1/20. The U.S. Court of Appeals (2ndCir) issued its opinion [45 pages in PDF] in Lentell v. Merrill Lynch, a consolidated class action case against Merrill Lynch and one of its research analysts alleging securities fraud for issuing falsely optimistic reports recommending that investors purchase stock of two internet companies. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's dismissal for failure to satisfy the pleading requirements of Section 10b5 and the PSLRA. Basically, the Appeals Court held that the complaint failed to plead loss causation.

The plaintiffs are John Lentell and others. They want to represent the a class of purchasers of stock in 24/7 Real Media, Inc. and Interliant, Inc. Merrill Lynch is a financial institution. Henry Blodget was a research analyst for Merrill Lynch who issued reports recommending that investors purchase stock in 24/7 and Interliant. Merrill Lynch was also a lead underwriter or co-lead underwriter for several securities offerings of 24/7 and Interliant.

The plaintiffs assert that Merrill Lynch both conducted market research and analysis, and underwrote public offerings of securities. They allege that to attract investment banking business, it deliberately published market research that was falsely optimistic, and that this amounts to securities fraud.

This action followed the widely publicized disclosures by the New York Attorney General of internal communications of financial institutions that contradicted their publicly released recommendations.

The plaintiffs filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (SDNY) against Merrill Lynch and Blodget alleging Section 10b5 securities fraud.

The complaint alleges that Merrill Lynch's analysts did not actually believe 24/7 Media or Interliant securities were a good investment when they encouraged the public to buy them; that the analysts' reports failed to disclose that the Firm's true motivation for publishing the fraudulent recommendations was to attract investment banking business; and (iii) that as a result of Merrill's misstatements and omissions, plaintiffs bought the stocks and, when their value plummeted, lost millions of dollars.

The District Court dismissed the complaint.

The Appeals Court affirmed. It held that the plaintiffs failed to plead fraud with the particularity required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

The Appeals Court held that one of the elements of a securities fraud action is loss causation -- that but for the claimed misrepresentations or omissions, the plaintiff would not have entered into the detrimental securities transaction. Moreover, the Court wrote that the loss must be foreseeable and that the loss be caused by the materialization of the concealed risk.

The Court noted that the complaint does not allege the plaintiffs read the hyped recommendations, or relied upon them in purchasing stock in 24/7 or Interliant. Rather, the complaint alleges that they were relying on the integrity of the market.

The Court continued that "To plead loss causation, the complaints must allege facts that support an inference that Merrill’s misstatements and omissions concealed the circumstances that bear upon the loss suffered such that plaintiffs would have been spared all or an ascertainable portion of that loss absent the fraud. As the district court found, no such allegations are made." It added that "There is no allegation that the market reacted negatively to a corrective disclosure regarding the falsity of Merrill's ``buy´´ and ``accumulate´´ recommendations and no allegation that Merrill misstated or omitted risks that did lead to the loss."

This case is Lentell, et al. v. Merrill Lynchand Henry Blodget, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, App. Ct. No. 03-7948, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Judge Dennis Jacobs wrote the opinion of the Court, in which Judges Sotomayor and B.D. Parker joined.

In April 2003 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed and settled civil securities fraud actions in the U.S. District Court (SDNY) against Merrill Lynch and Blodget arising out of the same occurrences. Merrill Lynch agreed to pay $200 Million, and Blodget $2 Million. See, SEC release, complaint against Merrill Lynch, and complaint against Blodget.

1/18. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the U.S.A. filed a brief [54 pages in PDF] with the Supreme Court in NCTA v. Brand X, a case regarding the regulatory classification of cable modem service. The FCC urges the Supreme Court to reverse the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir).

The FCC advances two arguments. First, it argues that its classification of cable modem service as an information service is a reasonable construction of the Communications Act. Second, it argues that the 9th Circuit's reasoning (applying the doctrine of stare decisis and its previous opinion in AT&T v. Portland) runs afoul of the doctrine announced by the Supreme Court in the Chevron case.

See also, related story titled "NCTA Files Brief with Supreme Court in Brand X Case" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,059, January 19, 2004.

On March 14, 2002, the FCC adopted a Declaratory Ruling and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [75 pages in PDF]. The Declaratory Ruling (DR) component of this item states that "we conclude that cable modem service, as it is currently offered, is properly classified as an interstate information service, not as a cable service, and that there is no separate offering of telecommunications service." This item is FCC 02-77 in Docket No. 00-185 and Docket No. 02-52.

On October 6, 2003, a three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir) issued its opinion [39 pages in PDF], which is also published at 345 F.3d 1120, vacating the FCC's declaratory ruling. See, story titled "9th Circuit Vacates FCC Declaratory Ruling That Cable Modem Service is an Information Service Without a Separate Offering of a Telecommunications Service" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 754, October 7, 2003; and story titled "Reaction to 9th Circuit Opinion in Brand X Internet Services v. FCC" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 756, October 9, 2003.

The FCC's brief states that "The Communications Act does not directly address the classification of cable modem service. In the face of that statutory silence, the FCC reasonably concluded after careful study that cable modem service is properly classified as an ``information service,´´ without a separately regulated “telecommunications service” component, for purposes of the Communications Act."

The brief also states that "The Ninth Circuit refused even to consider whether the Commission’s decision was reasonable under Chevron standards, because it concluded instead that the Commission was obliged to follow the Ninth Circuit’s own prior construction of the Communications Act in Portland. The Ninth Circuit’s misguided no-deference view should be rejected."

See, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984). See also, June 22, 2000 opinion of the 9th Circuit in AT&T v. Portland holding that cable modem service is a telecommunications service

The FCC brief continues, "Most fundamentally, the Ninth Circuit’s rule is inconsistent with Chevron’s recognition that Congress has delegated to the agency -- not the courts of appeals -- the primary authority to resolve statutory ambiguities. No decision of this Court requires adoption of the Ninth Circuit’s approach, which would subject a single agency decision to differing standards of review, thereby producing unseemly races to the courthouse, unnecessary conflicts in the circuits, and unfortunate situations in which (absent this Court's review) the meaning of federal statutes would be dispositively determined for the entire Nation by lone three-judge panels. The Ninth Circuit’s partial abrogation of Chevron should be overturned." (Parentheses in original.)

1/20. The U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir) issued its opinion in Zenith v. WH-TV, a contract dispute involving the sale of television set top boxes. The Appeals Court affirmed the District Court's summary judgment for Zenith.

This case is a 21st Century Hadley v. Baxendale. First year law students, and former 1Ls, may be interested to know that Judge Frank Easterbrook, who wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, cited the case decided in 1854 by the English Court of Exchequer.

At issue is what consequential damages might a purchaser recover for breach of contract. In Hadley v. Baxendale the plaintiffs owned a mill. A crankshaft broke, and had to be sent to the manufacturer for replacement. Meanwhile, the mill was shut down. Plaintiff hired defendant to carry the broken shaft to the manufacturer. The defendant promised delivery in one day, but took much longer. The plaintiff/purchaser sued the defendant/seller for breach of contract, and sought the consequential damages of profits lost during the extended shutdown of the mill. The Court of Exchequer held that, with certain exceptions, the buyer cannot obtain consequential damages for breach of contract.

In the present case, WH-TV broadcasts a digital television signal in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Zenith makes, among other things, set top boxes that convert the digital input into an analog output that TV sets can display. WH-TV wanted to purchase set top boxes for its customers that use the digital video broadcasting (DVB) standard. Zenith represented to WH-TV that it had for sale set top boxes that met the DVB standard. However, WH-TV had in mind a 1998 standard, while Zenith sold WH-TV boxes that met a 1995 standard. After WH-TV bought the set top boxes in 1999, its customers encountered technical difficulties, and it lost customers.

Zenith sued first, in U.S. District Court (NDIll), claiming non-payment for its out of date set top boxes. WH-TV counterclaimed, for breach of contract, and claimed as damages lost profits that it asserts it would have made had it originally used set top boxes meeting the 1998 standard. That is, it sought consequential damages.

The District Court granted summary judgment to Zenith, on both Zenith's claim for payment, and on WH-TV's claim for damages, relying upon the doctrine of Hadley v. Baxendale.

The Court of Appeals affirmed. It first wrote that "A trier of fact could find that Zenith misled WH-TV or at least withheld material information and that the consequences were unhappy for WH-TV and its customers: the broadcaster lost business ..."

However, it did not allow WH-TV to proceed to trial on damages for lost profits.  Although, much of the opinion addresses admissibility of evidence and expert testimony.

This case is Zenith Electronics Corp. v. WH-TV Broadcasting Corp., U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, App. Ct. Nos. 04-1635 & 04-1790, appeals from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, D.C. No. 01 C 4366, Judge George Lindberg presiding. Judge Easterbrook wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judges Kane and Evans joined.

1/18. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced the results of its out of cycle Special 301 reviews of the adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property protection in Poland and Taiwan. It announced that Poland will remain on the Watch List, and that Taiwan will be moved from the Priority Watch List to the Watch List.

Section 301 is the statutory means by which the United States asserts its international trade rights, including its rights under WTO Agreements. In particular, under the "Special 301" provisions of the Trade Act of 1974, the USTR identifies trading partners that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. artists and industries that rely upon intellectual property protection. Placement on the Watch List or Priority Watch List indicates that a country does not provide an adequate level of protection.

USTR Robert Zoellick stated in a release that ""We are encouraged by the progress made by Poland and Taiwan in taking steps to address long-standing concerns over piracy and counterfeiting of U.S. intellectual property and products ... However, a common thread in both reviews is the recognition of the need for stronger and sustained enforcement measures, including the necessity to protect data submitted by innovative pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical producers to obtain marketing approval.  Protection and enforcement of intellectual property are critical to the continued growth of our economy, and we will vigorously press our trading partners to follow and enforce the rules to protect American creativity, innovation and technology."

1/21. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) issued a release praising Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Michael Powell upon his departure from the FCC.

1/20. President Bush took the oath of office for a second term. He also gave an inaugural address in which he said nothing about technology.

1/20. The Senate confirmed Mike Johanns to be Secretary of Agriculture.

1/20. The Senate confirmed Margaret Spellings to be Secretary of Education.

1/19. The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed its consideration of the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General.

1/19. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to favorably report the nomination of Condi Rice to be Secretary of State by a vote of 16-2.

1/19. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice in the Federal Register the describes and sets the effective date (January 31, 2005) for its final rule amending its rules of practice to adjust the fee for filing a trademark application for registration based on whether the application is filed on paper or electronically using the Trademark Electronic Application System (TEAS). That is, the news fee for a trademark application filed on paper is increased to $375.00 for each class of goods or services, and the fee for a trademark application filed through TEAS is decreased to $325.00 for each class of goods or services. See, Federal Register, January 19, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 12, at Pages 2952 - 2953.

1/19. The Copyright Office (CO) published a notice in the Federal Register announcing that SoundExchange has filed with the CO three notices of intent to audit preexisting subscription services that transmit sound recordings under statutory licenses. See, Federal Register, January 19, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 12, at Pages 3069 - 3070.

9:30 AM. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a status conference in US v. Microsoft (D.C. No. 1998-cv-01232) and New York v. Microsoft (D.C. No. 1998-cv-01233) Judge Colleen Kotelly will preside. Location: Courtroom 11, Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) oppositions to petitions to deny the applications of NextWave Telecom and Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for FCC approval of their proposed transfer of control of broadband Personal Communications Services (PCS) licenses from NextWave to Cellco. See, FCC notice [4 pages in PDF]. This notice is DA 04-3873 in WT Docket No. 04-434.

EXTENDED TO JANUARY 28. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the FCC's public notice regarding BellSouth's petition for forbearance from certain Title II and Computer Inquiry requirements. This proceeding is WC Docket No. 04-405. See, notice of extension [PDF].

Deadline for licensees to submit responses to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to its second audit letter and notice of cancellation to certain licensees in the paging and radiotelephone service and certain licensees operating on 929-930 MHz exclusive private carrier paging channels. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 21, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 244, at Pages 76469 - 76470.

The Supreme Court will begin a recess. It will return from recess on February 22, 2005.

Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding service rules for advanced wireless services (AWS) in the 1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2175-2180 MHz and 1.7 GHz and 2.1 GHz bands. The FCC adopted this NPRM at its September 9, 2004 meeting, and released the text on September 24, 2004. It is FCC 04-218 in WT Docket No. 04-356 and WT Docket No. 02-353. See, original notice in the Federal Register, November 2, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 211, at Pages 63489-63498, and extension notice in the Federal Register, November 30, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 229, at Pages 69572 - 69573. See also, story titled "FCC Makes Additional 20 MHz of Spectrum Available for Advanced Wireless Services" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 975, September 13, 2004.

7:30 AM. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) will host a breakfast seminar titled "Expediting the Security Clearance Process: New Law, New Opportunities for Federal Contractors". See, ITAA notice. For more information, contact Shannon Zelsnack at szelsnack@itaa.org. Prices range from $50 to $95. Location: Sheraton Premiere Tysons Corner Hotel.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the Organization of American States' (OAS) Inter-American Telecommunication Commission's (CITEL) Permanent Consultative Committee II meeting in Guatemala to be held in April 2005. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 30, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 250, at Pages 78515-78516. For more information, including the location, contact Cecily Holiday at holidaycc@state.gov or Anne Jillson at jillsonad@state.gov. Location: undisclosed.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "The Basics of IP-Television: Technology and Regulation". The speakers will be engineers from the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Media Bureau (MB), and representatives of SBC Communications and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA). For more information, contact Jason Friedrich at jason.friedrich@dbr.com or 202 354-1340 or Ryan Wallach at rwallach@willkie.com or 202 303-1159. Location: Willkie Farr & Gallagher, 1875 K Street, NW, Second Floor.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion title "Class Action Reform: How Far and How Fast?". The speakers will be Robert Gasaway (Kirkland & Ellis), George Priest (Yale Law School), David McIntosh (Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw), and Michael Greve (AEI). See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

TIME? The Judicial Conference of the United States (JC) will hold a public hearing on its proposed amendment to Appellate Rule 25 regarding electronic filings. The JC has proposed amendments to Civil Rule 5, Appellate Rule 25, and Bankruptcy Rule 5005. Each of these proposed amendments would permit the applicable court, by local rules, to "permit or require papers to be filed, signed, or verified by electronic means" (or similar language). Current rules provide that the applicable court may "permit" filing by electronic means. See, JC notice [PDF] and notice in the Federal Register, Federal Register, December 2, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 231, at Page 70156. Location: undisclosed.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a Broadband PCS Spectrum Auction. This is Auction No. 58. This auction had previously been scheduled for January 12, 2005. See, notice [3 pages in PDF].

8:00 AM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a breakfast with Rep. Chip Pickering (R-MS), Vice Chairman of the House Commerce Committee. For more information, contact at heidi@fcba.org. Location: J.W. Marriott Hotel, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold an executive business meeting. See, Committee notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Committee on Aging will hold a hearings to examine the risks and benefits associated with internet pharmacy and importation. Location: Room 628, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Banking Committee will hold an organizational meeting. The Committee will consider its rules, subcommittee structure, and funding. Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) will preside. See, notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a hearing titled "The Department of Homeland Security: The Road Ahead". See, notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a brown bag lunch titled "International Aspects of Criminal Antitrust Enforcement". The speakers will be Lisa Phelan (Chief of the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division's National Criminal Enforcement Section) and Anthony Nanni (Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson). See, notice. Prices vary from $5 to $10. For more information, call 202 626-3463. Location: Fried Frank, 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a brown bag lunch titled "I’m an IP attorney, how can I do pro bono work?". The speakers will be Mary Kennedy (Finnegan Henderson) and Maureen Syracuse (Director of the DC Bar Association's Pro Bono Program). See, notice. Prices vary from $5 to $10. For more information, contact Rebecca McNeill 202 408-4086 or rebecca.mcneill@finnegan.com. Location: Finnegan Henderson, 901 New York Ave., NW.

4:00 - 5:45 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a panel discussion title "Trade Policy: The Next Four Years". The speakers will be Lael Brainard (Brookings Institution), Edward Gresser (Progressive Policy Institute), Gary Hufbauer (Institute for International Economics), Brink Lindsey (Cato Institute), and Claude Barfield (AEI). See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "An Overview of Contract Drafting". Location: Dow Lohnes & Albertson, 1200 New Hampshire Ave. NW.

12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) State and Local Practice Committee will host a brown bag seminar titled "Current State Regulatory Issues: An Update". The speakers will be Tom Pugh (Commissioner of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission), Beth Keating (attorney, Florida Public Service Commission), Robert Mayer (New York Public Service Commission), and Tammy Cooper (Administrative Law Judge, Texas Public Utility Commission). For more information, contact Erick Soriano at 202 939-7921 or esoriano@fw-law.com. Location: Fleischman & Walsh, 1919 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 600.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a brown bag lunch titled "Current Topics in Entertainment Law: Anti-Piracy and Film Financing Incentives". The speakers will be David Green (Motion Picture Association of America) and Michele LeBlanc (LeBlanc & Associates), and Aoi Nawashiro (Browdy & Neimark). See, notice. Prices vary from $20 to $30. For more information, call 202 626-3463. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, B-1 Level, 1250 H St., NW.

10:00 AM. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet to prepare for the International Telecommunications Union's ITU-T Study Group 17 (security, languages and telecommunication software) meeting, and the ITU-T Study Group 4 (telecommunication management). See, the ITU's calendar of meetings. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 20, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 243, at Page 76027. Location: Communication Technologies, Inc. (COMTek), 14151 Newbrook Dr., Suite 400, Chantilly, VA.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of State's International Telecommunication Advisory Committee will meet to discuss the meeting of the ITU Council's Ad Hoc Group on Cost Recovery for Satellite Network Filings that will take place March 21-22, 2005 in Geneva, Switzerland. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 13, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 9, at Page 2450. Location: Room 6 South (6B516), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), 445 12th St., SW.

2:00 PM. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) will host an event titled "Michelin Worldwide: Rolling with an RFID Strategy". See, notice. For more information, contact Eerik Kreek, ekreek@itaa.org. This event will be webcast only.

4:00 PM. Scott Kieff (Washington University's St. Louis School of Law) will present a draft paper titled "Introducing a Case Against Copyright: A Comparative Institutional Analysis of Intellectual Property Regimes". See, abstract of paper, and notice of event. This event is part of the Spring 2005 Intellectual Property Workshop Series sponsored by the Dean Dinwoodey Center for Intellectual Property Studies at the George Washington University Law School (GWULS). For more information, contact Robert Brauneis at 202 994-6138 or rbraun@law.gwu.edu. The event is free and open to the public. Location: GWULS, Faculty Conference Center, Burns Building, 5th Floor, 716 20th St., NW.

4:00 PM. The Cato Institute will host a book forum on Seth Mnookin's book titled Hard News: The Scandals at The New York Times and Their Meaning for American Media [Amazon]. The speakers will be Mnookin and Jack Shafer (Slate). A reception will follow the event. See, notice. Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

TIME? There will be a meeting of the Executive Office of the President's (EOP) Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP) National Science and Technology Council's (NSTC) Committee on Science's Subcommittee on Research Business Methods. The meeting is closed to the public. For more information, contact Megan Columbus at 301 435-0937. Location: undisclosed.

Extended deadline to file with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) first round DTV channel election forms. This proceeding is titled "In the matter of Second Periodic Review of the Commission’s Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion To Digital Television". This is MB Docket No. 03-15. See, FCC order extending deadline [PDF].

Effective date of the Copyright Office's final rule regarding reconsideration procedure. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 28, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 248, at Pages 77636 - 77637.

Deadline to submit to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) replies to oppositions to petitions to deny the applications of NextWave Telecom and Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for FCC approval of their proposed transfer of control of broadband Personal Communications Services (PCS) licenses from NextWave to Cellco. See, FCC notice [4 pages in PDF]. This notice is DA 04-3873 in WT Docket No. 04-434.

Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the FCC's public notice regarding BellSouth's petition for forbearance from certain Title II and Computer Inquiry requirements. This proceeding is WC Docket No. 04-405. See, notice of extension [PDF].

EXTENDED TO MARCH 14. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Public Notice [4 pages in PDF] (DA 04-3891) of December 14, 2004 seeking comments on the report of Avatar Environmental, LLC regarding migratory bird collisions with communications towers. See, Public Notice [2 pages in PDF] (DA 04-4021) of December 22, 2004 extending deadlines. This proceeding is WT Docket No. 03-187.

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year. However, there are discounts for subscribers with multiple recipients. Free one month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free subscriptions are available for journalists, 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 one month after writing. See, subscription information page.

Contact: 202-364-8882.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2005 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.