the states the
authority to collect and remit sales taxes and uses
taxes". He also stated that there should be a uniform and
simplified sales and use tax system. Robert Comfort testified
on behalf of Amazon.com. He advocate passed of either HR 1552
or 1675. |
|
|
| Digital Rights Management
Patent |
| 6/26. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued U.S.
Patent No. 6,253,193 to InterTrust Technologies
Corp. InterTrust, which is based in Santa Clara,
California, provides digital rights management software. The
patent discloses systems and methods for secure transaction
management and electronic rights protection. The patent
abstract states that "Electronic appliances such as
computers equipped in accordance with the present invention
help to ensure that information is accessed and used only in
authorized ways, and maintain the integrity, availability,
and/or confidentiality of the information." See, Intertrust
release. |
|
|
| Patent Reexamination |
6/25. Rep. Zoe
Lofgren (D-CA) placed extended remarks in the
Congressional Record regarding HR
2231, the Patent Reexamination Enhancement Act of 2001,
which she introduced on June 19. She wrote that "an
invalid patent -- a patent that either should never have been
issued or which confers protection beyond what is entitled --
can cause significant damage not only to individual companies
but to competitors. Those individuals who rely on their patent
and discover a defect, or those who face the threat of
litigation on the basis of a patent that is invalid each have
a substantial interest in having a mechanism to 'fix' the
problem with the patent. This is why I am calling for an
enhancement of our patent reexamination system."
Her bill would expand the grounds upon which one may initiate
a patent reexamination. She wrote that "Under current
law, reexaminations may be based only on patents or printed
publications. In a number of fast-moving technologies, such as
business methods and software, there is often a substantial
body of information that is not formally published or found in
patents, so that other information is not considered when
making the determination to issue a patent." See,
Congressional Record, June 25, 2001, at Page E1191.
The bill is cosponsored by Rep. Howard Coble
(R-NC), Chairman of the House Courts, Internet, and
Intellectual Property Subcommittee. |
|
|
| Gart v. Logitech |
| 6/26. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) issued its opinion in Gart
v. Logitech, a patent infringement case
involving computer mouses. Samuel Gart holds U.S.
Patent 4,862,165 which relates to ergonomically shaped
computer mouses for reducing muscle fatigue. Gart filed a
complaint against Logitech,
a producer of mouses and other computer input devices, in U.S.
District Court (CDCal)
alleging infringement of this patent. On cross motions for
summary judgment, the District Court determined that Logitech
did not infringe the patent either literally or under the
doctrine of equivalents. The District Court also determined on
a motion for summary judgment the starting dates for accrual
of damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C.
§ 287(a). Gart then brought this appeal. The Appeals
Court vacated the grant of summary judgment of no
infringement, either literally or under the doctrine of
equivalents, and remanded for further proceedings. The Appeals
Court also reversed in part the § 287
determination. |
|
|
|
| Online Auction Fraud |
| 6/25. Rep. Billy
Tauzin (R-LA), the Chairman of the House Commerce Committee,
and Rep. Heather Wilson
(R-NM) sent a letter
to the CEOs of Yahoo, eBay and Amazon seeking details on
marketplace efforts to curb online auction fraud, and
specifically shilling, the practice of driving up bidding
prices on behalf of the seller. "The ability to disguise
identity, revoke bids and maintain multiple online identities
may facilitate undesirable practices like shilling,"
wrote Tauzin and Wilson. "Although there are copious
statistics on Internet auction fraud, there is little analysis
of the practices that facilitate that fraud. We request your
assistance in determining the causes of online auction fraud
as well as solutions to help protect consumers and boost
confidence in e-commerce." |
|
|
| Wednesday, June 27 |
10:00 AM. The House
Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Courts, the
Internet, and Intellectual Property will hold a legislative
hearing on S
487, the "Technology, Education, and Copyright
Harmonization Act of 2001." This is a bill to extend the distance
learning exemption to copyright infringement to Internet
technologies. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
10:30 AM. House
Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-LA)
and Meg Whitman, P/CEO of eBAY will hold an on the
record media availability to discuss online fraud and other
Internet issues. Location: Room 2218, Rayburn Building.
12:00 NOON. eBay P/CEO Meg Whitman will speak at a Congressional Internet Caucus
luncheon on "Opportunities Facing the Internet".
RSVP to Catherine at 202-638-4370 or RSVP@netcaucus.org .
Location: Room SC-5, U.S. Capitol Building.
12:15 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's Cable Committee will host
a luncheon. The speaker will be Kenneth Ferree, the new
Chief of the FCC's Cable
Services Bureau. Location: NCTA, 1724 Massachusetts Ave.,
NW, Washington DC. The price to attend is $15.00. RSVP to Arlice Johnson. |
|
|
| Thursday, June 28 |
9:00 AM. The United States
Trade Representative will hold a meeting of the Industry
Sector Advisory Committee on Services (ISAC-13). The agenda
includes trade promotion authority and international trade
agreements. The meeting will be open to the public from 9:00
to 9:45 AM, and closed to the public from 9:45 AM to 12:00
NOON. See, notice
in Federal Register. Location: Conference Room 6057,
Department of Commerce, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and
Constitution Avenues, NW., Washington DC.
9:30 AM. The House
Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee
on Domestic Monetary Policy, Technology and Economic Growth will
hold a hearing titled ESIGN -- Encouraging the Use of
Electronic Signatures in the Financial Services Industry.
Location: Room 2128, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM. The Senate
Appropriations Committee's Commerce, Justice, State, and
the Judiciary Subcommittee will hold a hearings on proposed
budget estimates for FY 2002 for the Federal Communications
Commission and Securities and Exchange Commission. Location:
Room 192, Dirksen Building. |
|
|
| More News |
6/26. FCC
Commissioner Kathleen
Abernathy hired Matthew Brill to be her common
carrier Legal Advisor. He previously worked at the law firm of
Wilmer Cutler & Pickering
in its Communications Group. He has represented AOL, other
ISPs, and wireline and wireless carriers in proceedings before
the FCC and in federal courts of appeals. See, release.
6/26. The House
Science Committee's Subcommittee on Research held a
hearing titled Reinventing the Internet: Promoting
Innovation in IT. The witnesses were Eric Benhamou (3Com),
Anita Jones (Univ. of Virginia), Alfred Berkeley (Nasdaq), and
Cita Furlani (National Coordination Office for Information
Technology R&D). |
|
|
| About Tech Law Journal |
Tech Law Journal is a free access web site
and e-mail alert that provides news, records, and analysis of
legislation, litigation, and regulation affecting the computer
and Internet industry. This e-mail service is offered free of
charge to anyone who requests it. Just provide TLJ an e-mail
address.
Number of subscribers: 1,731.
Contact: 202-364-8882; E-mail.
P.O. Box 15186, Washington DC, 20003.
Privacy
Policy
Notices
& Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2001 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All
rights reserved. |
|
|