The report was written at the request of Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) (at right), the ranking Democrat on the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.

The report addresses the nature of analog and digital signals. It covers the allocation of spectrum to broadcasters for analog and digital signals, and the target date of December 31, 2006 for completing the conversion to DTV, and the recovery of spectrum used for analog signals.

The report notes that to be able to receive DTV signals, TV watchers must spend money, either to "(1) purchase a television set that includes a tuner capable of receiving digital broadcast signals, (2) purchase a converter box that captures the digital broadcast signal and converts it to a format that can be shown on an analog television set, or (3) subscribe to a cable or satellite provider that is carrying the broadcast stations’ digital signals as well as have the equipment necessary to receive that provider’s digital signals." (Footnote omitted.)

The report states that its public opinion survey shows that "many people have little understanding of the DTV transition".

The report continues that "If consumers are unfamiliar with DTV -- particularly with benefits such as high definition television -- they are less likely to purchase digital television sets. Yet, if few consumers purchase digital television sets, producers have little incentive to provide much digital content and cable systems have little incentive to carry the digital signal. Thus, consumer awareness of the transition -- and subsequent consumer adoption of DTV equipment -- is a key element in facilitating the transition."

The report also addresses cable and satellite carriage of digital signals. It states that "On the basis of current plans for digital carriage by cable and satellite companies, it appears unlikely that many households will have access to all of their local digital channels via cable or satellite by December 2006. FCC has tentatively decided against mandating that cable systems carry analog and digital channels simultaneously during the transition. In lieu of dual carriage, however, another option we have identified is to set a ``date certain´´ when cable systems would, all at once, switch from carrying analog channels to carrying digital channels."

The report also states that there is little digital programming being produced, because of lack of digital TV viewers, lack of advertisers' interest, and lack of protection for copyrighted works.

The report states that "Many content providers say they are reluctant to provide high-value digital content over the air via DTV because they are concerned about consumers making unauthorized copies as well as redistributing the content over the Internet."

"To address copy protection for over-the-air content, studios want the use of a ``broadcast flag,´´ which would identify rules for how particular content could be used. The flag would be recognized by technology embedded in digital television sets and other devices that receive DTV broadcast signals," the GAO report states. "In August 2002, FCC initiated a rulemaking exploring whether it can and should mandate the use of a copy protection mechanism for DTV."

The report next addresses mandating digital tuners. "To speed the DTV transition, FCC has adopted an order requiring that by 2007 most new broadcast television sets include a tuner capable of receiving digital signals over the air. Another policy option would be to pair the over-the-air mandate with a requirement that new television sets also be digital cable-ready. Because many more American households receive television via cable than receive it over the air, mandating digital cable-ready capability could be an effective policy for speeding the DTV transition if the marginal cost of this requirement were found to be reasonable."

The report recommends that the FCC "Explore options to raise public awareness about the DTV transition and the implications it will have." It also recommends that the FCC "examine the advantages and disadvantages of a policy that would set a date-certain for cable carriage to switch from full carriage of analog signals to full carriage of digital signals." The report contains no legislative recommendations.

To prepare the report, the GAO reviewed relevant statutes and regulatory proceedings. It also spoke with representatives of communications companies and industry groups. It also spoke with government officials. It also contracted with a public opinion research firm to conduct a survey.

The report contains no economic analysis. However, it does note that "Perhaps the most significant barrier to greater consumer adoption of DTV equipment is its cost. In 2001, the average price of a digital television set was more than $1,800."

The report also states that "television has become an important part of American life" and that "the Congress has repeatedly noted the importance of maintaining the nation's free, over the air system of local broadcasting".

Rob Stoddard of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) stated in a release that the report "confirms our belief that consumers are just now learning about digital TV, that additional education for consumers and retailers would be helpful, and that the transition itself is fairly complex, not only for consumers but also for the industries that are voluntarily working together to make it happen."

He added that "Though we remain opposed to expanding our carriage requirements through dual or multiple ``must carry´´ which would disadvantage many non-broadcast programmers and content providers, we look forward to working with Congress and the FCC to deliver high definition and digital television to American consumers."

Edward Fritts of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) stated in a release that the NAB desires greater consumer awareness.

The Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI) is a nonprofit organization that develops, promotes, and promulgates model building codes. Local governments, in turn, enact its codes into law by reference, in whole, or in part. SBCCI asserts a copyright in each of its codes. Peter Veeck operates a web site that contains information about North Texas, including the towns of Anna and Savoy. Several towns in North Texas have adopted SBCCI model codes, including Anna and Savoy. Veeck purchased from SBCCI CDs with copies of the building codes. In disregard of the software license and copyright notice, Veeck copied and published these building codes into his web site.

The District Court entered a judgment of copyright infringement. On February 2, 2001, a divided three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals (5thCir) issued its opinion upholding the judgment of copyright infringement. On June 10, 2002, a divided en banc panel of the Fifth Circuit issued its opinion reversing the three judge panel. This en banc opinion arguably creates a conflict between the Fifth Circuit, and the First, Second and Ninth Circuits.

See also, TLJ story titled "5th Circuits Affirms Judgment of Internet Copyright Infringement", February 5, 2001, and story titled "Divided En Banc 5th Circuit Reverses in Veeck v. SBCCI", TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 448, June 11, 2002.

The report states that "Many major credit card industry participants have attempted to restrict the use of credit cards for Internet gambling but have faced challenges in their efforts to do so. Full-service credit card companies that issue their own cards and license merchants to accept cards have implemented policies prohibiting customers from using their cards to pay for Internet gambling transactions and will not license Internet gambling sites. Credit card associations have instituted a different approach -- a transaction coding system that enables association members, at their discretion, to deny authorization of properly coded Internet gambling transactions. Many major U.S. issuing banks that are members of these associations have chosen to block such transactions because of concerns over Internet gambling’s unclear legal status and the high level of credit risk associated with the industry."

The report continues that "These efforts are hampered, however, by Internet gambling sites that attempt to disguise their transactions to keep from being blocked by the issuing banks. In addition, some association members -- primarily those in foreign jurisdictions where Internet gambling may be legal -- continue to acquire Internet gambling sites as merchants. Further, efforts to restrict the use of credit cards for Internet gambling can be circumvented by cardholders’ use of on-line payment providers to pay for gambling activities. With such intermediaries, issuing banks cannot necessarily determine the nature of the activity being charged."

It also states that "as banks increasingly choose to restrict the use of credit cards for Internet gaming, Internet gambling sites are expected to emphasize newer forms of payment, such as e-cash, that could eventually replace credit cards."

The report states that "The Internet, while changing the way our society communicates, has also changed the nature of many crimes, including child pornography. ... The trafficking of child pormography through increasingly sophisticated electronic media, including Internet chat rooms, newsgroups, and peer-to-peer networks, has made these images more readily accessible." (Footnotes omitted.)

However, the report focuses on the coordination of law enforcement efforts. It states that "Multiple federal agencies play roles in combating child pornography, many of them as a part of an overall effort to combat child exploitation in general. Additionally, state and local law enforcement agencies may also have jurisdiction over certain child exploitation cases and may work collaboratively with federal agencies to combat child pormography. While technology has created more challenges for law enforcement, it also requires federal agencies to coordinate efforts to work well together in identifying crimes, targeting suspects, investigating cases, and gathering evidence."

It concludes that "some improvements to information sharing can be made", and offers some specific recommendations.

The report also notes that "three of the leading electronic communications service providers, including two of the largest Internet service providers, report no significant problems with the coordination of federal law enforcement efforts. These entities report that it has been rare that they receive duplicate subpoenas from the federal law enforcement community relating to the same investigation."

The report was written at the request of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the ranking Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee.

Editor's Note: TLJ intentionally misspells words that, if spelled correctly, would cause many subscribers' e-mail systems to block the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert.

12/2. The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Nolen v. Nucentrix, a class action suit filed on behalf of cable service subscribers complaining about charges. The U.S. Court of Appeals (5thCir) issued its opinion on June 26, 2002, affirming the District Court's dismissal. See, Order List [20 pages in PDF], at page 5.

12/2. The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Deseret Book Company v. Jacobsen, a copyright case involving the supersubstantial similarity test. This denial lets stand the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals (10thCir) in Jacobsen v. Deseret Book Co., 287 F.3d 936 (April 19, 2002). See, Order List [20 pages in PDF], at page 16.

It stated in a release that "Although the United States District Court in Washington, D.C., found that Microsoft Corporation violated federal and state antitrust laws, the court largely sided with Microsoft in its decision on how to remedy the unlawful conduct. The court’s decision modified Microsoft’s proposal by providing stronger compliance provisions, including the court retaining jurisdiction of the matter for the next five years. However, the court failed to impose sanctions that will remedy the unlawful co-mingling of computer software code that the federal court of appeals specifically agreed was an antitrust violation."

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a three day meeting of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board (CCSPAB). The CCSPAB advises the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of NIST on security and privacy issues pertaining to federal computer systems. The agenda includes (1) GSA update on e-authentication, (2) updates on recent computer security legislation, (3) update by OMB on privacy and security issues, (4) briefing on OMB enterprise architecture effort, (5) briefing on NIST certification and authentication effort. See, notice in Federal Register. Location: North Gaithersburg Hilton Hotel, 620 Perry Parkway, Gaithersburg, MD.

CANCELLED? 10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Bell Communications Research v. Fore Systems, No. 02-1083. This is appeal from the U.S. District Court (DDel) in a patent infringement case involving ATM/SONET technology. Bell Communications Research (aka Bellcore) filed a complaint against Fore Systems (aka Marconi Systems). Fore's counsel is Fish & Richardson. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Storage Technology v. Cisco, No. 02-1232. This is a patent infringement case involving communication networks. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The FCC's Technological Advisory Council will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register. For more information, contact Jeffery Goldthorp at 202 418-1096 or jgoldtho@fcc.gov. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305, 445 12th St. SW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "Victor/Victoria: The ``Secret´´ to Proving Dilution". The panel will discuss the case Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue (which is pending before the Supreme Court) and the Federal Trademark Dilution Act. The speakers will be John Whealan (amicus USPTO), Jonathan Hudis (Oblon Spivak, for amicus AIPLA), and Jeremy Maltby (O’Melveny & Myers, for Victoria's Secret). The price to attend is $30 for IP Section members, $35 for other DC Bar members, $40 for the public, and free for people with a GWU law school ID. For more information, contact Maureen Britti at mbritti@dcbar.org or 202-626-3463, or Robert Brauneis at rbraun@main.nlc.gwu.edu. Location: George Washington University Law School, Moot Court Room, 2000 H Street, NW.

12:00 NOON. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a status hearing in McConnell v. FEC and related cases. Judge Kotelly will preside. Location: Courtroom 11, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Sprint v. FCC, No. 01-1266. Judges Ginsburg, Rogers and Tatel will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

9:30 - 11:30 AM. The FCC's WRC-03 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 7: Regulatory Issues and Future Agendas will meet. Location: Boeing Company, Arlington, VA.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Resonate v. Alteon Websytems, No. 02-1201. Resonate filed its complaint in U.S. District Court (NDCal) against Alteon Websystems, which has since been acquired by Nortel Networks, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,774,660, titled "World Wide Web Server With Delayed Resource Binding For Resource Based Load Balancing On A Distributed Resource Multi Node Network". The District Court issued a a claim construction ruling adverse to Resonate. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Intel v. Via Technologies, No. 02-1212. Location: Courtroom 201, 717 Madison Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) will meet. The agenda includes consideration of the final rules implementing the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) regarding coordinated and independent expenditures. Location: FEC, 9th floor hearing room, 999 E St. NW.

10:15 AM - 3:30 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion titled "The Use of Safeguards as Trade Policy Instruments: Where Have We Been, Where Are We Going?". See, notice and registration page. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

2:30 - 5:15 PM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) Central & East European Business Information Center (CEEBIC) will host a briefing and reception. The speakers will be visiting regulators and officials. For more information, contact Jennifer Gothard (CEEBIC) at 202 482-2645 or jennifer_gothard@ita.doc.gov.

10:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The FCC's Network Reliability and Interoperability Council (NRIC) will hold a meeting. For more information, contact Jeffery Goldthorp at 202 418-1096 or jgoldtho@fcc.gov. The meeting, which will be chaired by FCC Chairman Michael Powell and NRIC Chairman Richard Notebaert, will address "recommendations to protect the nation's communications infrastructure -- both physical and cyber -- against attack". See, FCC notice [MS Word]. See also, notice in the Federal Register. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305, 445 12th St. SW.

? 12:15 - 1:30 PM. The FCBA's Wireless Telecommunications Practice Committee will host a luncheon titled "WiFi -- What's all the Buzz About?" The speakers will be Julie Knapp (Deputy Chief of the FCC's Office of Engineering & Technology), Peter Pitsch (Intel), and Rebecca Arbogast (Legg Mason). The price to attends is $15. RSVP to wendy@fcba.org. Location: Sidley Austin Brown & Wood, 1501 K St. NW, 6th Floor, Conference Room 6E.

12:30 PM. Rep. Richard Armey (R-TX), the outgoing House Majority Leader, will speak at a luncheon. Location: National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. Bill Whyman, President of the Precursor Group, will speak at an Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) event. The title of his presentation is "Precursor Group's Tech Demand Model: IT Spending Set to Improve in '03". See, ITAA notice. For more information, contact Madeleine Wickwire at mwickwire@itaa.org.

Extended deadline to submit comments to the FCC in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [15 pages in PDF] in its proceeding titled "In the Matter of Digital Broadcast Copy Protection". This NPRM proposes that the FCC promulgate a broadcast flag rule, and seeks comment on this, and related questions. This is MB Docket No. 02-230. See also, FCC release [PDF] and Order [PDF] of October 11, 2002 extending deadlines.

Extended deadline to submit comments to the FCC in response to its requests for comments regarding whether to revise, clarify or adopt any additional rules in order to more effectively carry out Congress's directives in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA). This is CG Docket No. 02-278. See, original notice in the Federal Register, and notice of extension [PDF].