DC Circuit Reverses
in FTC v. Whole Foods |
7/29. The U.S. Court of Appeals
(DCCir) issued its divided
opinion [redacted, 58 pages in PDF] in FTC v. Whole Foods,
reversing the District Court's order denying the
Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) request for a preliminary injunction of the
acquisition by Whole Foods of Wild Oats.
The facts of this case are not technology related. It is about retail stores
that sell groceries. However, the antitrust principles discussed in this case
could impact technology companies. This case involves defining the relevant
market for the purpose of analyzing the impact of a merger upon competition.
The U.S. District Court (DC) held
in this case, as another District Court held in DOJ v. Oracle,
that government antitrust regulators postulated too narrow a market, and
therefore erroneously predicted anticompetitive results of a merger. See, story
titled "DOJ Loses Oracle Case" in
TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 974, September 10, 2006.
Also, this case, and the Federal
Communications Commission's (FCC) disposition of its antitrust review of the
merger of XM Sirius, reveal the power of federal regulators to block mergers,
extend uncertainty, and extend legal proceedings for extraordinarily long
periods of time. Both XM and Sirius and Whole Foods and Wild Oats announced
their mergers in early 2007. The FCC, after 16 months of delay, finally approved
the XM Sirius merger last week. And now, Whole Foods is informed by the Court of
Appeals, nearly a year after completing its merger, that the FTC may still
seek to enjoin it. These cases demonstrate that the legitimate interests of
investors, merging entities and other market participants in prompt
resolution of antitrust issues, and finality
and certainty, are not always being recognized by regulators and courts.
All three judges, Brown, Tatel, and Kavanaugh wrote long opinions. Brown
wrote the opinion of the Court of Appeals, in which Judge Tatel concurred. Tatel
also wrote a separate opinion offering additional analysis. Judge Kavanaugh
wrote a strenuous dissent.
In the present case, the FTC asserts that the relevant market is operators
of premium, natural, and organic supermarkets (PNOS). Moreover, it asserts
that based upon this market definition, the merger would give Whole Foods a
PNOS monopoly in 18 cities.
The District Court held that there is no distinct PNOS market. Rather,
Whole Foods and Wild Oats are just two of many competitors in the grocery
store market.
In August of 2007 the District Court issued an
order [2 pages in PDF] and a redacted copy of its
Memorandum Opinion [95 page PDF scan; 3.5 MB] denying the FTC's request
for a preliminary injunction.
The FTC sought an injunction pending appeal, which the Court of Appeals
denied. Whole Foods and Wild Oats then consummated their merger in late
August.
The FTC nevertheless proceeded with this appeal. See, FTC's January 14,
2008,
brief [78 pages in PDF] and February 27, 2008,
reply brief [35 pages in PDF].
First, Judge Brown wrote that the appeal is not moot, even though the
relief sought, an injunction of merger, cannot be granted, because the
merger has been completed.
Then, she opined, out of the blue, that the District Court must be
reversed, based upon an analysis of "marginal consumers" and
"core consumers".
She offered this summary: "the district court believed the antitrust laws are
addressed only to marginal consumers. This was an error of law, because in some
situations core consumers, demanding exclusively a particular product or package
of products, distinguish a submarket. The FTC described the core PNOS customers,
explained how PNOS cater to these customers, and showed these customers provided
the bulk of PNOS’s business. The FTC put forward economic evidence -- which the
district court ignored -- showing directly how PNOS discriminate on price
between their core and marginal customers, thus treating the former as a
distinct market. Therefore, we cannot agree with the district court that the FTC
would never be able to prove a PNOS submarket."
Judge Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that "the FTC's case is
weak and seems a relic of a bygone era when antitrust law was divorced from
basic economic principles."
He argued that the District Court properly rejected the FTC's PNOS
market assertion. He concluded that "Whole Foods competes in an
extraordinarily competitive market that includes all supermarkets, not
just so-called organic supermarkets. There is no good legal basis to block
further implementation of this merger."
He reasoned that "the FTC commits the basic antitrust mistake of
confusing (i) product differentiation (which is how a seller such as Whole
Foods competes within a market) and (ii) separate product markets.
Discerning the difference in a particular case usually turns on pricing
information. Here, the pricing evidence shows that Whole Foods prices did
not differ based on the presence or absence of a Wild Oats in the area and
that conventional supermarkets constrain Whole Foods prices. The relevant
product market therefore is all supermarkets." (Parentheses in
original.)
Jeffrey Schmidt, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition, stated in
a release that
"We are pleased by today's decision of the appeals court in the Whole
Foods matter and are looking forward to future proceedings before the
district court, leading to a full trial on the merits before the
Commission."
This case is FTC v. Whole Foods Markets, Inc. et al., U.S. Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia, App. Ct. No. 07-5276, an appeal
from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, D.C. No.
07cv01021, Judge Paul Friedman presiding.
|
|
|
WTO Doha Talks Fail
Again |
7/29. U.S. Trade Representative
Susan Schwab stated in a
release that "we will not be able to reach a breakthrough at this
time". She added that "negotiations deadlocked" on
agriculture issues.
The World Trade Organization (WTO)
began this latest meeting on July 21, 2008, in Geneva, Switzerland. See
also, WTO
release announcing the "collapse" of talks.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA)
stated in a release that "I'm disappointed but not surprised. The
writing was on the wall once these negotiations devolved into India and
China trying to roll back their existing WTO commitments. That would
have meant increased tariffs on U.S. exports, and there's no way Congress
would have supported that."
Sen. Grassley continued that "I'd hoped to see the talks result in
new market access opportunities for U.S. farmers, manufacturers, workers,
and service providers. But no deal is better than a bad deal."
"If India, China, and other advanced developing countries
want the benefits of expanded trade, they have to abandon protectionism and
negotiate in good faith. I hope they recommit themselves to pursuing a
meaningful trade expansion agenda in the future. WTO members need to realize
what's at stake and the opportunity that's been lost, at least for the time
being", said Sen. Grassley.
|
|
|
NTIA Seeks Amendment of 1090
MHz Rules |
7/29. The National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (NTIA) filed a
petition for rulemaking [PDF] with the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
requesting that it amend its rules "to allow Aeronautical Utility Mobile
Stations to use the 1090 MHz frequency for runway vehicle identification and
collision avoidance".
The NTIA explained that its "proposals would allow air
traffic control (ATC) to identify service vehicles transiting within the airport
movement area, enhance ATC ability to control vehicle movement, and thereby
reduce the risk of aircraft colliding with vehicles on the airport surface.
Providing ATC with the ability to control service vehicle movement on the
airport movement area would significantly reduce the number of incidents
occurring there and increase overall safety."
Basically, to track the location of vehicles new airport surface
detection equipment (ASDE) would use 1090 MHz vehicle squitters and
triangular of signals.
The NTIA asserts that there would be no degrading the performance of
existing systems that rely on 1090 MHz.
|
|
|
DOJ Obtains
Indictment of Sen. Stevens in DC |
7/29. A grand jury of the U.S.
District Court (DC) returned an
indictment [27 pages in PDF] that charges
Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) with
seven counts of violation of
18 U.S.C. § 1001 in connection with his alleged failure to disclose
receipt of things of value on his annual Senate Financial Disclosure Forms
(SFDF) for the years 1999 through 2006.
Sen. Stevens (at right) was, until the release of this
indictment, the ranking Republican on the
Senate
Commerce Committee (SCC), which has jurisdiction over communications
issues, and exercises oversight over the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the
National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and other
information technology and communications related agencies.
The indictment alleges that Sen. Stevens failed to disclose "home
improvements" to his house in Girdwood, Alaska, performed by others,
including a "second-story wraparound deck, new plumbing, new electrical
wiring" and other remodeling and additions.
It also alleges that he failed to disclose vehicle exchanges, and
receipt of a Viking "gas
grill, and a new multi-drawer, stationary tool storage cabinet with new
tools".
It alleges that he received these things of value from VECO Corporation,
an oil industry services company based in Alaska. It further alleges that
Sen. Stevens "did use his official position and his office on behalf
of VECO".
§ 1001(a) provides, in part, that "whoever, in any matter
within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch
of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -- (1)
falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a
material fact; (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation; or (3) makes or uses any false writing or
document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or
fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined" or "imprisoned
...".
Sen. Stevens responded in a
release that "I have proudly served
this nation and Alaska for over 50 years. My public service began when I
served in World War II. It saddens me to learn that these charges have been
brought against me. I have never knowingly submitted a false disclosure
form required by law as a U.S. Senator."
He added that "In accordance with Senate Republican Conference
rules, I have temporarily relinquished my vice-chairmanship and ranking
positions until I am absolved of these charges."
"The impact of these charges on my family disturbs me
greatly", said Sen. Stevens. "I am innocent of these charges and
intend to prove that."
The indictment does not charge Sen. Stevens with any violations of the
Internal Revenue Code. Nor does the indictment charge Sen. Stevens with
any violation of
Chapter 11 of the Criminal Code, which pertains to "Bribery, Graft, and
Conflicts of Interest". Yet, the indictment alleges facts that would
support charges under Chapter 11.
There is a wide
disconnection between the facts alleged in the indictment, and the criminal
charges brought by the indictment. The indictment does not explain this gap, and
government officials who touted this indictment at a news conference on July 29
were evasive about it.
DOJ Forum Shopping. This article posits the hypothesis that the
reason that the Department of Justice (DOJ) has brought the lesser charges
of non-disclosure in SFDFs, rather than tax or Chapter 11 charges, is that
the government is forum shopping for a favorable judge and jury. That is,
the DOJ obtained this indictment in the District of Columbia, and seeks to
keep this case from being tried in Anchorage, Alaska, where it fears a
verdict of acquittal.
The 6th Amendment of the Constitution provides that "In all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by
an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed."
Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 18 provides that "Unless a statute or these rules permit
otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the
offense was committed. The court must set the place of trial within the district
with due regard for the convenience of the defendant and the witnesses, and the
prompt administration of justice."
Stevens' house is in Alaska. The
alleged home improvements, and all of the transactions alleged in the indictment,
occurred in Alaska. Only the filing of the Senate Financial
Disclosure Forms (SFDFs) are alleged to have taken place in District of
Columbia. Thus, the §1001/SFDF offense is the only one that the DOJ can assert
occurred in the District of Columbia.
Thus, the indictment alleges that Sen. Stevens violated §1001 "in the District of Columbia".
If the DOJ were to charge Sen. Stevens with bribery or tax
evasion, then there would be no credible argument that the alleged crime occurred in
the District of Columbia, and Sen. Stevens
would be entitled to have the case moved to Alaska. Of course, it still remains
an open issue whether the alleged §1001/SFDF offense was committed in Alaska.
And, Sen. Stevens may soon seek to move the case.
Victor Song, Deputy Chief of the
Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Criminal
Investigations Division participated in a news conference on July 29. However, he did not explain the absence of tax
charges.
Matthew Friedrich, acting Assistant Attorney
General in charge of the DOJ's Criminal Division, also participated in the news
conference. He was asked "Why did the Justice Department go after disclosures as
opposed to other statutes, the tax statute or gift ban statute?"
He gave a non-responsive answer. First, this is what he said: "I guess
the best way to answer that, in terms of would of, could of, should of on
other charges, again, as I alluded to, I really need to stick to what's
charged here in terms of the indictment. The indictment is pretty detailed.
I think, if you take a look at it, it lays out pretty clearly what our
basis is for what we brought."
Another reporter persisted, "Why wouldn't that
be a tax violation ... ?", while another asked asked "Did he report these on his tax
returns; like improvements to a house would be income, wouldn't it?"
Friedrich said "I'm not going to comment on the
senator's tax returns."
There are many reasons why the DOJ would fear a trial in Anchorage, or
anywhere in Alaska. Anchorage is a town with a high proportion of active
duty and retired military personnel. Any jury pool would include people who
know of Sen. Stevens' distinguished service in WWII and his long history
of support for the military and military personnel, particularly as a
member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its Defense Subcommittee,
both of which he has chaired. He piloted C-46s and C-47s in the
China theater and received the
Distinguished Service
Cross, which the Department of Defense states is awarded for
"extraordinary heroism not justifying the award of a Medal of
Honor". Sen. Stevens also has been one of most successful Senators
in influencing appropriations, legislation, and regulatory actions to
benefit his state. Any Anchorage jury pool would include people familiar
with Sen. Stevens' service to the state.
In addition, many potential jurors in Anchorage possess a high level of
distrust for the federal government in Washington DC, which has obtained
this indictment. Moreover, it unlikely
that any rational and competent prosecutor seeking to maximize his or her career opportunities
in the state would willingly or diligently prosecute Sen. Stevens. The DOJ would
thus have to send prosecutors from out of state. Some jurors and judges would perceive
these prosecutors with suspicion, as outsiders.
Moreover, jury pools in Anchorage contain more highly educated people who
hold managerial, engineering, professional and legal jobs than jury pools in the
District of Columbia. These people are more capable of dissecting, analyzing,
and rejecting complicated government cases.
In sum, were the DOJ to attempt to prosecute Sen. Stevens in Alaska, it
would likely face a jury with members unfavorable to the prosecution. In
contrast, the DOJ likely could not pick a jury anywhere in the country more
biased in its favor in a case against Sen. Stevens than in the District of
Columbia.
Thus, the hypothesis advanced here is that, while the DOJ has not
admitted so much, it has procured an unusual indictment for the purpose of
manipulating the forum in which the case would be tried, and hence, the
outcome of the case.
Disclosure. David Carney, author of this story, is an ex-Alaskan
who voted for Sen. Stevens in the 1984 Senate election.
|
|
|
|
Correction |
The Wednesday, July 23, 2008, issue of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert, No.
1,798, contained an article titled "Orphan Works Bills
Discussed".
The 7th paragraph incorrectly stated that "Only one, Victor Perlman
(American Society of Media Photographers),
was an opponent. He stated that these bills are ``disastrous´´ for creators
of visual arts."
In fact, Mr. Perlman stated that "For creators of visual materials,
most of the orphan works legislation has looked more like a choice between
the disastrous and the disastrous. The current version of the House bill
finally reached the level of protections that the two largest photo trade
associations could support."
Copies of this article published in the TLJ web site will reflect this
correction.
|
|
|
Washington Tech Calendar
New items are highlighted in red. |
|
|
Wednesday, July
30 |
The House will meet at 10:00 AM
for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's
schedule for the week of July 28.
TIME CHANGE. 10:00 AM. 9:00 AM. The
Senate Judiciary Committee
(SJC) will hold a hearing titled "Politicized
Hiring at the Department of Justice". See,
notice.
Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce
Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing titled "Improving
Consumer Protection in the Prepaid Calling Card Market". This
hearing will also address S 2998
[LOC |
WW], the "Prepaid Calling Card Consumer Protection Act of
2008", sponsored by Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL). Sen. Nelson will
preside. The witnesses will be
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), William
Kovacic (FTC Chairman), Sally Greenberg, (National Consumers League),
Gus West (Hispanic Institute), and Barry Smitherman (Chairman, Texas
Public Utility Commission). See,
notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.
10:00 AM. The
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will hold a meeting. The
agenda
includes an interpretive release to provide guidance regarding the use of company web sites under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws. Location: SEC,
Auditorium, Room L-002.
10:15 AM. The
House Judiciary Committee (HJC)
will meet to mark up numerous items. The agenda includes HR 6353
[LOC |
WW], the "Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer
Protection Act of 2008", and HR 2140
[LOC |
WW], the "Internet Gambling Study Act". The HJC
will webcast this meeting. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn
Building.
12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The
Alliance for Public Technology (APT)
host a panel discussion titled "Broadband in Low-income
Communities: From Access to Adoption". The speakers will be
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Joy Howell (APT), Austin Bonner (One Economy
Corporation), and Alec Ross (OEC). A box
lunch will be served. Location: Room HC-6, Capitol Building.
|
|
|
Thursday, July 31 |
The House will meet at
10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's
schedule for the week of July 28.
9:00 AM - 4:30 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of
the Department of Homeland Security's
(DHS) Homeland Security Information Network Advisory Committee.
See, notice
in the Federal Register, July 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 128, at Page
37975-37976. Location: Bolger Center, 9600 Newbridge Drive,
Potomac, MD.
9:30 AM. The
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee's
(SHSGAC) Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government
Information, Federal Services, and International Security will hold a
hearing titled "Offline and Off-budget: The Dismal State of
Information Technology Planning in the Federal Government". See,
notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The
Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will meet to mark up several bills,
including S 3274
[LOC |
WW],
the "National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of
2008". See,
notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.
10:00 AM. The
Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business
meeting. The
agenda once again includes consideration of S 2746
[LOC |
WW],
the "OPEN FOIA Act of 2008". The SJC rarely follows its
published agendas. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The
House Science Committee (HSC)
will hold a hearing titled "Oversight of the Federal Networking
and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD)
Program". The witnesses will be Chris Greer
(NITRD), Daniel Reed (Microsoft),
Craig
Stewart (Indiana University), and Don Winter (Boeing Company).
Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM. The
House Small Business Committee
(HSBC) will hold a hearing titled "Cost and Confidentiality:
The Unforeseen Challenges of Electronic Health Records in Small
Specialty Practices". Location: Room 1539, Longworth
Building.
10:30 AM. The
House Judiciary Committee's
(HJC) Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law will hold a
hearing on HR 5884
[LOC |
WW],
the "Sunshine in Litigation Act of
2008", a bill to amend 28 U.S.C. § 111 to limit the use of
protective orders and the sealing of cases and settlements. The HJC
will webcast this hearing. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn
Building.
12:30 PM. The House
Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on the Constitution will
hold a hearing on HR 5607
[LOC |
WW],
the "State Secrets Protection Act of 2008".
The HJC will webcast this hearing. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn
Building.
Extended deadline to submit initial comments to
the Copyright Office (CO) in
response to its proposed rule changes regarding retransmission of
digital television broadcast signals by cable operators pursuant to
17 U.S.C. § 111. See,
notice of
extension in the Federal Register, July 14, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 135, at
Page 40203, and original
notice in
the Federal Register, June 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 106, at Pages
31399-31415.
|
|
|
Friday,
August 1 |
The House will meet at 9:00 AM
for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's
schedule for the week of July 28.
8:30 AM - 4:30 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of
the Department of Homeland Security's
(DHS) Homeland Security Information Network Advisory Committee.
See, notice
in the Federal Register, July 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 128, at Page
37975-37976. Location: Bolger Center, 9600 Newbridge Drive,
Potomac, MD.
10:00 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) may hold
an event titled "Open Commission Meeting". See, FCC
agenda and story titled
"FCC Announces Tentative Agenda for August 1 Meeting" in TLJ
Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,795, July 18, 2008. Location: FCC, Commission
Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.
Deadline to submit reply comments regarding broadband
availability mapping (BAM) to the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM)
regarding BAM and modifications to the FCC Form 477 data collection. The
FCC adopted this FNPRM on March 19, 2008, but did not release the
text
[81 pages in PDF] until June 12, 2008. It is FCC 08-89 in WC Docket No.
07-38.See,
notice in the Federal Register, July 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 128, at
Pages 37911-37922. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts Order
Regarding Broadband Data Collection" in
TLJ Daily
E-Mail Alert No. 1,734, March 20, 2008.
Deadline to submit initial comments regarding issues
other than broadband availability mapping (BAM) to the
Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM)
regarding BAM and modifications to the FCC Form 477 data
collection. The FCC adopted this FNPRM on March 19, 2008, but did
not release the
text [81 pages in PDF] until June 12, 2008. It is FCC 08-89 in WC
Docket No. 07-38.See,
notice
in the Federal Register, July 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 128, at Pages
37911-37922. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts Order Regarding
Broadband Data Collection" in
TLJ Daily
E-Mail Alert No. 1,734, March 20, 2008.
|
|
|
Monday, August 4 |
10:00 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Lexicon
Medical v. Northgate Technologies, App. Ct. No. 2007-1420. This
is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (NDIll) in a patent infringement
case involving the post KSR v. Teleflex obviousness standard.
Location: Courtroom 201, 717 Madison Place, NW.
10:00 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Griffin
Broadband Communications v. U.S., App. Ct. No. 2008-5032. This
is an appeal from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in a 5th Amendment
takings case involving government termination of a contract relationship
regarding the provision of communications services on a military base.
Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.
2:00 - 3:00 PM. The
President's National
Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee will hold a
partially closed meeting by teleconference. See,
notice in
the Federal Register, June 19, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 119, at Pages
34945-34946.
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 5. |
10:00 AM. The U.S.
Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Qualcomm
v. Broadcomm, App. Ct. No. 2007-1545. Location: Courtroom 402,
717 Madison Place, NW.
6:30 - 8:30 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee
will host an event titled "Happy Hour". For more information,
contact Devin Crock at dcrock at kelleydrye dot com or Tarah Grant at
tsgrant at hhlaw dot com. Location: Tony and Joe’s Seafood Place at the
Georgetown Waterfront, 3000 K St., NW.
Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Justice
(DOJ) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking regarding
inspection of records relating to the depiction of simulated sexually
explicit performances. See,
notice in
the Federal Register, June 6, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 110, at Pages
32262-32273. This notice states that this "means conduct engaged
in by real human beings, not conduct engaged in by computer-generated
images".
|
|
|
|
|
More
News |
7/29. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a
release [6 pages in PDF] that describes the contents of a yet of its
order that imposes restrictions upon the XM Sirius. The FCC held up
the merger for sixteen months. It has yet to release the order. See also,
story titled "FCC Approves XM Sirius Merger" in TLJ Daily E-Mail
Alert No. 1,800, July 25, 2008.
7/25. The Center for Democracy and
Technology (CDT) released a
paper titled
"Security and Privacy Issues Associated With Federal RFID-Enabled
Documents". It states that
Department of State (DOS) and Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) have developed two new alternative ID cards
for U.S. citizens without a passport, the passport card and the Enhanced
Driver's License (EDL). The CDT argues that "Both of these cards carry
a long-range radio frequency identification (RFID) chip that presents a
privacy nightmare for American citizens." It continues that "These
insecure chips, containing traveler data, could be read from long distances
by anyone, without the cardholder's knowledge or consent, and could be used
to track and profile the movements and activities of innocent Americans.
Moreover, access to a traveler's ``unique ID number´´ could be used to
further access sensitive personal information held by the
government ..."
7/18.
Neelie Kroes, the European Commissioner for competition regulation,
gave a
speech in Strasbourg, France, regarding broadcasting, and especially
government owned broadcasters.
|
|
|
About Tech Law Journal |
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 1998-2008
David Carney,
dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved. |
|
|