9/20. The Author's Guild and others filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (SDNY) against Google alleging copyright infringement in connection with the Google Print project. The plaintiffs seek class action status.

The Author's Guild stated in a release that "Google is reproducing works still under the protection of copyright as well as public domain works". It accuses Google of "massive copyright infringement" in "its unauthorized scanning and copying of books through its Google Library program".

On December 14, 2004, Google announced that it "is working with the libraries of Harvard, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and the University of Oxford as well as The New York Public Library to digitally scan books from their collections so that users worldwide can search them in Google." See, Google release. See also, Oxford release titled "Google checks out Bodleian Library books".

The 2004 Google release describes a program identified as "Google Print". The release adds that "Users searching with Google will see links in their search results page when there are books relevant to their query. Clicking on a title delivers a Google Print page where users can browse the full text of public domain works and brief excerpts and/or bibliographic data of copyrighted material. Library content will be displayed in keeping with copyright law."

Google responded in a September 20, 2005, release that "any copyright holder can exclude their books from the program". Google added that "Google doesn't show even a single page to users who find copyrighted books through this program (unless the copyright holder gives us permission to show more). At most we show only a brief snippet of text where their search term appears, along with basic bibliographic information and several links to online booksellers and libraries."

Hence, it asserts that its copying of copyrighted works is protected by the fair use doctrine, which is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 107.

See also, story titled "University Publishers Accuse Google of Systematic Infringement of Copyright on a Massive Scale" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,142, May 25, 2005.

9/20. The U.S. Court of Appeals (2ndCir) heard oral argument on the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Expedited Appeal in Doe v. Gonzales, a case pertaining to National Security Letter authority under 18 U.S.C. § 2709. The Court of Appeals granted a stay of the District Court's ruling of September 9 which enjoined the gag provisions of § 2709.

The Court of Appeals also announced the schedule for an expedited appeal process. The DOJ's brief is due by September 27. The ACLU's brief is due by October 4. (The ACLU is a named plaintiff, and the ACLU Foundation is counsel for plaintiffs.) The DOJ's reply brief is due by October 10. See, ACLU release of September 20.

Section 2709. § 2709 is titled "Counterintelligence access to telephone toll and transactional records". It provides that the FBI may "request the name, address, length of service, and local and long distance toll billing records of a person or entity if the Director (or his designee) certifies in writing to the wire or electronic communication service provider to which the request is made that the name, address, length of service, and toll billing records sought are relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities". (Parentheses in original.)

This section further requires service providers to comply with any such request, which is more commonly referred to as a National Security Letter or NSL. It further imposes a gag on communications about such NSLs. It provides that "No wire or electronic communication service provider, or officer, employee, or agent thereof, shall disclose to any person that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought or obtained access to information or records under this section." The District Court ruling under review pertains to this gag provision.

There is no requirement in this section that the FBI first obtain a court order. There is no notice to the affected individuals that their privacy has been compromised. There is no procedure for the recipient, or affected individuals, to contest the validity of the NSL.

However, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has conceded that there are constitutional limitations on the gag order authority. Moreover, two different bills approved by the House and Senate in July to extend the expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act contain amendments to Section 2709 that would limit gag order authority. See, HR 3199, the "USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005", and S 1389, the "USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005". See also, story titled "House Approves PATRIOT Act Extension Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,180, July 22, 2005.

District Court Proceedings. On August 9, 2005, a plaintiff identified as John Doe filed a complaint [18 page PDF scan of redacted copy] in U.S. District Court (DConn) against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and others seeking a declaratory judgment that 18 U.S.C. § 2709 violates the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, and an injunction barring the FBI from enforcing a National Security Letter. The plaintiffs also seek preliminary relief. The District Court unsealed the redacted complaint on August 24. See, story titled "Suit Challenges Constitutionality of National Security Letters" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,202, August 26, 2005.

The unredacted portions of the complaint suggest that the lead plaintiff is an employee of a library that provides internet access to its users. For example, it states that "The vast majority of libraries around the country are "electronic communication service providers" under Section 2709 because they use online service to track circulation and cataloging of library materials, to track patron borrowing, and to provide Internet access to library patrons. As a result, libraries maintain a wide range of sensitive information about the reading habits and Internet usage of library patrons."

The District Court promptly heard oral arguments on August 31. It granted injunctive relief as to the gag provisions of § 2709 on September 9, but stayed its effect until September 20, to allow expedited review by the Court of Appeals. See, opinion [29 page redacted PDF scan] of September 9, and ACLU release of September 9.

The District Court held that "the application of § 2709(c) to the plaintiffs in this case on the topic of Doe's identity does not pass strict scrutiny. The defendants have failed to show a compelling state interest that is served by gagging the plaintiffs with regard to Doe's identity. If the government's interest is more broadly defined as preventing an unknown subject of the government's investigation from learning of the government's investigation, which would support a finding of a compelling interest, the gag provision as to Doe's identity is not narrowly tailored to serve that interest. Because § 2709(c) as applied cannot survive strict scrutiny, the plaintiffs have shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, as well a irreparable harm. Therefore, the court grants their motion to enjoin enforcement of § 2709(c) against them with regard to Doe's identity."

The District Court case is John Doe, et al. v. Alberto Gonzales, et al., U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, D.C. No. 3:05cv1256 JCH, Judge Janet Hall presiding.

Court of Appeals Proceedings. The DOJ brought the present expedited appeal.

It wrote in its September 15 memorandum [21 pages in PDF] that "When the Federal Bureau of Investigation investigates international terrorism and clandestine foreign intelligence activities, 18 U.S.C. § 2709 authorizes the FBI to issue National Security Letters (“NSLs”) to obtain relevant subscriber information and transactional records from wire and electronic communication service providers. To protect the integrity of such sensitive investigations, Section 2709 prohibits recipients of NSLs from disclosing that the government has sought or obtained information from the recipient pursuant to the NSL. Absent such a prohibition, disclosure of information about the NSL, including the identity of the NSL’s recipient, can seriously jeopardize the investigation itself -- for example, by alerting the target of the investigation that his activities are subject to scrutiny, and allowing the target to hide, move his activities to another provider, provide misinformation to the government, or otherwise frustrate the FBI's investigation."

It added that "Disclosure can also cause more general harm to the government’s counter-terrorism and counterintelligence efforts by allowing terrorist organizations and foreign intelligence operatives to monitor the government’s investigatory activities and look for information and patterns that can be used to evade detection and otherwise frustrate future investigations."

It argued that the gag provisions of § 2709 are constitutional, and hence, the District Court's ruling should be stayed pending consideration of the issue upon full briefing.

The Court of Appeals granted the stay requested by the DOJ.

The Court of Appeals case is Doe, et al. v. Gonzales, et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Judges Sotomayor, Wesley and Brieant presiding.

9/19. The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) released a paper [18 pages in PDF] titled "Lessons of the FCC Broadcast Flag Process: Background for the Legislative Debate".

The paper argues that "The creation of any significant new regulatory regime -- especially one that affects rapidly evolving technology industries -- raises concerns that over time the regulatory approval process may be used by established companies in the regulated industry or by third parties with related interests to protect established market interests or block disruptive technologies. The history of the first round of the flag process suggests that, as the regime was implemented in its first trial phase, it was susceptible to this kind of misuse."

The CDT also released an updated version of its paper [8 pages in PDF] titled "Broadcast Flag Authorization Legislation: Key Considerations for Congress". It concludes that "A broadcast flag regime would have significant and lasting consequences. It would create an ongoing role for the FCC in approving a wide range of digital technologies and would have a major impact on the way the public can use digital television. CDT believes that the policy issues surrounding the flag should not be left to unguided FCC discretion. If Congress chooses to authorize implementation of a broadcast flag regime, it should do so pursuant to careful limits and safeguards concerning the FCC’s authority and process; the public's ability to comment on news and public affairs programming; and interoperability problems that the flag may pose for consumers."

Also, on September 19, three interest groups, the Public Knowledge, Consumers Union, and Consumer Federation of America, wrote a letter to Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), the Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, urging the Senate "not to pass as part of an appropriations or budget package any legislation giving the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to impose its ``broadcast-flag´´ technology mandate."

They argued that "any jurisdictional grant to the FCC of the power to implement a broadcast-flag regulation necessitates giving broad, unprecedented power to the FCC to dictate product design, and to determine the future course of our digital economy. By imposing government-agency control over the design of digital electronics and, potentially, over computer operating systems and other software, the scheme will inevitably slow or stifle the development of innovative consumer electronics and other products. The Commission is not equipped by experience or tradition to be the gatekeeper on this unprecedentedly broad range of technologies."

Background on the Broadcast Flag. A broadcast flag is digital code embedded in a digital broadcasting stream. It signals digital television (DTV) reception equipment to limit redistribution. For it to be effective, DTV equipment must give effect to a broadcast flag. Hence, the FCC wrote rules that contains technology mandates for equipment manufacturers. However, while the FCC has statutory authority to license and regulate the use of electromagnetic spectrum, including devices that transmit and receive radio frequency signals, it does not have statutory authority to protect copyrights, or to regulate consumer electronic equipment for the purpose of protecting copyrights. The Court of Appeals reminded the FCC of this limitation in May of this year.

The FCC adopted its broadcast flag notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on August 8, 2002. The FCC released the text [12 pages in PDF] of this NPRM on August 9, 2002. See, stories titled "FCC Issues NPRM on Broadcast Flag" and "FCC Debates Its Authority to Promulgate Broadcast Flag Rule" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 489, August 12, 2002.

The FCC adopted and released, on November 4, 2003, its rules mandating the broadcast flag in its Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [72 pages in PDF]. See, story titled "FCC Releases Broadcast Flag Rule" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 772, November 5, 2003, and story titled "More Reaction to the FCC Broadcast Flag Item" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 773, November 6, 2003.

On May 6, 2005, the U.S.Court of Appeals (DCCir) issued its opinion [34 pages in PDF] in American Library Association v. FCC, overturning the FCC's broadcast flag rules. See, story titled "DC Circuit Reverses FCC's Broadcast Flag Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,131, May 9, 2005.

9/20. Maximilian Grant, Gerald Mossinghoff, and Lisa Norton were named to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) for three year terms. Grant is an associate in the Washington DC office of the law firm of Latham & Watkins, and the local chair of its intellectual property and technology practice group. He represents, among other clients, Veritas Software (now part of Symantec). Mossinghoff is Senior Counsel at the Alexandria, Virginia, law firm of Oblon Spivak. He is a former Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks and former President of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Norton is an associate in the Washington DC office of the law firm of DLA Piper Rudnick Gray & Cary. She previously worked for Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT). See, USPTO release.

9/20. Ayala Deutsch, Van Leichliter, and Albert Tramposch were named to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC) for three year terms. Deutsch is VP and Senior Intellectual Property Counsel at NBA Properties. Leichliter works for DuPont. Tramposch is Director of Trademark Registry Services at the Washington DC law firm of Morgan Lewis & Bockius. From 1993 to 2001, he worked for the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva, Switzerland. See, USPTO release.

9/19. President Bush nominated Alice Fisher to be an Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division. See, White House release. The Criminal Division is responsible for many matters related to the CALEA, cybercrime, enforcement of intellectual property laws, wiretaps, and electronic surveillance, searches and seizures involving new information technologies. She currently holds this position by recess appointment. Bush first nominated her back on March 29, 2005. See, story titled "Bush to Nominate Alice Fisher to Head DOJ's Criminal Division" TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,107, April 1, 2005. However, the Senate did not vote on her nomination. The delay relates to the partisan politics of Guantanamo Bay, not technology related issues.

9/20. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined the Metro Goldwyn Mayer Political Action Committee for the late filing of a 2004 year end report. See, FEC release.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. The House will likely take up HR 250, the "Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act of 2005", at about 1:00 PM. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM for morning business. It will then 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.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee may hold a hearing titled "Able Danger and Intelligence Information Sharing". The witnesses will be Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), Mark Zaid, Erik Kleinsmith (former Army officer), Gary Bald (FBI), and William Dugan (Department of Defense). 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.

POSTPONED. 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 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee will hold a business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 1725, the "Assure Emergency and Interoperable Communications for First Responders Act of 2005", and the nomination of Stewart Baker to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security. See, notice [PDF]. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

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 the first of two hearings titled "Communications in Disaster". The witnesses will be Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin, Bill Smith (BellSouth), Paul Roth (Cingular Wireless), Jeffrey Citron (Vonage), and Hossein Eslambolchi (AT&T). 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].

12:00 NOON. Xuan-Thao Nguyen (Southern Methodist University School of Law) will deliver a paper titled "Collateralizing Intellectual Property". This event is a part of the George Washington University Law School's (GWULS) intellectual property workshop series. RSVP by Tuesday, September 20, to Rosalie Kouassi at rkouassi at law dot gwu dot edu. Location: GWULS, Faculty Conference Center, 5th Floor Burns, 716 20th St., NW.

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.

Deadline to register for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) pre-auction seminar for the MVDDS Auction (Auction No. 63), to be held on September 28, 2005. See, notice and registration form [PDF].

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in American Association of Paging Carriers v. FCC, No. 04-1359. This petition for review pertains to paging carriers and licensing by itinerant mobile radio transmitters on a nationwide, non-coordinated basis. The AAPC challenges the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Memorandum Opinion and Order (MOO) adopted September 1, 2004, and released on September 8, 2004. This MOO is FCC 04-212 in WT Docket No. 01-146. See, brief [43 pages in PDF] of the AAPC. Judges Henderson, Garland and Griffith will preside. Location: Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

1:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will hold a hearing on HR 1956, the "Business Activity Tax Simplification Act of 2005". The meeting will be webcast by the HJC. Press contact: Jeff Lungren or Terry Shawn at 202 225-2492. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

6:00 - 9:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "How to Litigate a Patent Infringement Case". The speakers will be Patrick Coyne and Jerry Ivey (both of Finnegan Henderson). 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.

10:00 AM - 2:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold a pre-auction seminar for the MVDDS Auction (Auction No. 63). See, notice and registration form [PDF]. Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a seminar titled "Electronic Filing At The Trademark Office". The speaker will be Craig Morris (US Patent and Trademark Office). The price to attend ranges from $20-$40. For more information, call 202 626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

12:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Professional Responsibility Committee will host a brown bag lunch. This will be an organizational and planning meeting. RSVP to Tina Screven at  escreven at wbklaw dot com. Location: Wilkinson Barker Knauer, 2300 N St., NW, 7th floor large conference room.

Extended effective date of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) VOIP customer lockout order. See, the order contained in the FCC's document titled "Public Notice' [PDF], numbered DA 05-2085, and released on July 26, 2005. It requires, among other things, that every interconnected voice over internet protocol (VOIP) service provider must send every one of its subscribers an FCC mandated statement regarding E911, and that every interconnected VOIP service provider must send to every one of its customers the FCC mandated VOIP warning stickers. This order further requires that every interconnected VOIP service provider obtain acknowledgement from every one of its subscribers, and that it "disconnect, no later than August 30, 2005, all subscribers from whom it has not received such acknowledgements". See, extension order [4 pages in PDF].

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.