| MAPS Stops Blacklisting of
Harris Interactive |
8/21. Harris
Interactive (HI) stated that it has reached an agreement
with MAPS, a
blacklisting service that had caused HI's e-mail surveys to be
blocked by e-mail service providers that subscribe to MAPS's
service. Under this agreement MAPS will stop its blacklisting
of HI. See, HI
release.
HI filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (WDNY)
on July 31, 2000, against Microsoft (as operator of Hotmail),
AOL, and other e-mail service providers, alleging violation of
antitrust law, defamation, negligence, and other causes of
action. All subscribed to the Realtime Blackhole List, which
is maintained by the Mail
Abuse Prevention System (MAPS). MAPS was also named as a
defendant in that suit. AOL agreed to stop blocking HI email
in August, 2000. Microsoft agreed to stop in September. HI
then dismissed that suit. See, HI
September 13, 2001 release.
HI is a market research, polling and consulting firm based in
Rochester, New York. It issued a release on August 21, 2001,
in which it stated that "As a result of its decision to
fully transition to COI, Harris Interactive recently reached
agreement with the Mail Abuse Prevention System, LLC (MAPS),
whereby MAPS will immediately remove Harris Interactive from
their real-time blackhole list (RBL)." Gordon Black,
C/CEO of HI, also stated in the same release that "During
the last year we've extensively tested a confirmed opt-in (COI)
registration process. Interestingly, we've found that our COI
panel members give far more thoughtful and comprehensive
survey responses than non-COI panelists– making these
members invaluable to our customers." |
|
|
| FCC Prepared to Grant
Broadband PCS Licenses |
| 8/22. The FCC released a public
notice [PDF] in which it stated that it is prepared to
grant 4 (out of over 400) licenses that were auctioned by the
FCC in its C and F block broadband PCS auctions completed in
January. This is Auction Event No. 35, the re-auction of
licenses originally auctioned in 1996. |
|
|
| New Documents |
FCC: public
notice re C and F block broadband PCS auctions, 8/22 (PDF,
FCC).
FCC: notice
re expanding the definition of universal service, 8/22 (PDF,
FCC).
USPTO: notice
re draft convention on jurisdiction and judgments, 8/20 (HTML,
USPTO). |
|
|
|
| Should Universal Service be
Expanded to Include Broadband Internet Services? |
8/22. The FCC and the Federal-State
Joint Board on Universal Service released a notice
[PDF] soliciting comments on expanding the definition of
universal service. The notice states: "We also invite
comment on whether any advanced or high-speed services should
be included within the list of core services."
Nominally, universal service is the notion of providing basic
telephone service to everyone who wants it. The theory
underlying government involvement is that the costs of
providing service vary by region and type of customer, and
therefore, a series of cross subsidies are necessary to
accomplish affordable pricing for all users. Universal service
is also a powerful political rallying cry in the Congress,
especially in the Senate, where sparsely populated states are
over represented.
The Congress codified the FCC's longstanding practice of
mandating universal service support for telecommunications
services for high cost rural and low income areas in Section
254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The section
also instructed the FCC to extend universal service support to
schools, libraries, and rural health care clinics. The FCC
issued a report on May 7, 1997 broadly interpreting this
program, which is also known as the e-rate, to extend, not
only for telecommunications services, but also to Internet
access and internal connections for Internet services. See
also, FCC's
universal service web section.
However, aside from this e-rate program, the FCC has
interpreted universal service to include only old fashioned
phone services, including single party service, voice grade
access to the public switched telephone network, Dual Tone
Multifrequency signaling or its functional equivalent, access
to emergency services, access to operator services, access to
interexchange service, access to directory assistance, and
toll limitation services for qualifying low income consumers.
Universal service cross subsidies have run from long distance
to local service, business to residential subscribers, urban
to rural subscribers, and in the case of the e-rate, all phone
subscribers to schools, libraries, and rural health clinics.
The notice just released raises the question of what, beyond
currently included services, should be included in cross
subsidy regimes. The notice "invites comment on what
services, if any, should be added to or removed from the list
of core services eligible for federal universal service
support and how those core services should be defined."
The notice also references in several places "Internet
access" and "high-speed and advanced services"
as services under consideration.
Comments are due 60 days from publication in the Federal
Register, which has not yet happened. Reply comments are due
within 120 days from publication in the Federal Register. |
|
|
|
| USPTO Seeks Comments on
Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Judgments |
8/20. The USPTO published
in the Federal Register a notice
of hearing and request for comments on the Draft
Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and
Commercial Matters. The USPTO will hold a hearing on September
11, 2001, form 9:30 AM until 5:00 PM. Persons who wish to
testify must submit a request by August 31, 2001. The
hearing will be held at the Patent Theater, Second Floor of
Crystal Park 2, 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia.
Written comments are due by October 19, 2001. See, Federal
Register, August 20, 2001, Vol. 66, No. 161, at Pages 43575 -
43578.
The Hague Conference on Private International Law is
negotiating a Convention
designed to create common jurisdiction rules for international
civil and commercial cases and to provide for international
recognition and enforcement of judgments issued under these
rules. |
|
|
| Federal Circuit Rules in
McGinley v. Franklin Sports |
8/21. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) issued a divided opinion in McGinley
v. Franklin Sports, a patent infringement
case involving baseballs in which the Appeals Court addressed obviousness,
and the role of trial court juries in suits involving claims
of obviousness. The Court reversed a trial court JMOL
which set aside a jury verdict.
Michael McGinley is the holder of U.S.
Patent No. 5,407,193, which discloses a regulation
baseball with markings for the placement of fingers for
different types of pitches. McGinley filed a complaint in U.S.
District Court (DKan)
against Franklin Sports (FS) alleging patent infringement. The
jury returned a verdict in favor of McGinley, finding the
patent not invalid and willfully infringed. The District Court
set aside the jury's verdict and granted FS's motion for JMOL
on invalidity, concluding that as a matter of law, plaintiff's
patent is invalid as obvious. The Court of Appeals reversed
the grant of JMOL in favor of FS and ordered the jury's
verdict reinstated. Judge Clevenger wrote the opinion of the
Court, in which Judge Mayer joined. Judge Michel dissented. |
|
|
| 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: 1,979.
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. |
|
|