10/22. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted and released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [107 pages in PDF] that proposes to regulate the network management practices of broadband internet access service providers.

This proceeding is titled "In the Matter of Preserving the Open Internet Broadband Industry Practices". This NPRM is FCC 09-93 in GN Docket No. 09-191 and WC Docket No. 07-52.

Initial comments are due by January 14, 2010. Reply comments are due by March 5, 2010.

This NPRM is different from most NPRMs issued by the FCC to the extent that it contains the text of proposed rules. See, text of proposed rules, at right.

The proposed rules would regulate broadband broadband Internet access service providers, including telcos, cable companies, and wireless companies, but not internet protocol (IP) based application or services providers, such as Google.

The NPRM asserts that the FCC has ancillary jurisdiction to promulgate these rules. Until the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) rules in Comcast v. FCC, the validity of this assertion remains uncertain.

See also, prepared statement [PDF] of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, prepared statement [PDF] of Michael Copps, prepared statement [PDF] of Mignon Clyburn, prepared statement [PDF] of Robert McDowell, and prepared statement [PDF] of Meredith Baker. And see, FCC release and FCC staff presentation.

McDowell and Baker concurred in part and dissented in part.

Broadband internet access service. The just released proposed rules only regulate the operations of a "provider of a broadband Internet access service".

The proposes rules define "broadband Internet access" to include wireless broadband.

However, the term "broadband" is used, not in its ordinary sense, but as a term of art. The proposed rules set no minimum transmission speeds. Rather, it is defined to include any "Internet Protocol data transmission", regardless of speed or bandwidth, except dial up service.

Notably, each of the six regulatory mandates in the proposed rules affects "a provider of broadband Internet access service". Other internet application and services providers remain unregulated.

Thus, nothing in these proposed rules would prohibit Google Voice from blocking phone calls. Nothing in these rules would prohibit Google from blocking a competing free text messaging application. Nothing in these rules would prohibit Google from discriminating in search results rankings on the basis of whether the pages favor or oppose Google's positions on net neutrality.

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), the ranking Republican on the House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, stated in a release that the proposed rules "would apply to broadband providers but not online providers of applications, content and services ... This selective targeting is troublesome."

Walter McCormick, head of the USTelecom, stated in a release that "this rulemaking must look carefully across the entire Internet ecosystem, encompassing not only broadband providers, but also applications and content providers.  At the end of the day, ‘neutrality’ must, in fact, be neutral."

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski (at left) was asked at an FCC news conference on October 22 if the rules should be applied "across the board", including to search engines. He stated that "open internet rules -- the whole proceeding has always been about internet access providers; it has been about the entry ramps to the internet; so that is the status quo".

He added that "We should be very cautious before moving from tackling issues presented by the on ramp providers to the internet itself."

Copyright Law and Network Management. All of the six prohibitions in the proposed rules are "Subject to reasonable network management". The proposed rules define this to include "reasonable practices employed by a provider of broadband Internet access service to ... prevent the transfer of unlawful content ... or ... prevent the unlawful transfer of content".

There is no express reference to copyright law in the proposed rules. Moreover, the NPRM contains only passing references to copyright. It states that child pornography is an example of "unlawful content" and that "unlawful transfer of content" implicates copyright law.

The NPRM also states that the six "open Internet principles apply only to lawful transfers of content. They do not, for example, apply to activities such as the unlawful distribution of copyrighted works ... In order for network openness obligations and appropriate enforcement of copyright laws to co-exist, it appears reasonable for a broadband Internet access service provider to refuse to transmit copyrighted material if the transfer of that material would violate applicable laws."

The NPRM does not elaborate on appropriate forms of blocking or filtering in connection with copyright.

The NPRM says nothing, and asks nothing, about blocking access to websites that traffic in pirated software, games, music, or movies.

The NPRM says nothing, and asks nothing, about blocking distribution of any technology that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected. See, 17 U.S.C. § 1201.

Dan Glickman, head of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), stated in a release that "The American motion picture and television production industry applauds the decision of the FCC to recognize the critical role of legitimate content in the continuing development of the Internet. Today's notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) makes clear that reasonable network management includes the ability to stop unlawful distribution of content online. Although we are not proponents of government regulation of the Internet, by highlighting the importance of intellectual property in this way, the Commission signaled that American creativity and ingenuity, and millions of related jobs will be preserved."

Gigi Sohn, head of the Public Knowledge, which supports the proposed rules, stated in a release that "we do not believe copyright holders have the right to demand filtering of everyone's network traffic, which would violate privacy and free speech rights of everyone online. We are also concerned about the definition and operation of managed services. It would be unfortunate if the details of the rules undermined the openness this proceeding promises."

Law enforcement, intelligence agencies, wiretaps, and location surveillance. Under the 2005 Policy Statement, only the second item, regarding consumers' entitlement to run applications and use services, was "subject to the needs of law enforcement". The other three items included no such limitation.

The just released NRPM removes the limitation from the applications and services item, but adds new limitations that apply to all six of its items.

Moreover, the Policy Statement only covered "law enforcement". The proposed rules also covers both "emergency communications" and "national ... security authorities". So, for example, nothing in the proposed rules limit the federal government's ability to conduct warrantless wiretaps or seizures of e-mail or other communications or data.

The proposed rules provides that "Nothing in this part supersedes any obligation a provider of broadband Internet access service may have -- or limits its ability -- to address the needs of law enforcement, consistent with applicable law", and "Nothing in this part supersedes any obligation a provider of broadband Internet access service may have -- or limits its ability -- to deliver emergency communications or to address the needs of public safety or national or homeland security authorities, consistent with applicable law.

Congressional Reaction. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the Chairman of the House Commerce Committee (HCC), and Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), the Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee (SCC), sent a joint letter to the FCC. "We write to support your efforts to conduct this rulemaking in an open and transparent manner that is fair to all parties."

Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL), the ranking Republican on the House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, stated in a release that "the FCC is not conducting any market analysis to demonstrate why such rules are necessary. Why now? Where is the market failure? Without such analysis, the FCC runs the risk of freezing private investment and chilling investment. Attempting to regulate problems that may not even exist will only create uncertainty."

Sen. Kay Hutchison (R-TX), the ranking Republican on the Senate Commerce Committee (SCC), stated in a release that "I will be closely reviewing the text of the recent FCC decision, as well as the comment period that follows".

She added that "I had strong concerns with the original proposal which I shared with Chairman Genachowski.  Chairman Genachowski has assured me that he understands my concerns, particularly as they relate to the investment incentives and decisions of small rural communications providers. These small providers are a critical part of improving broadband access for rural areas across the country. After reviewing the Commission’s decision, I will evaluate whether legislative efforts, including those recently introduced, are an appropriate course of action."

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a bill that would prevent the FCC from adopting its proposed rules. See, story in this issue titled "Sen. McCain Introduces Bill to Block FCC Regulation of Internet or IP-Enabled Services".

10/22. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced S 1836 [LOC | WW], a bill to prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from promulgating internet regulation rules.

This bill is timed as a response to the FCC's adoption of an internet regulation notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). If enacted, this bill would prevent the FCC from promulgating its proposed rules.

However, the bill is not specific to this one rulemaking proceeding. It would broadly prevent many types of FCC and state regulation of the internet and IP enabled services. Consider, for example, the FCC's omnibus IP enabled services rulemaking proceeding, WC Docket No. 04-36.

The bill provides that the FCC "shall not propose, promulgate, or issue any regulations regarding the Internet or IP-enabled services". There are exceptions for "national security", "public safety", "law enforcement", and "to ensure the solvency of the Universal Service Fund". Also, the bill would not affect any FCC internet or IP enabled services rules already in effect.

Sen. McCain's bill also provides this: "Congress finds that -- (1) the Internet and IP-enabled services are services affecting interstate commerce; and (2) such services are not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State or municipal locality." (Grammatical error in original.)

Sen. McCain has referred to this bill as the "Internet Freedom Act of 2009". A PDF draft sent to TLJ lists the title as the "Real Stimulus Act of 2009".

He wrote in his Senate statement that the FCC's proposed rules are "yet another government power grab over a private service provided by a private company in a competitive marketplace. Earlier this year the administration moved to control much of the auto industry and the banking industry and now the administration is trying to control the technology industry by regulating its very core: the Internet." See, Congressional Record, October 22, 2009, at Page S10703.

Sen. McCain (at right) continued that "This government takeover of the Internet will stifle innovation, in turn slowing our economic turnaround and further depressing an already anemic job market."

"The light touch regulatory approach toward the Internet that was advanced by previous administrations has brought Americans social networking, low cost long distance calling, texting, telemedicine and over 85,000 ``apps'' for the iPhone. It also brought us Twitter, You Tube, Hulu, Kindle, the Blackberry and the Palm. It has allowed the Internet to change our lives forever", said McCain.

He also stated that "The wireless industry exploded over the past twenty years due to limited government regulation. Wireless carriers invested $100 billion in infrastructure and development over the past three years which has led to faster networks, more competitors in the marketplace and lower prices compared to any other country. Meanwhile, wired telephones and networks have become a slow dying breed as they are mired in state and Federal regulations, universal service contribution requirements and limitations on use. It is for these reasons that today I introduce The Internet Freedom Act of 2009 that will keep the Internet free from government control and regulation."

See also, Sen. McCain's release.

10/22. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) internet regulation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) asserts that "The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to the Notice is contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i)–(j), 201(b), 230, 257, 303(r), and 503 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 152, 154(i)–(j), 201(b), 230, 257, 303(r), 503, 1302."

This is a shotgun recitation of minimally relevant statutes that say nothing about writing rules to preserve the open internet.

There is no "Preserving the Open Internet Act", no "Network Neutrality Act", and no "Broadband Internet Access Service Provider Regulation Act". There is no Congressional statute that instructs, or allows, the FCC to conduct this rulemaking proceeding. There is no statute that expressly authorizes the FCC to write rules regulating broadband internet access providers, or the network management practices of such providers.

There are many proponents of enacting such legislation in the Congress. However, they lack the votes to pass a bill. (Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), who has repeatedly introduced bills and offered amendments, praised the NPRM. He stated in a release that "These proposed rules are an excellent complement to the net neutrality legislation that I introduced in Congress". See for example, HR 3458 [LOC | WW], the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009".)

The FCC is now acting in a legislative capacity, as it often does. However, the federal Courts of Appeals have authority to review and overturn FCC rules, as they often do.

The proposed rules are vulnerable to being struck down for being beyond the statutory authority of the FCC. (There are also other possible grounds for granting a petition for review, such as that the failure to include other internet applications and services providers is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.)

The FCC is relying upon the notion of ancillary jurisdiction. This concept is not included in the Communications Act. However, it has been recognized by the Courts.

See for example, the Supreme Court's June 27, 2005 opinion [59 pages in PDF] in NCTA v. Brand X. The Court wrote that "the Commission remains free to impose special regulatory duties on facilities-based ISPs under its Title I ancillary jurisdiction".

However, this was dicta because the issue before the Court was only whether the FCC could classify cable modem service as a Title I information service. See story titled "Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,163, June 28, 2005.

On the other hand, the DC Circuit has rejected specific FCC claims of Title I ancillary jurisdiction, as for example, in striking down the FCC's broadcast flag rules in 2005. See, May 6, 2005 opinion [34 pages in PDF] in American Library Association v. FCC, and story titled "DC Circuit Reverses FCC's Broadcast Flag Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,131, May 9, 2005.

The FCC asserted this ancillary jurisdiction authority in the just released NPRM. It wrote that "we may exercise jurisdiction under the Act to regulate the network practices of facilities-based broadband Internet access service providers. We have ancillary jurisdiction over matters not directly addressed in the Act when the subject matter falls within the agency’s general statutory grant of jurisdiction and the regulation is ``reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of the Commission's various responsibilities.´´" (Footnotes to two forty year old cases omitted.)

Moreover, the FCC also asserted this position in the August 2008 Comcast order [67 pages in PDF]. It is FCC 08-183 in Docket No. 07-52. See, story titled "FCC Asserts Authority to Regulate Network Management Practices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,805, August 4, 2008.

That order is currently under review by the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir). See, story titled "Comcast Files Petition for Review of FCC's Network Management Practices Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,821, September 24, 2009.

The FCC filed its brief [138 pages in PDF] on September 21, 2009, arguing in great detail for the concept of ancillary jurisdiction.

TLJ asked Austin Schlick, the FCC's General Counsel, at the FCC's meeting on October 22, 2009, what is the statutory authority for the just released NPRM. He said, "read our brief" in the Comcast case.

That case is Comcast Corporation v. FCC and USA, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, App. Ct. No. 08-1291.

The Court of Appeals could reject the FCC's argument that it has ancillary jurisdiction to regulate the network management practices of broadband internet access service providers. If that is the outcome, then the authority for present rulemaking proceeding will have been rejected. On the other hand, the Court could rule that the FCC validly exercised ancillary jurisdiction. If that is the outcome, then the asserted authority for the present rulemaking would rest on firmer ground.

(It is also possible that the Court could uphold the FCC's claims to ancillary jurisdiction as to some, but not all, of the six prohibitions in the proposed rules.)

Until the Court of Appeals rules, there is a element of prematurity to the present rulemaking proceeding.

TLJ spoke with the Center for Democracy and Technology's (CDT) Leslie Harris, who supports the proposed rules. She said that now is the appropriate time to issue the NPRM, because the "momentum" would be lost by waiting for the Court of Appeals to rule.

(It is also possible that the Court of Appeals could grant the petition for review in the Comcast case, but on grounds that would not affect the just proposed rules. For example, the Court could rule on the basis that the FCC had not promulgated rules and proceeded by adjudication in its Comcast proceeding.)

The Court of Appeals has not yet held, or scheduled, oral argument in that case. On October 22 Chairman Genachowski declined to offer his prediction as to when the Court would rule.

Both Commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith Baker questioned the FCC's legal authority to adopt the proposed rules. Genechowski and Commissioners Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn said nothing about legal authority in their statements. FCC staff presentations at the October 22 meeting contained nothing on legal authority.

10/22. Google's Rick Whitt stated in a release that "The Internet was built and has thrived as an open platform, where individuals and entrepreneurs -- not network owners -- can connect and interact, choose marketplace winners and losers, and create new services and content on a level playing field. No one seems to disagree with that fundamental proposition. This new proceeding is aimed at opening a national dialogue on how best to protect that unique environment. For our part, we fully support the adoption of ``rules of the road´´ to ensure that the broadband on-ramps to the Net remain open and robust."

Ed Black, head of the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), stated in a release that "This day represents a major step forward for consumers, innovation and economic growth ... The public Internet was launched, thrived and grew for more than 10 years under non-discriminatory access rules. Only recently have non-discrimination rules been muddied by court and regulatory decisions in anticipation of ISP competition that has not matured beyond duopoly."

Gary Shapiro, head of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), applauded the NPRM in a release.

The Free Press's Ben Scott stated in a release that "After years of hard work, we are pleased that the FCC has begun this crucially important rulemaking on Network Neutrality. A well-crafted Net Neutrality rule can ensure that the open Internet continues to serve as a great force for economic innovation and democratic participation for all Americans. Today’s vote is an important step toward securing the open Internet and a victory for the public interest and civil rights organizations, small businesses, Internet innovators, political leaders, and millions of people who have fought to get to this point."

10/22. Steve Largent, head of the CTIA, which represents wireless industry companies, stated in a release that "applying these rules to mobile wireless broadband services during a period of dynamic innovation and change in the wireless ecosystem could have significant unintended consequences". He continued that "Rules that could impact the ecosystem from continuing to evolve, such as the ability of wireless carriers, device makers, and applications developers to optimize their devices, applications, and networks to work together will stifle innovation and harm consumers".

Largent also stated that "the imposition of net neutrality rules will degrade the value of unencumbered licenses purchased in the most recent auctions and threaten the integrity of the auction process. The FCC considered `openness´ requirements in the 700 MHz auction and chose to apply those requirements to a single block of spectrum. To extend that requirement, and more, now would raise serious legal issues and threaten the integrity of future auctions."

The Progress & Freedom Foundation's (PFF) Barbara Esbin stated in a release that "the FCC is poised to take intrusive action into a well-functioning Internet ecosystem without either the demonstrated need or clear legal authority to do so. I know of no empirical evidence suggesting that the openness of the Internet that we all value is under threat today, or is likely to be under threat tomorrow."

Esbin continued that "In the absence of evidence of market failure or demonstrable consumer harms, the costs of government intervention are more likely to outweigh the benefits. I am confident that the data-driven process the FCC has created for its net neutrality rulemaking will bear this out, and if so, I hope that the FCC will have the magnanimity to decline to adopt any of the proposed rules that are not supported by the factual and legal record."

Walter McCormick, head of the USTelecom, stated in a release that "all Americans enjoy today a free and open Internet in the absence of more regulation". He added that "Those calling for greater government intervention face a high bar in demonstrating the public interest in reversing a course that has been so successful for consumers, our economy and our national security. We believe it would be a mistake to replace today's open and dynamic environment with a government-managed  `mother may I´ approach to innovation."

Wayne Crews of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) stated in a release that "Agency neutrality, not net neutrality, is the real key to Internet freedom. If the administration actually valued neutrality, it wouldn’t pick favorites by discriminating against the infrastructure industry. The FCC’s proposed rules are the true non-neutrality and discrimination at issue today. The FCC should steadfastly resist politically driven business and pressure group demands for special treatment of particular elements of the communications sector."

10/22. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) internet regulation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to add a new Part 8, titled "Preserving the Open Internet". The proposed rules are as follows:

§ 8.1 Purpose and Scope.

The purpose of these rules is to preserve the open Internet. These rules apply to broadband Internet access service providers only to the extent they are providing broadband Internet access services.

§ 8.3 Definitions.

Internet. The system of interconnected networks that use the Internet Protocol for communication with resources or endpoints reachable, directly or through a proxy, via a globally unique Internet address assigned by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.

Broadband Internet access. Internet Protocol data transmission between an end user and the Internet. For purposes of this definition, dial-up access requiring an end user to initiate a call across the public switched telephone network to establish a connection shall not constitute broadband Internet access. Broadband Internet access service. Any communication service by wire or radio that provides broadband Internet access directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public.

Reasonable network management. Reasonable network management consists of:
  (a) reasonable practices employed by a provider of broadband Internet access service to:
    (i) reduce or mitigate the effects of congestion on its network or to address quality-of-service concerns;
    (ii) address traffic that is unwanted by users or harmful;
    (iii) prevent the transfer of unlawful content; or
    (iv) prevent the unlawful transfer of content; and
  (b) other reasonable network management practices.

§ 8.5 Content.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not prevent any of its users from sending or receiving the lawful content of the user’s choice over the Internet.

§ 8.7 Applications and Services.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not prevent any of its users from running the lawful applications or using the lawful services of the user’s choice.

§ 8.9 Devices.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user’s choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network.

§ 8.11 Competitive Options.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not deprive any of its users of the user’s entitlement to competition among network providers, application providers, service providers, and content providers.

§ 8.13 Nondiscrimination.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.

§ 8.15 Transparency.

Subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service must disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this part.

§ 8.19 Law Enforcement.

Nothing in this part supersedes any obligation a provider of broadband Internet access service may have -- or limits its ability -- to address the needs of law enforcement, consistent with applicable law.

§ 8.21 Public Safety and Homeland and National Security.

Nothing in this part supersedes any obligation a provider of broadband Internet access service may have -- or limits its ability -- to deliver emergency communications or to address the needs of public safety or national or homeland security authorities, consistent with applicable law.

§ 8.23 Other laws.

Nothing in this part is intended to prevent a provider of broadband Internet access service from complying with other laws.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM. It will conclude its consideration of HR 3619 [LOC | WW], the "Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010". See, Rep. Hoyer's schedule for the week of October 19, and schedule for October 23.

The Senate will not meet.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON and 2:00 - 5:00 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). The agenda for the morning of October 23 includes "Role of Science and Technology in Foreign Policy and Development Assistance" and "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education". The agenda for the afternoon session includes reports for committees and working groups. The meeting is open to the public, except for an additional session with the President. See, agenda [PDF] and notice in the Federal Register, September 25, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 185, at Pages 49047-49048. Location: National Academy of Sciences, 2100 C St., NW.

10:00 AM - 4:15 PM. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) will conduct a mock auction for Auction 86.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association will host an event titled "50 Hot Technology Tips, Tricks & Web Sites". The speakers will be Reid Trautz and Daniel Mills. The price to attend ranges from $15 to $35. Most DC Bar events are not open to the public. This event does not qualify for continuing legal education (CLE) credits. See, notice. For more information, call 202-626-3463. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K St., NW.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host a brown bag lunch titled "Meet and Greet the FCC’s new Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Chief Rear Admiral (ret.) James Arden Barnett and staff". For more information contact Nneka Ezenwa at 202-515-2466 or nneka dot n dot ezenwa at verizon dot com. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) states that this is an FCBA event. The FCBA excludes people from its events. Location: Verizon, Suite 400, 1300 I St., NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Public Notice [PDF] that requests comments regarding "the sufficiency of current spectrum allocations in spectrum bands, including but not limited to the prime spectrum bands below 3.7 GHz". This is to aid the FCC in drafting its "National Broadband Plan". This item is DA 09-2100 in GN Docket Nos. 09-47, 09-51, and 09-137.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the FCC's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding requiring applicants that win broadband radio service (BRS) licenses in Auction 86, and any subsequent auction, to demonstrate substantial service on or before four years from the date of license grant. The FCC adopted this NPRM on September 8, 2009, and released the text on September 11, 2009. It is FCC 09-70 in WT Docket No. 03-66 and RM-10586. Auction 86 is scheduled to begin on October 27, 2009. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 28, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 186, at Pages 49356-49359.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Engineering and Technical and Wireless Committees will host a brown bag lunch titled "Everything You Wanted to Know About Cell Phone Jamming In Case Your Phone Goes Dead". The speakers will be Michael Marcus (South Carolina Department of Corrections), Charles Jamison (CTIA), and others. See also, S 251 [LOC | WW] and HR 560 [LOC | WW], the "Safe Prisons Communications Act of 2009". Register with Tami Smith at 202-736-8257 or tesmith at sidley dot com. Location: Sidley Austin, 1501 K St., NW.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host a brown bag lunch titled "Meet the FCC Media Bureau Chief, William Lake". The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) states that this is an FCBA event. The FCBA excludes people from its events. Location: Wiley Rein, 1776 K St., NW.

6:00 - 9:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host an event titled "Copyright Law and Litigation". The speaker will be Kenneth Kaufman (Manatt Phelps & Phillips). The price to attend ranges from $89 to $129. Most DC Bar events are not open to the public. This event qualifies for continuing legal education (CLE) credits. See, notice. For more information, call 202-626-3488. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K St., NW.

9:30 AM - 1:00 PM. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 9, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 195, at Pages 52185-52186. Location: Department of Commerce, Room 4830, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) Bureau of Industry and Security's (BIS) Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 14, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 197, at Pages 52749-52750. Location: DOC, Room 3884, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Aves., NW.

10:00 - 11:30 AM. The Center for American Progress (CAP) will host an event titled "Renewing and Reviewing the PATRIOT Act". The speakers will be Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), Rudy deLeon (CAP) and Ken Gude (CAP). Location: CAP, 10th floor, 1333 H St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) will host an event titled "Competition Policy as Innovation Policy". See, notice and registration page. Location: Newseum, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

2:30 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing titled "Oversight of the Broadband Stimulus Programs in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act". See, notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

Expiration of the Copyright Office's (CO) third triennial rules designating exemptions to the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). These rules are codified at 37 C.F.R. § 201.40. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 6, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 194, at Pages 58073-58079, and story titled "Copyright Office Announces 4th Triennial Review of DMCA Exemptions" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,839, October 7, 2008.

The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Auction 86, the broadband radio service (BRS) auction, is scheduled to begin.

9:30 - 10:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) WRC-12 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 3 (Space Services) will meet. See, notice. Location: FCC, Rooms 4-B142 and 4-B112, 445 12th St., SW.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "staff workshop". The FCC asserts in a notice that the purpose is "to explore possible revisions to the Commission's ex parte rules and processes to enhance the transparency" of FCC actions. It adds that this event will "explore new issues posed by the increasing use of Internet-based media of communication and expression, such as blogs". The participants will be Austin Schlick (FCC General Counsel), Joel Kaufman (FCC Associate General Counsel), MaryBeth Richards (Special Counsel to the Chairman for FCC Reform), Christopher Bjornson (Steptoe & Johnson), Diane Cornell (Inmarsat), Jane Mago (National Association of Broadcasters), Amy Mehlman (Mehlman Capitol Strategies), John Muleta (M2Z Networks), Jef Pearlman (Public Knowledge), Andrew Schwartzman (Media Access Project), and David Solomon (Wilkinson Barker Knauer). See also, FCC's ex parte rules. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

10:30 AM - 12:30 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) WRC-12 Advisory Committee's Informal Working Group 2 (Terrestrial Services) will meet. See, notice. Location: FCC, Rooms 4-B142 and 4-B112, 445 12th St., SW.

RESCHEDULED FROM OCTOBER 14. 2:30 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing titled "Combating Distracted Driving: Managing Behavioral and Technological Risks". The witnesses will be Ray LaHood (Secretary of Transportation) and Julius Genachowski (FCC Chairman). See, notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) [33 pages in PDF] in its proceeding titled "In the Matter of Consumer Information and Disclosure Truth-in-Billing and Billing Format IP-Enabled Services". This NOI is FCC 09-68 in CG Docket Nos. 09-158 and CC Docket No. 98-170 and WC Docket No. 04-36. The FCC adopted it on August 27, 2009, and released the text on August 28, 2009.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Public Notice [10 pages in PDF] requesting comments regarding cost estimates and models for providing fiber optic connectivity to "anchor institutions, such as public schools and libraries, community colleges, and hospitals". See also, story titled "FCC Seeks Comments Regarding Cost of Connecting Schools and Libraries with Fiber" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,000, October 9, 2009. The FCC seeks answers to these questions to assist it in drafting a document titled "National Broadband Plan". This item is DA 09-2194 in GN Docket Nos. 09-47, 09-51, and 09-137.

9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF) and the George Mason University (GMU) School of Law will host an event titled "Ronald Coase's The Federal Communications Commission at 50". See, "The Federal Communications Commission", 2 Journal of Law and Economics 1-40 (1959). The speakers may include FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell (FCC Commissioner), Thomas Hazlett (GMU), Jeffrey Eisenach (Empiris LLC), Evan Kwerel (FCC's Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis), and John Williams (FCC/OSPPA). This event is free. See, PFF notice and registration page. Location: Room 121, Hazel Hall, GMU law school, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA. The nearest metro stop is Virginia Square on the Orange Line.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda again includes consideration of HR 985 [LOC | WW] and S 448 [LOC | WW], both titled the "Free Flow of Information Act of 2009". It also includes consideration of S 1490 [LOC | WW], the "Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2009", and S 139 [LOC | WW], the "Data Breach Notification Act". The agenda also includes consideration of the nominations of Barbara Keenan (to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit), Carmen Ortiz (to be the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, and Edward Tarver (to be the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Georgia. See, notice. The SJC rarely follows is published agendas. The SJC will webcast this meeting. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA) will host an event titled "Libel Tourism/Libel Terrorism: Publishers' First Amendment Rights in the International Market". The speakers will be Clifford Sloan (Jones Day) and Scott Bain (SIIA). See, notice. Prices vary. Location: United Press International, 1133 19th St., NW.

2:00 - 6:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Broadband: How the Pieces Fit Together". There will be panels titled "The National Broadband Plan", "Broadband Mapping", and "Role of Government Funding in Maximizing Broadband Goals". Prices vary. This event qualifies for CLE credits. See, notice and registration form [PDF]. Registrations are due by 5:00 PM on October 27. Location: Arnold & Porter, 555 12th St., NW.

2:30 - 5:00 PM. 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 "More Security, Less Waste: What Makes Sense for Our Federal Cyber Defense". See, notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) in response to it Public Notice regarding qualifying information for recognizing laboratory accreditation bodies and ACLASS application for recognition. This item is DA 09-2049 in ET Docket No. 09-161.

Target adjournment day for the House of the 1st Session of the 111th Congress.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division will host an event titled "A Competition Policy Perspective on the Changing Telecommunications Landscape". The speaker will be Phil Weiser, Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Policy, Appellate, and International Matters. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) states that this is an FCBA event. The FCBA excludes people from its events. Lunch will be served. The price to attend is $15. The deadline for registrations and cancellations is 12:00 NOON on October 28. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: Sidley Austin, 6th floor, 1501 K St., NW.

1:00 - 3:00 PM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will host an event titled "Broadband Data Transparency Workshop". See, notice in the Federal Register, October 22, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 203, at Pages 54549-54550. Location: DOC, Room 4830, 1401 Constitution Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit requests to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to participate as a panelist at its workshop titled "Exploring Privacy" on December 7, 2009. See, release and event web page. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft SP 800-127 [46 pages in PDF] titled "Guide to Security for Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX) Technologies".

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and a subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year for a single recipient. 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 two months after writing.

For information about subscriptions, see subscription information page.

Tech Law Journal now accepts credit card payments. See, TLJ credit card payments page.

TLJ is published by David Carney
Contact: 202-364-8882.
carney at techlawjournal dot com
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2009 David Carney. All rights reserved.