9/26. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) issued divided opinion [PDF] in Verizon v. Vonage, a patent infringement case involving VOIP technology. The Court of Appeals affirmed much of the District Court's judgment in favor of Verizon.

The District Court found that Vonage infringed three patents, issued an injunction, and awarded $58 Million in damages and a 5.5% royalty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of infringement, and injunction, as to two of the three patents, and vacated as to the third. The Court of Appeals also vacated the damages award.

All three members of the three judge panel wrote opinions. Two judges dissented parts of the opinion of the court.

Verizon file a complaint in the U.S. District Court (EDVa) against Vonage alleging patent infringement on June 12, 2006.

The District Court entered judgment of patent infringement with respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,282,574 titled "Method, server and telecommunications system for name translation on a conditional basis and/or to a telephone number", U.S. Patent No. 6,104,711 titled "Enhanced internet domain name server", and U.S. Patent No. 6,359,880 titled "Public wireless/cordless internet gateway".

It also awarded Verizon $58 Million in damages. On April 6, 2007, the District Court issued a permanent injunction barring Vonage from further infringement of these patents.

Vonage brought the present appeal. The Federal Circuit issued a stay pending appeal. See, story titled "Federal Circuit Issues Stay of Injunction in Verizon v. Vonage" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,569, April 24, 2007.

The Court of Appeals held that the District Court "did not err in its construction of disputed claim terms of the ’574 and ’711 patents. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of infringement with respect to those claims. However, we hold that the district court improperly construed one of the disputed terms in the ’880 patent, and accordingly vacate the judgment of infringement with respect to the ’880 patent and remand for a new trial."

The Court of Appeals also held that the District Court "did not commit prejudicial reversible error in instructing the jury on the law of obviousness with respect to the ’574 and ’711 patents, and therefore affirm the judgment that the asserted claims of those patents would not have been obvious. However, in light of the error in the construction of the claims of the ’880 patent and the possibility of error in the jury instruction on obviousness, we remand to the district court to determine whether prejudicial error occurred with respect to the jury instructions that would affect the obviousness verdict with respect to the ’880 patent."

The Court of Appeals vacated the $58 Million damages award and the 5.5% royalty, and remanded. It affirmed the injunction as to the ’574 and ’711 patents. In vacated the injunction as to the ’880 patent.

Vonage stated in a release that "In light of the workaround technology that Vonage has developed and deployed, today's decision is not expected to have an adverse impact on Vonage's business and customers will continue to enjoy the same great service they have come to expect from Vonage. Workarounds to the 711 patent and the 574 patent have been deployed for awhile."

Vonage's Chief Legal Officer, Sharon O'Leary, stated in this release that "We are pleased with the decision to vacate the 880 patent and the damages. However, Vonage remains confident that it has not infringed on the 880 patent -- a position we will continue to vigorously assert and look forward to presenting at trial. ... In the meantime, it's business as usual. We have had our workarounds for the 711 and 574 patents in place for some time and will remain focused on providing a great customer experience."

This case is Verizon Services Corp., et al. v. Vonage Holdings Corp. et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, App. Ct. Nos. 2007-1240, 2007-1251, and 2007-1274, appeals from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Claude Hilton presiding. Judge Dyk wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals. Judge Michel and Gajarsa also wrote opinions. Judge Michel would have affirmed the District Court judgment in its entirety.

9/26. The U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir) issued its opinion [PDF] in Freecycle Network v. Oey, vacating the judgment of the District Court, and remanding.

Summary. The District Court granted a preliminary injunction to an applicant for a trademark registration that bars an opponent of the registration from disparaging the possible trademark. The defendant merely expressed opinions that the mark was in the public domain, encouraged others to use it in a generic sense, and argued that it should not be registered by the USPTO.

While this case is a victory for free speech regarding agency proceedings, and on the internet, the Court of Appeals decided the case solely on statutory grounds. That is, it held that the Lanham Act does not permit trademark applicants to suppress speech that constitutes opposition to registration and encourages generic use.

The Court of Appeals also held that there is no claim for "trademark disparagement" under Section 1125.

The Court of Appeals did not rule on the merits of TFN's trademark application, but held that it is not a violation of the Lanham Act to use a trademarked term in its generic sense. Nor is encouraging others to use a mark in a generic sense actionable, unless there is also infringement, false designation of origin, false advertising, or dilution.

Facts. The Freecycle Network (TFN) is nonprofit Arizona corporation that states that it is dedicated to encouraging and coordinating the reusing, recycling, and gifting of goods. It filed a trademark registration application for the mark "freecycle" with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in 2004. The USPTO has not registered the mark.

Tim Oey is a former member of TFN who opposes registration of the mark. He published statements on the internet in which he asserted that TFN lacks trademark rights in the mark because it is a generic term. He also encouraged others to use the term in its generic sense and to write letters to the USPTO opposing registration.

District Court. TFN filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (DAriz) against Oey alleging that Oey’s statements constituted contributory trademark infringement and trademark disparagement under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), as well as state law claims of injurious falsehood, defamation, and intentional interference with a business relationship. TFN sought injunctive relief and damages.

The District Court granted a preliminary injunction (PI) based TFN's § 1125(a) claims. The Court of Appeals wrote that the District Court apparently conflated TFN's allegations of contributory trademark infringement and "trademark disparagement".

The PI enjoins Oey "from making any comments that could be construed as to disparage upon" TFN's "possible trademark and logo". It also requires that he "remove all postings from the internet and any other public forums that he has previously made that disparage" TFN's "possible trademark and logo."

Court of Appeals. Oey brought the present appeal. The Court of Appeals vacated and remanded.

The Court of Appeals applied the usual four part test for requests for a PI -- strong likelihood of success on the merits, possibility of irreparable injury to plaintiff if a PI is not granted, balance of hardships favoring the plaintiff, and advancement of the public interest.

The Court of Appeals focused on the likelihood of success.

The Court of Appeals first analyzed the trademark infringement claim. It wrote that "To be liable for trademark infringement under § 1125(a), a person must (1) use in commerce (2) any word, false designation of origin, false or misleading description, or representation of fact, which (3) is likely to cause confusion or misrepresents the characteristics of his or another person’s goods or services." It continued, quoting from Abercrombie & Fitch v. Moose Creek, 486 F.3d 629, that "The core element of trademark infringement is the likelihood of confusion, i.e., whether the similarity of the marks is likely to confuse customers about the source of the products."

The Court of Appeals concluded that "Contrary to the district court’s conclusion, these facts -- even if true --simply do not demonstrate that TFN has a likelihood of success on its § 1125(a) infringement claim."

First, it concluded that since "Oey simply expressed an opinion that TFN lacked trademark rights in the term ``freecycle´´ and encouraged likeminded individuals to continue to use the term in its generic sense and to inform the PTO of their opinions", his statements were not "in commerce" within the meaning of Section 1125.

Second, it concluded that since "his statements neither mention any competing service or product, nor claim any affiliation with TFN" his statements were not likely to cause confusion within the meaning of Section 1125.

Third, it concluded that Oey's statements did not satisfy the requirements for false advertising, misrepresentation, or unfair competition.

The Court of Appeals next analyzed the "trademark disparagement" under Section 1125 claim in the complaint. The Court of Appeals wrote simply that "no such claim exists" under Section 1125.

It wrote that "Trademark disparagement is not a valid cause of action under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and, even if it were, Oey’s actions do not satisfy the elements alleged by TFN because he made no false statements."

Finally, the Court of Appeals addressed the concept of genericide. It wrote that "the crux of TFN’s complaint is that Oey should be prevented from using (or encouraging the use of) TFN’s claimed mark FREECYCLE in its generic sense. However, TFN’s asserted mark -- like all marks -- is always at risk of becoming generic and thereby losing its ability to identify the trademark holder’s goods or services." (Parentheses in original.)

It noted that "Genericide has spelled the end for countless formerly trademarked terms, including ``aspirin,´´ ``escalator,´´ ``brassiere,´´ and ``cellophane.´´"

However, it held that "The Lanham Act itself, however, contains no provision preventing the use of a trademarked term in its generic sense. ... Nor does the Act prevent an individual from expressing an opinion that a mark should be considered generic or from encouraging others to use the mark in its generic sense. Rather, the use of a mark in its generic sense is actionable under the Lanham Act only when such use also satisfies the elements of a specified cause of action -- e.g., infringement, false designation of origin, false advertising, or dilution. TFN's mere disagreement with Oey’s opinion and frustration with his activities cannot render Oey liable under the Lanham Act."

The Court of Appeals did not address the First Amendment issue, or any of the state law claims. The case is remanded to the District Court. Hypothetically, TFN could still proceed on the state law claims, if the District Court does not decline to exercise jurisdiction.

This case is The Freecycle Network, Inc. v. Tim Oey and Jane Doe Oey, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 06-16219, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, D.C. No. CV-06-00173-RCC, Judge Raner Collins presiding. Judge Michael Hawkins wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judges Diarmuid O'Scannlain and Kim Wardlaw joined.

9/26. The U.S. District Court (DOre) issued an Opinion and Order [44 pages in PDF] in Mayfield v. USA, an action for unlawful arrest and imprisonment and unlawful searches and seizures.

Brandon Mayfield was arrested and detained at a time when the US and Spanish governments were investigating terrorist bombings in Madrid, Spain, in 2004. The US also engaged in wiretapping, bugging, and secret searches and seizures at his house, pursuant to orders issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).

The lengthy recitation of facts in the Opinion and Order illustrates, in the least, the lack of cause for treating Mayfield as a suspect, and at worst, improper conduct by the US.

The District Court, among other things, held that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), at 50 U.S.C. § 1804 and 50 U.S.C. § 1823, as amended by the PATRIOT Act, violate the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. In so doing, the District Court rejected the reasoning of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISCR) in In re Sealed Case.

This case is Mayfield et al. v. USA, U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, D.C. No. 04-1427-AA, Judge Ann Aiken presiding.

9/19. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report [52 pages in PDF] titled "Information Security: Sustained Management Commitment and Oversight Are Vital to Resolving Long-standing Weaknesses at the Department of Veterans Affairs". This report finds that the Department of Veteran's Affairs (DVA) "has not yet fully implemented most of the key GAO and IG recommendations to strengthen its information security practices", and that as a result "unnecessary risk exists that personal information of veterans and other individuals, such as medical providers, will be exposed to data tampering, fraud, and inappropriate disclosure."

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 1998-2007 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF].

The Senate will meet at 9:00 AM. It will resume consideration of HR 1585 [LOC | WW], the Department of Defense authorization bill.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes consideration of S 1267 [LOC | WW], the "Free Flow of Information Act of 2007", S 2035, [LOC | WW], also titled the "Free Flow of Information Act of 2007", and S 980, [LOC | WW] the "Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 2007". The SJC frequently fails to obtain a quorum for its meetings. The SJC rarely follows the agendas for its meetings. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Intelligence Committee's (HIC) Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence will hold a closed hearing titled "The Boeing Company". Location: Room H-405, Capitol Building.

10:00 AM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, July 26, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 143, at Pages 41074-41075. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

12:15 - 2:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cyberspace Practice and Wireless Telecom Practice Committees will host a lunch titled "700 MHz Auction: Will the Reality Match the Hype?". The speakers will be Christopher Guttman-McCabe (CTIA - Wireless Association), Harlin McEwen (International Association of Chiefs of Police), Janice Obuchowski (Frontline Wireless), and Richard Whitt (Google). The price to attend is $15. Reservations and cancellations are due by 12:00 NOON on September 25. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Sidley Austin, 6th Floor, 1501 K St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Alliance for Public Technology (APT), National Catholic Educational Association (NCEA), and National Association of Independent Schools (NAIS) will hold a brown bag lunch titled "How Broadband is Changing Educational Institutions and the Lives of Those Who Use Them". RSVP to apt at apt dot org. Location: 10th Floor, 919 18th St., NW.

1:00 PM. The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) will hold a hearing on HR 2128 [LOC | WW], the "Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2007", a bill to allow a presiding judge to permit the photographing, electronic recording, broadcasting, or televising to the public of any court proceeding over. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. The President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) will meet by teleconference. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 29, 2006, Vol. 71, No. 250, at Page 78451.

TIME CHANGE. 2:30 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights will hold a hearing titled "An Examination of the Google DoubleClick Merger and the Online Advertising Industry: What Are the Risks for Competition and Privacy?" Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) will preside. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

2:30 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will meet to mark up bills, including S 1453 [LOC | WW], the "Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) Extension Act of 2007", and S 1965 [LOC | WW], the "Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act", a bill pertaining to child pornography and online predation. See, notice. The meeting will be webcast by the SCC. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

3:00 - 5:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer Advisory Committee will meet. See, FCC Public Notice (DA 07-3842) and notice in the Federal Register, September 11, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 175, at Page 51814. Location: FCC, Room 3-B516, 445 12th St., SW.

TIME? The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (OUSTR) will hold a hearing to assist it in preparing its annual report to the Congress on the People's Republic of China's compliance with the commitments made in connection with its accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The OUSTR will consider, among other things, intellectual property rights (IPR) and IPR enforcement. The hearing may also be continued on September 28. See, notice in the Federal Register, July 25, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 142, at Pages 40905-40906. Location: Room 1, 1724 F St., NW.

Day two of a two day event hosted by the American Society of Access Professionals (ASAP) titled "Annual Symposium and Training Conference". Location: Ronald Reagan and International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) regarding the Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System (NDGPS) Program. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 1, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 147, at Pages 42219-42220.

Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF] states that "no votes are expected in the House".

8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a program titled "Feist, Facts, and Functions: IP Protection for Works Beyond Entertainment". The price to attend ranges from $25 to $50. For more information, call 202-289-7442. See, notice. Location: Cosmos Club, 2121 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

12:15 - 2:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cable Practice and Young Lawyers Committees will host a brown bag lunch titled "Translating the Set Top Box Debate and Visualizing the Living Room of the Future". For more information, contact Chris Fedeli at chrisfedeli at dwt dot com or Tarah Grant at tsgrant at hhlaw dot com. Location: Willkie Farr & Gallagher, Suite 200, 1875 K St., NW.

1:30 - 3:30 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host another panel discussion titled "Is Sarbanes-Oxley Impairing Corporate Risk-Taking?". The speakers will be Peter Wallison (AEI), Katherine Litvak (University of Texas at Austin School of Law), Henry Butler (Northwestern University), and Richard Geddes (Cornell University). See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

4:00 PM. Abdoulaye Wade, President of Senegal, will give a speech titled "I Don't Want Money. I Want Trade Agreements". See, notice. Location: Cato Institute, 1000 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

Effective date of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) final rule adjusting certain patent fee amounts to reflect fluctuations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). See, notice in the Federal Register, August 22, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 162, at Pages 46899-46903.

9:30 - 10:45 AM. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) will host a panel discussion titled "Government Procurement: Continuing Reform or Rolling Back Progress?". For more information, contact Charlie Greenwald at cgreenwald at itaa dot org or 703-284-5305. Breakfast will be served. Location: Zenger Room, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

9:30 AM - 3:40 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a conference titled "Women and Science". See, notice. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Copyright Office (CO) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) regarding the operation of, and continued necessity for, the cable and satellite statutory licenses under the Copyright Act. See, original notice in the Federal Register, April 16, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 72, at Pages 19039-19055; technical correction notice in the Federal Register, April 24, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 78, at Page 20374; and notice of extension in the Federal Register, June 19, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 117, at Pages 33776-33777.

Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) regarding user needs and systems requirements of the terrestrial component of the Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System (NDGPS). See, notice in the Federal Register, August 1, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 147, at Pages 42219-42220.

Deadline to submit applications to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the renewal of state telecommunications relay services (TRS) program certification. See, notice in the Federal Register, July 18, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 137, at Pages 39423-39424.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding planning consumer understanding of the transition to digital television. This NPRM is FCC 07-128 in MB Docket No. 07-148. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 16, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 158, at Pages 46014-46020.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding ten studies related to government regulation of media ownership. See, FCC Public Notice [4 pages in PDF], which is DA 07-3470 in MB Docket Nos. 06-121 and 02-277, and MM Docket Nos. 01-235, 01-317, and 00-244. See also, notice in the Federal Register, August 8, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 152, at Pages 44539-44540.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding various proposals to promote minority and female ownership in the media industry. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 8, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 152, at Pages 44457-44466.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding proposed changes to the system of records maintained by the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) titled Terrorist Screening Records System (TSRC). See, notice in the Federal Register, August 22, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 162, at Pages 47073-47079, and story titled "FBI Announces Changes to Terrorist Screening Records System" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,627, August 23, 2007.

9:30 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hold a hearing title "Digital Future of the United States: Part VI: The Future of Telecommunications Competition". Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a hearing titled "Preserving the Rule of Law in the Fight Against Terrorism". The only witness will be Jack Goldsmith, author of the just published book titled "The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration" [Amazon]. Goldsmith is a professor at Harvard Law School who previously worked for the Department of Defense's General Counsel, and then as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel. The book contains some material on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP). See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a panel discussion titled "Private Equity Panel". The speakers will be William Kennard (The Carlyle Group), Julie Richardson (Providence Equity Partners), Jamie Rubin (One Equity Partners), and Tom Wheeler (Core Capital Partners). Blair Levin (Stifel Nicolaus) will moderate. The doors will open at 11:30 AM. Lunch will be served at 12:00 NOON. Prices vary. See, registration form [PDF]. Registrations and cancellations are due by 5:00 PM on September 27. Location: Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a program titled "The Copyright Office Speaks". The speakers will be Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights. The price to attend ranges from $25 to $40. For more information, call 202-626-3463. See, notice. Location: Caucus Room, 401 9th St., NW.

2:00 - 4:00 PM. The House Science Committee's (HSC) Subcommittee on Research and Science Education will hold a hearing titled "Nanotechnology Education". The witnesses will be David Ucko (National Science Foundation), Navida Ganguly (Oak Ridge High School), Hamish Fraser (Ohio State University), Ray Vandiver (Oregon Museum of Science and Industry), Sean Murdock (NanoBusiness Alliance), and Gerald Wheeler (National Science Teachers Association). Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) Mass Media Practice Committee will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Buying and Selling Political Time in a Hot Election Season". The speakers will be Bobby Baker (FCC), Hope Cooper (FCC), Kyle Roberts (Smart Media), and Kyle Osterhout (Media Strategies). Prices vary. Registrations and cancellations are due by 5:00 PM on September 28. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Dow Lohnes, Suite 800, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Coalition Against Counterfeiting and Piracy (CACP) titled "4th Annual U.S. Chamber of Commerce Anti-Counterfeiting and Piracy Summit". See, notice. Prices vary. For more information, contact counterfeiting at uschamber dot com or 202-463-5500. Location: U.S. Chamber, 1615 H St., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding its proposed rules changes concerning shareholder proposals and electronic shareholder communications. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 3, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 149, at Pages 43465-43488.

9:30 AM. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (OUSTR) will hold a GSP Subcommittee Public Hearing in connection with the 2007 Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) Annual Review. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 6, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 172, at Pages 51264-51266. Location: Rooms 1 and 2, 1724 F St., NW.

10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Information Technology and Innovation Forum (ITIF) will hold an event titled "Does the U.S. Benefit from U.S. IT Products Made Overseas?: Mapping the Global Value Chain of the iPod and Notebook Computers". The speakers will be Ken Kraemer (UC Irvine) and Robert Atkinson (ITIF). Location: Room 210, Cannon Building, Capitol Hill.

10:00 AM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Commercial Mobile Service Alert Advisory Committee will hold its final meeting. See, FCC notice [PDF]. Location: FCC, Room TW-C305, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF) will host a panel discussion titled "Cyber-Safety in a Web 2.0 World: What Parents and Policymakers Need to Know," The speakers will be Rep. Melissa Bean (D-IL), Sharon Cindrich (author of e-Parenting: Keeping Up with Your Tech-Savvy Kids), Larry Magid (co-author of MySpace Unraveled: A Parent’s Guide to Teen Social Networking), and Nancy Willard (author of Cyber-Safe Kids, Cyber-Savvy Teens: Helping Young People Learn To Use the Internet Safely and Responsibly), and Adam Thierer (PFF). See, PFF notice and registration page. Lunch will be served. Location: Room 121, Cannon Building.

6:00 - 9:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) program titled "How to Protect and Enforce Trademark Rights: A Primer". The speakers will be Shauna Wertheim (Roberts Mardula & Wertheim) and Steven Hollman (Hogan & Hartson). The price to attend ranges from $80 to $115. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See, notice. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, B-1 Level, 1250 H St., NW.

Day two of a two day conference hosted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Coalition Against Counterfeiting and Piracy (CACP) titled "4th Annual U.S. Chamber of Commerce Anti-Counterfeiting and Piracy Summit". See, notice. Prices vary. For more information, contact counterfeiting at uschamber dot com or 202-463-5500. Location: U.S. Chamber, 1615 H St., NW.

9:30 AM. The Office of the United States Trade Representative (OUSTR) will hold a GSP Subcommittee Public Hearing in connection with the 2007 Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) Annual Review. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 6, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 172, at Pages 51264-51266. Location: Rooms 1 and 2, 1724 F St., NW.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Science Committee's (HSC) Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation will hold a hearing titled "The Globalization of R&D and Innovation, Pt. III: How do Companies Choose Where to Build R&D Facilities?" The witnesses will be Robert Atkinson (Information Technology Innovation Foundation), Martin Kenney (UC Davis), Mark Sweeney (McCallum Sweeney Consulting). Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.

? TIME? The House Intelligence Committee (HIC) may mark up a bill to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Congress passed, and the President signed, S 1927 [LOC | WW], the "Protect America Act", in early August. That act sunsets after six months. Location: __?

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Tivo v. Echostar, App. Ct. No. 2006-1574, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (EDTex) in a patent infringement case involving personal video recorder (PVR) technology. The District Court case is numbered 2:04-CV-1-DF. Location: Courtroom 201.

Day one of a four day convention of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). See, conference web site. Location: Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill, 400 New Jersey Ave., NW.