9/15. The House Commerce Committee (HCC) released a discussion draft [77 pages in PDF] on September 15, 2005, of a bill that is as yet unnumbered and untitled. It creates three new regulatory regimes -- for broadband internet transmission services (BITS), voice over internet protocol (VOIP) services, and broadband video services (BVS). The HCC also released a summary [7 pages in PDF] and a short release.

The FCC currently operates under a dichotomy of Title I based information services, with the associated assertion of ancillary jurisdiction, and Title II telecommunications. This draft would create three new regulatory categories, while maintaining Title II. It would provide some clarity as to which regulatory categories would apply to certain current services. It would put all broadband internet transmission services, whether provided by cable, DSL, wireless, or other platform, in the same regulatory category.

The regulatory scheme contains some elements that could be characterized as deregulatory, such as by precluding the exercise of certain powers by state and local governments. On the other hand, it also maintains, or expands, the regulatory reach of government in many other areas.

Broadband Internet Transmission Service. The draft bill defines "broadband Internet transmission service" as "a packet-switched service that is offered to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, with or without a fee, and that, regardless of the facilities used (i) is transmitted in a packet-based protocol, including TCP/IP or a successor protocol; and (ii) provides to subscribers the capability to send and receive packetized information", and it includes "any features, functions, and capabilities, as well as any associated packetized facilities, network equipment, and electronics, used to transmit or route packetized information". However, it does not include the provision of any video programming service.

While the bill uses the term "broadband", its definition contains no reference to transmission speeds. The term "subscriber" is given a definition different from its plain meaning. It includes anyone who "consumes".

It is also notable that the definition of BITS, like the definition of VOIP services and broadband video services, includes free services. This is an expansion of regulatory power.

The bill then provides (at Section 101) two significant deregulatory provisions. First, it provides that "Except as expressly provided in this Act ... neither the Commission nor any State or political subdivision thereof may establish or enforce any law, rule, regulation, or other provision having the force of law that -- (1) regulates, or requires the approval by the Commission or such State or subdivision of, the rates, charges, terms, or conditions for, or entry into the provision of, any broadband Internet transmission service; or (2) imposes any such regulation or requirement on any BITS provider that is registered under section 102 of this Act."

The bill requires BITS providers, VOIP service providers, and broadband video service providers to register with the FCC. (See, Sections 102, 202, and 302.)

Second, it provides that "Broadband Internet transmission services are interstate services and are subject to exclusive Federal jurisdiction, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act."

However, the bill also maintains, or creates, many regulatory powers, which would fall within the meaning of "except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act".

The bill maintains the FCC's full authority to license and regulate the use of spectrum.

The bill provides that while there is no regulation of "rates, charges, terms or conditions for, or entry into the provision of, any broadband Internet transmission service", there is a mandate to interconnect with both other BITS providers and telecommunications carriers (Section 103), and there is FCC adjudicatory authority with respect to interconnection (Section 411). FCC interconnection authority necessarily implies rate regulation. Telecommunications services are currently subject to an interconnection mandate. In contrast, the internet has grown and thrived without any interconnection mandate. This bill changes this.

The bill also extends authority to mandate disability access to BITS, VOIP, and BVS, and related equipment manufacturers (at Section 404).

The bill also contains detailed requirements and restrictions related to consumer privacy (at Section 403).

The bill provides that state and local governments can regulate public rights of way, and to demand "fair and reasonable compensation".

The bill provides that state and local government can provide BITS, VOIP services, or broadband video services, regardless of whether such services are already available.

Network Neutrality. Section 104 provides a network neutrality, or network freedom, guarantee.

It provides that "each BITS provider has the duty -- (1) to provide subscribers with access to lawful content, applications, and services provided over the Internet, and not to block, impair, or interfere with the offering of, access to, or the use of such content, applications, or services; (2) to permit subscribers to connect and use devices of their choosing in connection with BITS; and (3) not to install network features, functions, or capabilities that do not comply with the guidelines and standards established pursuant to section 106 of this Act." (Section 106 pertains to coordination for interconnectivity.)

The bill then enumerates certain practices by BITS providers that do not violate this section, such as blocking spam or providing parental controls.

There is no reference to the "needs of law enforcement", as there may be in the FCC's yet to be released Policy Statement of August 5, 2005.

VOIP Services. The bill defines VOIP services as "a packet-switched voice communications service that -- (i) is offered with or without a fee to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used; and (ii) enables a subscriber to send or receive voice communications in TCP/IP protocol or a successor protocol over a broadband Internet transmission service to or from any subscriber with a telephone number under the North American Numbering Plan or such other identification method as designated by the Commission".

The bill then defines "VOIP service provider" as "any person who provides or offers to provide a VOIP service, either directly or through an affiliate."

The bill contains two limitations on regulation (at Section 202). First, it provides that "Except as expressly provided in this Act ... neither the Commission nor any State or political subdivision thereof may establish or enforce any law, rule, regulation, or other provision having the force of law that -- (1) regulates, or requires the approval by the Commission or such State or subdivision of, the rates, charges, terms, or conditions for, or entry into the provision of, any VOIP service; or (2) imposes any such regulation or requirement on any VOIP service provider that is registered under section 202 of this Act."

Second, it provides that "VOIP services are interstate services and are subject to exclusive Federal jurisdiction, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act."

But, then it provides exceptions, some of which are noted above in the summary of BITS.

In addition, exchange of traffic is required. The bill provides (at Section 203) that "Each VOIP service provider shall have the right and duty to exchange voice communications traffic with other VOIP service providers and telecommunications carriers."

In addition, "A VOIP service provider shall enter into a reciprocal compensation agreement with a telecommunications carrier with which the VOIP service provider exchanges traffic for compensation for the costs of transport and termination of voice communications traffic." Moreover, the FCC is given rule making authority, and the states and the FCC both possess dispute resolution authority.

That it, this bill puts the states and the FCC into the role of rates and terms regulators.

And in addition, the bill imposes detailed 911/E911 requirements upon VOIP providers (at Section 205). The bill also allows state and local governments to tax VOIP services in connection with imposing 911/E911 mandates.

And furthermore, the bill requires that the FCC "shall initiate an inquiry to determine if, as subscribers migrate from telecommunications services to VOIP services, the contribution base used to support universal service should be expanded to include VOIP service providers to ensure that contributions to the universal service support mechanisms are being made in an equitable and nondiscriminatory manner. The Commission shall complete such inquiry within 180 days after such date of enactment." Then, if the FCC "determines that the contribution base must be expanded", it should conclude a rule making proceeding within 180 days. (See, Section 206.)

And furthermore, the bill extends number portability requirements to VOIP services. (See, Section 207.)

Broadband Video Service. The bill defines "broadband video service" as "a two-way, interactive service that -- (A) is offered, with or without a fee, to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available to the public, regardless of the facilities used; (B) integrates, on a real-time and subscriber customizable basis, a video programming package with voice and data features, functions, and capabilities; and (C) integrates the capability to access Internet content of the subscriber’s choosing consistent with section 104 of this Act."

A BITS providers is then anyone that "provides or offers to provide, directly or through an affiliate, a broadband video service that is delivered directly to subscribers over facilities the service provider owns or controls."

The BVS title of the bill provides two broad limitations on regulatory authority, as with the BITS and VOIP titles. First, it provides that "Except as expressly provided in this Act ... neither the Commission nor any State or political subdivision thereof may establish or enforce any law, rule, regulation, or other provision having the force of law that -- (1) regulates, or requires the approval by the Commission or such State or subdivision of, the rates, charges, terms, or conditions for, or entry into the provision of, any broadband video service; or (2) imposes any such regulation or requirement on any broadband video service provider that is registered under section 302 of this Act."

Second, it provides that "Broadband video services are interstate services and are subject to exclusive Federal jurisdiction, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act."

The bill creates a local franchise process for broadband video services, and allows the local franchising authorities (LFAs) to collect rents not to exceed 5 percent of a broadband video service provider's gross revenues (at Section 303).

The bill also permits the LFAs to impose capacity requirements on broadband video service providers.

More Provisions. The bill also prohibits a local exchange carrier (LEC) related BITS or BVS provider from acquiring more than 10% interest in "cable operator, BITS provider, or broadband video service provider who is owned by, operated by, controlled by, or under common control with an entity that was a cable operator". The bill also contains a similar prohibition on cable related BITS or BVS providers. (See, Section 405.)

The bill extends the CAN-SPAM Act  to BITS providers and VOIP service providers

What is Not in the Bill. There are many topics not addressed by this bill.

There is nothing in the bill regarding the broadcast flag. There is nothing regarding defining intellectual property rights or remedies.

There is nothing regarding the CALEA, or mandating that BITS or VOIP providers make their facilities or services more susceptible to government surveillance.

There is nothing regarding spectrum management, or developing secondary markets for spectrum rights.

There is nothing in the bill about a DTV transition.

There is nothing regarding reforming the FCC.

Comments by Committee Leaders. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), the Chairman of the HCC, stated in a release that "The Telecommunications Act of 1996 spurred the development of telephone competition, but no one could have foreseen the magnitude of the challenges and opportunities that the Internet age has presented. New services shouldn't be hamstrung by old thinking and outdated regulations ... We need a fresh new approach that will encourage Internet providers to expand and improve broadband networks, spur growth in the technology sector and develop cutting-edge services for consumers."

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), the ranking Democrat, stated in the same release that "This staff draft is a very useful starting point in the process ... I look forward to continued bipartisan efforts to resolve these tough issues, and to full and fair committee consideration."

Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, stated in a release that "Today's release of the bipartisan staff draft of legislation to update the country's telecom laws represents a big step forward as we seek to ensure that our laws will allow for the growth of new Internet services. As I've said all along -- as goes the tech sector, so goes the economy -- and I am confident that, before year's end, the House will pass comprehensive legislation that keeps pace with evolving technologies, spurs the economy and facilitates growth in this critical infrastructure. Most importantly, this bill will create jobs throughout the nation and bring consumers a variety of new services."

9/15. Many representatives of affected companies, their trade groups, and interest groups commented on the House Commerce Committee's (HCC) discussion draft [77 pages in PDF].

Walter McCormick, P/CEO of USTelecom, stated in a release that the draft bill "demonstrates a bipartisan commitment of the committee leadership to begin to move beyond government-managed competition and toward a truly consumer-controlled marketplace that encourages vigorous investment, competition and innovation across today’s diverse communications landscape."

He wrote that "we are encouraged by its overall direction, particularly in promoting investment and competition in advanced services. Of course, there are areas we would like to see addressed in a more comprehensive manner, such as the sustainability of universal service. We also believe that any legislation should spur immediate competition in the video market and if regulations are deemed outdated, they should be lifted for all competing services, not solely new ones."

He concluded that "Alongside Senator Ensign's bill, this draft legislation continues to build critical momentum for real reform."

Herschel Abbott, BellSouth's VP for Governmental Affairs, stated in a release that "We welcome the release of this staff draft. We understand that a lot of work by the staff has resulted in a fairly broad consensus among the Committee leadership. Now that we have a document in hand we will review it closely. We welcome the staff's invitation that we submit comments and we will. What is important today is that we have momentum, this is a very positive step toward having forward-looking, consumer-friendly, consumer-oriented legislation passed this year."

Michael Petricone, VP of Technology at the Consumer Electronic Association (CEA), stated in a release that the bill will "will advance the deployment of broadband services". He added that "We are especially pleased that this draft reflects important principles that ensure consumers' ability to access content, use applications and connect devices of their choice to high-speed Internet networks."

Gigi Sohn, President of the Public Knowledge, stated in a release that the bill has "many the pro-competitive features". She added that "We were very pleased to see that Chairman Barton recognized the need for preserving the model of an open broadband network by codifying the duty of broadband providers to allow subscribers to have access to the services, equipment and applications they need without interference from network providers and by requiring the interconnection of traffic." She also praised "the loosening of franchise requirements on new broadband video providers and by the recognition of the role of municipalities in providing broadband service."

The Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance (ITTA), the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association (NTCA), the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO), and the Western Telecommunications Alliance (WTA), stated in a joint release that "We are pleased to see that the draft recognizes the need for communications providers to live up to their universal service and reciprocal compensation responsibilities, though we would like to see these guidelines even more definitive.  Our objective going forward will be to ensure these draft provisions are strengthened from the perspective of rural carriers and consumers to fully ensure we are able to maintain a nationwide integrated communications infrastructure that has proven so critical to our economic and national security.”

A collection of 21 groups joined in a release that declined to offer support for the draft bill. These groups include the Consumers Union, the Center for Digital Democracy, the Consumer Federation of America, the Media Access Project, the Future of Music Coalition, the Common Cause, and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA).

They wrote that "Telecommunications legislation has for too long been negotiated behind closed doors with key industry heavyweights and major media conglomerates, which spend hundreds of millions of dollars on campaign contributions and lobbying in Washington."

They wrote that any bill should guarantee "Equal access, regardless of race, income, ethnicity or location, to affordable, advanced telecommunications technologies". It should also ensure that "that franchising agreements protect consumers, extend the benefits of competition to underserved communities, provide adequate compensation to local governments for use of public resources, provide for public access media, and flexibly address community needs".

9/15. The four Commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) held a meeting in Atlanta, Georgia, that focused on communications and Hurricane Katrina.

Jeff Pulver, a voice over internet protocol (VOIP) innovator, wrote a piece in his web site on September 15 in which he criticized the FCC for not acknowledging the role played by VOIP and other IP based communications in keeping people connected. He said that the internet community and the Amateur Radio Relay League were excluded from testifying at the meeting.

He wrote that "the FCC Open Meeting was a slight, not just to VoIP providers, but to the Internet and the entire, current and evolving IP-based communications industry."

"I think the FCC has been searching around for communications failures to highlight what went wrong in the wake of Katrina. The IP-based communications story does not fit that story -- the Internet and IP story is a story about what went right and what could go even more right with greater public awareness of the enabling power of IP technology and the Internet," wrote Pulver.

He opined that "it really is the larger Internet and the multitude of applications that IP technology allows that could revolutionize the ways in which government and citizens respond to public catastrophes. It wasn't just the VoIP service that helped bridge the communications divide during Hurricane Katrina. Frankly, text messaging, email, Web-obtained information, video blogs and other streaming media, and other IP-based applications were instrumental in keeping people connected and informed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. These applications only hint at what is possible through more ubiquitous, robust usage of the Internet. All these applications have been slighted today by the FCC's focus on carriers and traditional modes of communication."

"But if we do not shine a spotlight more brightly on the power of the Internet and the host of emerging and evolving applications that the Internet will spawn, we cannot expect the public to ever understand what could be. In the absence of public awareness, regulators will never feel any compulsion beyond caving to the will of the traditional communications companies, reluctant to experiment with the power of IP."

He had more unkind words for the FCC and its exercise of regulatory authority. "Now, I might say, thank goodness that the FCC has not recognized the role of the Internet in times of public emergencies. If the FCC recognized the Internet as a bona fide communications network, it might be inclined to regulate it. Oh, wait, the FCC has already begun to do so. Ironically, the FCC's first foray into regulating the Internet came in its effort to impose cookie-cutter E-911 obligations on VoIP. As I have previously noted, had the FCC rule been in place during Hurricane Katrina, VoIP services would have been shut off if the provider could not offer the cookie-cutter E-911 offering of the PSTN. Who would have benefited from such a backward-looking decision during a public crisis? Certainly not the Mayor who needed a Vonage phone to speak with President Bush."

He concluded that "If one lesson should have been learned by those who regulate communications, it should be that one-size-fits-all regulation destroys resiliency and the power afforded by promoting a multiplicity of communications options and capabilities. The Internet should be recognized as a means to improve lives and promote the public good, both during crises and otherwise. Government should work not to restrain the capabilities of the Internet but to encourage the Internet innovators to go forth, to differentiate, and to offer a multitude of products and services that will allow for as many communications alternatives as possible. Such alternatives will make communications more survivable and resilient during times of public catastrophes. But this is a message that the FCC and the public will not hear today."

See also, prepared statement [PDF] of Kevin Martin, prepared statement [PDF] of Kathleen Abernathy, prepared statement [PDF] of Michael Copps, and prepared statement [PDF] of Jonathan Adelstein. And see, FCC's video [RAM] of the meeting.

The House will meet at 12:00 NOON in pro forma session only. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM. It will resume consideration of HR 2744, the agriculture appropriations bill.

The Supreme Court is between terms. The opening conference of its October 2005 Term will be held on September 26.

2:30 PM. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hold a hearing on the nomination of Boyden Gray to be the US Representative to the European Union. Location: See, notice. Room 419, Dirksen Building.

The House will meet at 12:30 PM for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. The House will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:00 AM. The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) will meet. The agenda includes an update on nanotechnology. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 6, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 171, at Pages 53029 - 53030. Location: Room 100, National Academies Keck Center, 500 5th St., NW.

9:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) North American Numbering Council (NANC) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 31, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 168, at Page 51814. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-305.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee may hold a hearing titled "The Kelo Decision: Investigating Takings of Homes and other Private Property". See, the June 23, 2005, opinion [58 pages in PDF] of the Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London, a takings clause case. The witnesses will be Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Susette Kelo, Fred Jenkins (Pastor, St. Luke’s Pentecostal Church), Eddie Perez (National League of Cities), Hilary Shelton (NAACP), Thomas Merrill (Columbia University Law School), and Steven Eagle (George Mason University Law School). The SJC frequently cancels or postpones heairngs without notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing on several nominations, including Emil Henry (to be Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions at the Department of the Treasury), and Patrick O’Brien (to be Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing at the Department of the Treasury). See, notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Ten Ways to Protect Intellectual Property When Drafting E-Commerce Agreements". The speaker will be Walter Effross (American University law school). The price to attend ranges from $80-$125. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee may hold a hearing titled "Able Danger and Intelligence Information Sharing". See, notice. This involves data mining. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. The SJC frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) will meet to mark up HR 3648, a bill to impose additional fees with respect to immigration services for intracompany transferees. The meeting will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

CANCELLED. 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Network Reliability and Interoperability Council (NRIC) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 31, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 168, at Page 51814. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-305. See, notice [PDF] of cancellation.

10:30 AM - 1:30 PM. The Progress and Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host an event titled "Net Neutrality or Net Neutering in a Post- Brand X World: Self-Regulation, Policy Principles, and Legal Mandates in the Broadband Marketplace". The speakers will include Tom Tauke (Verizon), Randolph May (PFF), Peter Pitsch (Intel), Dan Brenner (National Cable and Telecommunications Association), Gigi Sohn (Public Knowledge), David McClure (U.S. Internet Industry Association), and Adam Thierer (PFF). Lunch will be served. See, notice and registration pages. Location: Capital Hilton, 1001 16th Street, NW.

12:00 NOON -1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) International Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be Mobile Satellite Services/Ancillary Terrestial Component (MSS/ATC). The speakers will be Anna Gomez (Deputy Chief of the FCC's International Bureau), Howard Griboff (FCC International Bureau), Jennifer Manner (VP Regulatory Affairs of Mobile Satellite Ventures), and Tim Farrar (Telecom, Media and Finance Associates, Inc.). No RSVP requested. Location: Hogan & Hartson, 555 13th St., NW, 13th Floor.

12:00 NOON - 1:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a seminar titled "Current Topics in Patent Law: Interference Practice and Patent Reform". The speaker will be Charles Gholz (Oblon Spivak McClelland Maier & Neustadt). The price to attend ranges from $10-$30. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

6:30 - 8:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Happy Hour". Location: 14K Restaurant at the Hamilton Crowne Plaza Hotel, 14th and K Streets, NW.

EXTENDED FROM AUGUST 22. Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to it notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding low power FM rules. The FCC adopted its order and NPRM on March 16, 2005, and released it on March 17, 2005. It is FCC 05-75 in MM Docket No. 99-25. See, original notice in the Federal Register, July 7, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 129, at Pages 39217 - 39227. See also, FCC notice [PDF] extending the deadlines.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property will hold a hearing titled "Reducing Peer-To-Peer Piracy (P2P) on University Campuses: A Progress Update". The hearing will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

9:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) Aviation Security Advisory Committee (ASAC) will meet. The agenda includes "final report and recommendations of the Secure Flight Privacy/IT Working Group". See, notice in the Federal Register, September 1, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 169, at Page 52119. Location: Residence Inn by Marriott, Pentagon City, 550 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of Judge John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the United States, and Timothy Flanigan to be the Deputy Attorney General. The agenda also includes numerous bills, including S 1088, the "Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005", S _, the "Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2005", and S 751, the "Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act", and S 1326, the "Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act". The SJC frequently cancels or postpones meetings without notice. The SJC rarely follows its published agenda. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing on "Examining the Financial Services Industry’s Responsibilities and Role in Preventing Identity Theft and Protecting Sensitive Financial Information". The witnesses will be Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR), Stuart Pratt (Consumer Data Industry Association), Edmund Mierzwinski (USPIRG), Ira Hammerman (Securities Industry Association), Gilbert Schwartz (Schwartz & Ballen), Oliver Ireland (Morrison and Foerster). See, notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Financial Institutions will hold a hearing on HR 3505, the "Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2005". See also, story titled "House Subcommittee to Hold Hearing on Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1215, September 15, 2005. Location: Room 2128, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing titled "Communications in Disaster". The first panel will address the protection of critical communications infrastructure in a disaster. The second panel will address communications for first responders. See, notice. The hearing will be webcast by the SCC. Press contact: Melanie Alvord (Stevens) 202 224-8456 or Melanie_Alvord at commerce dot senate dot gov, or Andy Davis (Inouye) at 202 224-4546 or Andy_Davis at commerce dot senate dot gov Location: Room 562, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The President's Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration (PECSEA) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, July 21, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 139, at Pages 42027 - 42028. Location: Room 4832, Department of Commerce, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW.

11:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on the Constitution will hold a hearing titled "The Supreme Court's Kelo Decision and Potential Congressional Responses". See, the June 23, 2005, opinion [58 pages in PDF] of the Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London, a takings clause case. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

4:00 PM. The Cato Institute will host a panel discussion titled "Mr. Smith Leaves Washington". The speakers will be Bradley Smith (Capital University School of Law), Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), and John Samples (Cato). Smith was until recently a Commissioner of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He was a leading opponent of government regulation of internet based speech. See, notice and registration page. A reception will follow the program. Location: Cato, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

5:00 - 7:00 PM. William Baumol will give a lecture titled "How Regulators Can Be Misled By Simplistic Theory". He is the author of, among other works, the book titled "The Free Market Innovation Machine" [Amazon]. The event is hosted by the AEI Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies. See, notice. Location: American Enterprise Institute, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

EXTENDED FROM SEPTEMBER 1. Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Copyright Office regarding its first report to the Congress required by the Satellite Home Viewer Extension and Reauthorization Act of 2004. See, original notice in the Federal Register, July 7, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 129, at Pages 39343 - 39345. See also, notice extending deadlines in the Federal Register, August 15, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 156, at Page 47857.

The House may meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business. See, Republican Whip Notice.

8:00 AM. The American Bar Association's (ABA) Standing Committee on Law and National Security will host a breakfast. The speaker will be Nuala Kelly, Chief Privacy Officer at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The title of her speech will be "Challenges in Preserving Privacy while Protecting Homeland Security". The price to attend is $20. See, notice and registration form [PDF]. Location: University Club, 1135 16th St., NW.

EXTENDED FROM SEPTEMBER 9. Extended extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its notice of second further proposed rulemaking regarding horizontal and vertical cable ownership limits. The FCC adopted this Second Further NPRM on May 13, 2005, and released it on May 17, 2005. This item is FCC 05-96 in MM Docket No. 92-264. See, original notice in the Federal Register, June 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 109, at Pages 33679 - 33687. See also, notice of extension of deadlines, in the Federal Register, July 6, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 128, at Pages 38848 - 38849. See also, notice [PDF] of further extension.

Deadline to submit requests to participate as a panelist in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division's and the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) October 25, 2005, workshop titled "Competition and Real Estate Workshop". See, FTC notice and notice in the Federal Register, September 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 173, at Pages 53362 - 53364.

The Supreme Court will hold the opening conference of the October Term 2005. See, calendar [PDF].

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cable Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. This will be an organizational meeting. For more information, contact Frank Buono at fbuono at willkie dot com. Location: Willkie Farr & Gallagher, 875 K Street, NW.

9/15. Eight Democrats in the House of Representatives wrote a letter to Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee, in which they advocated a hard date for DTV conversion, and funding for digital to analog converter boxes.

They wrote that "to express our support for legislation establishing a ``hard date´´ for television broadcasters to return their analog spectrum so it can be utilized to improve public safety communication systems and promote the deployment of innovative wireless technologies. In order to ensure a smooth transition to digital television (DTV) for consumers, this legislation should include a self-funded program to provide financial assistance for digital converter devices for all American households."

The signers of the letter include Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), and Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), all of whom are members of the HCC. The other signers are Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI), Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL), Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), and Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA).

Also on September 15, the High Tech DTV Coalition hosted a technology demonstration in House Commerce Committee's third floor hearing room, at which several companies displayed their converter boxes.

9/16. Timothy Stratford was named Assistant USTR for China Affairs. The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) stated in a release that he "will be responsible for developing and implementing U.S. trade policy toward Mainland China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao and Mongolia." Since 1998 he has been General Counsel for General Motors' China operations. Before that, he was a partner in the Beijing office of the law firm of Coudert Brothers. He has also worked in Taiwan with the Mormon church, in Beijing for the Department of State, and in Hong Kong for the law firm of Paul Weiss.

9/16. Theodore Ullyot, the Chief of Staff of the Department of Justice, will leave in October. He joined the DOJ in February of 2005. Before that, he worked at the Executive Office of the President. He was Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Staff Secretary in 2004-2005. He was Associate Counsel to the President in 2003-2004. See, DOJ release.

9/15. James Unruh and Wayne Murdy were named to the Board of Directors of Qwest Communications. Unruh is a principal of Alerion Capital Group; he was previously P/CEO of Unisys. Murdy is Ch/CEO of Newmont Mining. In addition, Vinod Khosla resigned his position on the Board. Khosla is a general partner with the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

9/14. Leslie Harris was named Executive Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), effective January 1, 2006. She heads her own firm, Leslie Harris & Associates. Before that, she worked for the ACLU. She will replace James Dempsey, who remains Policy Director, but has relocated to San Francisco, California. Ari Schwartz will handle management and administrative responsibilities until Harris starts. See, CDT release [PDF].

9/16. A spokesman for EBay, which has announced that it will acquire Skype, told TLJ that "we don't believe that there will be any type of, or any need for an, FCC review of this transaction, and that there are no licenses involved in this deal." A spokesman for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which has authority to review the transfer of licenses issued by the FCC, stated that there will likely be no FCC review of this transaction.

9/16. The U.S. Court of Appeals (1stCir) issued its opinion in Venegas-Hernandez v. ACEMLA, and a related action, disputes over ownership of the copyrights in musical compositions of Guillermo Venegas-Lloveras, who died in 1993. The Court affirmed in part, and reversed in part. This case is Venegas-Hernandez, et al. v. ACEMLA, et al.,  U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, Nos. 04-1934 and 04-1935, appeals from the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, Judge José Antonio Fusté presiding.

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.