6/9. Google's Pablo Chavez sent a letter [7 pages in PDF] to leaders of the House Commerce Committee (HCC) regarding its "collection of data from WiFi networks".

On May 26, 2010, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) sent a letter [PDF] to Eric Schmidt, Ch/CEO of Google, asking questions regarding "recent reports that Google has gathered huge amounts of data sent over private Wi-Fi networks while documenting the streets of our country for its Google Street View product". See, story titled "House Commerce Committee Leaders Write Google Regarding Wi-Fi Data" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,090, June 2, 2010.

Also, on May 19, 2010, Rep. Barton and Rep. Markey sent a letter [PDF] to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regarding Google's Wi-Fi data collection. See, story titled "Rep. Markey and Rep. Barton Write FTC Regarding Google Data Collection Activities" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,085, May 20, 2010.

Chavez wrote to the HCC leaders that "Google Street View cars were outfitted with commercially available WiFi antennas and software on board our Street View cars. The system detected and collected WiFi network data, including SSID, MAC address, signal strength, data rate, channel of the broadcast, and type of encryption method."

SSID is service set identifier. See, Wikipedia. MAC is media access control. See, Wikipedia.

Chavez also explained that "Information about the location of WiFi networks improves the accuracy of the location-based services, such as Google Maps or driving directions, that Google provides to consumers."

In addition, "The data was relayed to Google-developed software that processed the data for storage, and eventually used to improve location-based services. This information was not used to identify any specific individual or household." Also, "Google does not share this WiFi information with third parties".

Chavez disclosed that Google also "collected samples of ``payload data´´ -- information sent over the network -- from open (unencrypted) networks", and that this "payload data may have included personal data". (Parentheses in original.)

Moreover, he said, Google acted "mistakenly", and "the payload data was not parsed for use; instead, it was stored in raw, aggregate, binary form". Also, this "payload data has never been used in any Google product or service, nor do we intend to use it".

Joel Gurin, Chief of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGAB), wrote in the FCC web site on June 11, 2010, that "Whether intentional or not, collecting information sent over WiFi networks clearly infringes on consumer privacy."

6/15. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy held a hearing titled "Is There Life After Trinko and Credit Suisse?: The Role of Antitrust in Regulated Industries".

See, January 13, 2004, opinion in Verizon v. Trinko, 540 U.S. 398, and story titled "Supreme Court Holds That There is No Sherman Act Claim in Verizon v. Trinko" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 815, January 14, 2004.

See also, June 18, 2007, opinion in Credit Suisse v. Billings, 551 U.S. 264, and story titled "Supreme Court Rules in Credit Suisse v. Billing" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,598, June 20, 2007.

In both Trinko and Credit Suisse, private litigants filed civil actions in federal court alleging violation of antitrust law. In both cases the Supreme Court held that the private actions are precluded by industry specific, statute based, regulatory regimes that address anticompetitive conduct. However, neither opinion stated that governmental antitrust regulators at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division are not likewise barred.

In Trinko, the telecom case, the law office of Curtis Trinko was a local phone service customer of AT&T in New York. Trinko filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (SDNY) against Bell Atlantic (now Verizon), alleging various claims under the Communications Act and in tort. Trinko also alleged violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2. The alleged facts supporting Trinko's antitrust claim related to an alleged breach of the incumbent local exchange carrier's (ILEC), that is Verizon's, duty under the 1996 Act to share its network with competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs), such as AT&T.

Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote opinion, addressed when industry specific regulation bars recourse to the Sherman Act. "One factor of particular importance is the existence of a regulatory structure designed to deter and remedy anti-competitive harm. Where such a structure exists, the additional benefit to competition provided by antitrust enforcement will tend to be small, and it will be less plausible that the antitrust laws contemplate such additional scrutiny."

Howard Shelanski (FTC) wrote in his prepared testimony [PDF] for the HJC that "the combined effect of Credit Suisse and Trinko is to make it more difficult than before for either private plaintiffs or public agencies to bring important antitrust cases in regulated sectors of the American economy".

He argued that "the federal courts should not be able to use those decisions to impose an unwarranted bar on public antitrust enforcement in regulated industries".

He explained that "the Court's concern is that antitrust litigation is always costly and in the presence of regulation is likely to have little additional benefit for competition. Treble damages and class action litigation could make erroneous antitrust liability particularly costly in private cases. The government, however, has no reason to use antitrust law against regulated firms unless doing so could yield net benefits on top of those the market already achieves through regulation."

Hence, Shelanski urged the Congress to "clarify that neither Credit Suisse nor Trinko prevents public antitrust agencies from acting under any of the antitrust laws when they conclude that anticompetitive conduct would otherwise escape effective regulatory scrutiny".

Another approach for preserving public antitrust authority, which was not advocated by Shelanski, would be to take away from industry specific regulators their authority to write and enforce rules that are designed to deter and remedy anticompetitive harm, and leave the industry specific regulators, or the FTC and DOJ, with antitrust authority to address those anticompetitive harm. If the Congress were to do this for any industry, Trinko and Credit Suisse would not bar governmental antitrust enforcement.

John Thorn (Verizon) wrote in his prepared testimony [17 pages in PDF] that "Antitrust should not be rewritten or interpreted to encompass specific regulatory requirements", and "Antitrust should not condemn large, successful firms for pro-competitive behaviors".

He also stated that "Trinko would not preclude the bringing of cases like the 1974 government antitrust case that led to the 1982 AT&T Bell System breakup consent decree".

Mark Lemley (Stanford University law school) wrote in his prepared testimony [4 pages in PDF] that "an antitrust law that ignored anticompetitive behavior in any regulated industry would be a law full of holes".

He reasoned that "Absolute antitrust deference to regulatory agencies makes little sense as a matter either of economics or experience. Economic theory teaches that antitrust courts are better equipped than regulators to assure efficient outcomes in many circumstances. Public choice theory -- and long experience -- suggests that agencies that start out trying to limit problematic behavior by industries often end up condoning that behavior and even insulating those industries from market forces. And as history has shown, relying on regulatory oversight alone without the backdrop of antitrust law would leave both temporal and substantive gaps in enforcement, which unscrupulous competitors could exploit to the clear detriment of consumers."

He urged the Congress to "act to preserve the traditional role of antitrust law in the face of regulation". Specifically, he urged the Congress to amend the Sherman Act with the following: "No regulation or Act of Congress shall be interpreted to restrict or repeal the antitrust laws unless it expressly so provides".

Mark Cooper (Consumer Federation of America) wrote in his prepared testimony [7 pages in PDF] that because of big companies, such as "Worldcom, Enron, Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs, and BP", "We need every regulatory cop on the beat".

The Supreme Court in Trinko and Credit Suisse, wrote Cooper, "has gone off the deep end". Therefore, "Congress should act swiftly to restore the balance between antitrust and regulation".

On June 24, the American Antitrust Institute (AAI) will host a one day conference titled "Public and Private: Are the Boundaries in Transition?". At 11:00 AM there will be a panel discussion on telecommunications. The speakers will be Jonathan Baker (FCC economist), Joseph Farrell (Director of the FTC's Bureau of Economics), and Marius Schwartz (Georgetown University).

6/9. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights held a hearing titled "Oversight of the Enforcement of the Antitrust Laws".

See, prepared testimony [15 pages in PDF] of Christine Varney (Assistant Attorney General in charge of the DOJ's Antitrust Division) and prepared testimony [17 pages in PDF] of Jonathan Leibowitz (Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission).

Varney (at right) discussed, among other topics, the DOJ's disposition in January of 2010 of the Ticketmaster Live Nation transaction, ongoing price fixing prosecutions involving LCD monitors, the long pending Comcast NBC transaction, intellectual property, and review of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines (HMG).

She wrote that "We are also collaborating closely with the FCC on our concurrent review of the proposed transaction involving Comcast and NBC in order to harmonize to the maximum extent possible government review of that deal."

She also discussed the DOJ and FTC's Intellectual Property Task Force. She wrote that this "Task Force focuses on strengthening efforts to combat intellectual property crimes through close coordination with state and local law enforcement partners, as well as international counterparts. It also serves as an engine of policy development to address the evolving technological and legal landscape of this area of law enforcement. Moreover, we have been working closely with the Patent and Trademark Office on issues relating to the intersection between patent law and competition principles."

She also wrote that the DOJ's and FTC's "ongoing review of the Horizontal Merger Guidelines and examination of whether they need to be updated in light of changes in agency practice in the eighteen years since the Guidelines were last significantly revised has been a constructive and positive collaboration."

See, April 20, 2010, proposed revisions released for public comment [34 pages in PDF]. Comments were due by June 4, 2010.

Leibowitz wrote that "the 1992 Guidelines no longer offer an entirely accurate representation of agency practices", and that the proposed revisions "more accurately reflect the way the FTC and DOJ currently conduct merger reviews".

He also noted that the FTC has held two of three scheduled workshops related to "public policy options" for journalism and news media. He said that "plans to issue a report on this project in the fall".

He also reiterated his assertion that the FTC has antitrust authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act, and that this authority is broader than that under the Sherman Act. He wrote that the FTC "is actively considering how it can best use Section 5 to enhance enforcement".

The FTC initiated what is in essence an administrative antitrust action against Intel in December of 2009, but which alleged violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. See, stories titled "FTC Files Antitrust Charges Against Intel by Administrative Complaint Under FTC Act" and "Commentary: FTC Antitrust Procedure" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,024, December 17, 2009.

Leibowitz added that "we have other investigations in progress that may include similar claims".

There are well developed bodies of judicial case law that construe and give meaning to the various sections of the Sherman Act and Clayton Act. In contrast, there is no comparable body of case law that gives meaning to Section 5 as an antitrust statute. It has hardly been invoked as an antitrust statute for decades. It is an antitrust blank slate. There is almost nothing to put companies on notice as to what constitutes a violation of Section 5 in the antitrust context, and little to constrain the FTC. But then, this may be what makes it so attractive to Leibowitz.

While not an antitrust issue, Leibowitz also addressed the Do Not Call Registry. He wrote that "The FTC vigorously enforces the rule prohibiting marketing calls to phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, which soon will have more than 200 million unique phone numbers, and takes enforcement action against deceptive telemarketing. For example, during the past year, the Commission filed nine new actions that attack the use of harassing ``robocalls´´ -- the automated delivery of prerecorded messages -- to deliver deceptive telemarketing pitches that promised extended auto warranties and credit card interest rate reduction services."

6/7. The American Antitrust Institute (AAI) released a paper [15 pages in PDF] titled "Analysis of the FTC's Decision Not to Block Google's Acquisition of AdMob". The authors are the AAI's Randy Stutz and Richard Brunell.

On May 21, 2010, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a statement [2 pages in PDF] explaining its decision not to seek to block the transaction. The FTC wrote that "Google's proposed $750 million acquisition of AdMob necessitated close scrutiny because the transaction appeared likely to lead to a substantial lessening of competition in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act. Those companies generate the most revenue among mobile advertising networks, and both companies are particularly strong in one segment of the market, namely performance ad networks. The Commission’s six-month investigation yielded evidence that each of the merging parties viewed the other as its primary competitor, and that each firm made business decisions in direct response to this perceived competitive threat." (Footnote omitted.)

However, the FTC continued, "During the investigation, Apple acquired the third largest mobile ad network, Quattro Wireless, in December 2009 and then introduced its own mobile advertising network, iAd, as part of its iPhone applications package. The Commission has reason to believe that Apple quickly will become a strong mobile advertising network competitor."

Moreover, "a number of firms appear to be developing or acquiring smartphone platforms to better compete against Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android. Because of the importance of advertising-supported content to the success of smartphone platforms, these firms would have a strong incentive to facilitate competition among mobile advertising networks, including through self-supply."

The AAI paper states that "The FTC's decision not to challenge Google’s acquisition of AdMob is understandable given the nascent and changing nature of the mobile advertising market and Apple’s emergence as a likely formidable competitor in this market."

However, it continues that "it is not clear that Apple’s emergence will mitigate competitive concerns with respect to advertising on mobile web sites, as opposed to advertising on mobile applications, which is iAd’s exclusive focus. Moreover, a market dominated by two mobile advertising networks – Google and Apple – is unlikely to provide adequate competition to protect application developers and advertisers, particularly insofar as those networks hold mutually exclusive ``inventory.´´"

The AAI paper also states that "It is not clear how deeply the FTC investigated the possibility that Apple's license agreements with developers may unreasonably foreclose rival ad networks." It argues that "Apple should not be permitted to dominate advertising on the iPhone through exclusionary means", and adds that the FTC's announcement does not preclude review of Apple's conduct by the FTC or the Department of Justice's (DOJ)Antitrust Division.

6/11. Joel Gurin, Chief of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGAB), wrote about iPad hacking in the FCC web site. He wrote that "a group of hackers reported that it had gotten the e-mail addresses of more than 100,000 Apple iPad owners by hacking the Web site of AT&T, Apple’s partner. The hackers also got the ID numbers the iPads use to communicate over the network." He continued that "The iPad incident appears to be a classic security breach – the kind that could happen, and has happened, to many companies – and is exactly the kind of incident that has led the FCC to focus on cyber security. Our Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau is now addressing cyber security as a high priority. The FCC’s mission is to ensure that broadband networks are safe and secure, and we’re committed to working with all stakeholders to prevent problems like this in the future."

6/10. James Barnett, Chief of the FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) stated in a release about iPad hacking that "I am concerned about the report of a security breach to AT&T's network that exposed the personal data of more than a hundred thousand iPad users. This breach underscores the need for robust cyber security. The FCC's cyber security mission is to ensure that broadband networks are safe and secure for the consumers and businesses that depend on them. The FCC will continue to work with all stakeholders to prevent future security breaches that violate consumer privacy and undermine trust in America’s communications infrastructure."

6/10. A grand jury of the U.S. District Court (NDCal) returned a superseding indictment that charges AU Optronics Corporation, its American subsidiary, AU Optronics Corporation America, and six executives of AU Optronics with conspiracy to fix prices of thin film transistor liquid crystal display panels (TFT-LCD), in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1. See, Department of Justice (DOJ) release. This is another in a long series of TFT-LCD price fixing prosecutions.

6/8. Hong Meng pled guilty in U.S. District Court (DDel) to one count of theft of trade secrets, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1832, in connection with his transferring electronic documents that contained a chemical process developed by DuPont de Nemours and Company that increases the performance and longevity of Organic Light Emitting Diodes (OLED). The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in a release that Meng transferred these trade secrets while still an employee of DuPont. It added that "while still employed by DuPont and without company permission, MENG accepted a position as a faculty member at Peking University (PKU) College of Engineering, Department of Nanotechnology, in Beijing, China." OLEDs emit light when an electric current passes through them, and are used in computer monitors and screens for mobile phones and other electronic devices.

6/1. Brad Newell pled guilty in U.S. District Court (EDVa) criminal copyright infringement and with making of an unauthorized recording in a motion picture exhibition theater. See, 18 U.S.C. § 2319B. The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in a release that Newell used a camcorder to record the movie titled "Clash of the Titans" in a movie theater, and had made 300 copies for sale, when arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. See also, story titled "Camcorder Infringement in Movie Theaters" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,052, March 1, 2010.

5/28. The U.S. District Court (EDVa) sentenced Robert Cimino to serve 18 months in prison following his February 25, 2010, plea of guilty to one count of criminal copyright infringement. The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in a release that Cimino pled to "manufacturing and distributing pirated copies of popular business, engineering and graphic design copies of software titles by Adobe, Autodesk, Intuit, Quark".

5/26. Hosam Maher Husein Smadi pled guilty in U.S. District Court (NDTex) to one count of attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a)(2(A). He drove what he thought was a live truck bomb to a parking garage under a 60 story office building in downtown Dallas, Texas, and then attempted to detonate it with a cell phone. However, FBI undercover agents, who had located Smadi online, had long been working with Smadi. The target was Fountain Place, a prominent part of of the Dallas skyline, designed by I.M. Pei, and distinct for its reflective glass and lack of orthogonal lines. See, story titled "FBI Finds Terrorist Bomber Online" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,989, September 25, 2009. This case is USA v. Hosam Maher Husein Smadi, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, D.C. No. 3-09-MJ-286.

5/25. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the EMC Corporation settled a civil lawsuit filed by the DOJ in which the DOJ alleged violation of the False Claims Act (31 U.S.C. §§ 3729–3733) and the federal Anti-kickback Act (41 U.S.C. §§ 51-58). The DOJ announced in a release that pursuant to the settlement, EMC paid $87.5 Million. The DOJ added that "EMC fraudulently induced the General Services Administration (GSA) to enter into a contract with prices that were higher than they would have been had the information technology company not made false misrepresentations." Moreover, it falsely "represented during contract negotiations that, for each government order under the contract, EMC would conduct a price comparison to ensure that the government received the lowest price provided to any of the company’s commercial customers making a comparable purchase."

5/24. The U.S. District Court (DMd) sentenced Shamai Kedem Leibowitz, aka Samuel Shamai Leibowitz, to serve 20 months in prison. The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in a release that he was an FBI contract linguist who gave copies of five documents that contained "classified information relating to the communication intelligence activities of the United States" to an internet blogger, who then published them.

5/17. A trial jury of the U.S. District Court (DMass) returned a verdict of guilty against Zhen Zhou Wu, aka Alex Wu, Yufeng Wei, aka Annie Wei, and Chitron Electronics Inc. on charges of unlawfully exporting defense articles and Department of Commerce (DOC) controlled goods, via Hong Kong, to the People's Republic of China. The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated in a release that the defendants exported without a license "electronic components" that "are primarily used in military phased array radar, electronic warfare, military guidance systems, and military satellite communications".

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for morning hour, and at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Rep. Hoyer's schedule for the week of June 14.

The Senate will meet at 10:00 AM. It will consider several judicial nominees.

RESCHEDULED FROM MAY 25. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Auction 87, for the lower and upper paging bands, is scheduled to begin. See, Public Notice (DA 09-2416), notice of error in Public Notice, and notice in the Federal Register, December 18, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 242, at Pages 67221-67226. This is AU Docket No. 09-205. See also, Public Notice (DA 10-588) regarding postponement.

8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the Judicial Conference of the United States' Advisory Committee on Rules of Rules of Practice and Procedure. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 11, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 47, at Page 11560. Location: Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, Mecham Conference Center, One Columbus Circle, NE.

9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will hold another is a series of events titled "How Will Journalism Survive the Internet Age?". This event is free and open to the public. See, notice. Location: National Press Club, 13th floor, 549 14th St., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a hearing on the nomination of James Cole to be the Deputy Attorney General at the Department of Justice (DOJ). The SJC will webcast this event. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:15 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy will hold a hearing titled "Is There Life After Trinko and Credit Suisse?: The Role of Antitrust in Regulated Industries". See, notice. The witnesses will be Howard Shelanski (FTC), John Thorn (Verizon), Mark Lemley (Stanford University law school), and Mark Cooper (Consumer Federation of America). See, January 13, 2004, opinion in Verizon v. Trinko, 540 U.S. 398, and story titled "Supreme Court Holds That There is No Sherman Act Claim in Verizon v. Trinko" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 815, January 14, 2004. See also, June 18, 2007, opinion in Credit Suisse v. Billings, 551 U.S. 264, and story titled "Supreme Court Rules in Credit Suisse v. Billing" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,598, June 20, 2007. The HJC will webcast this event. Location: Room 2237, Rayburn Building.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Wireless Committee will hold a brown bag lunch titled "Universal Service Reform After the National Broadband Plan". The speakers will be John Nakahata (Wiltshire & Grannis), Tom Navin (Wiley Rein), Jonathan Banks (USTelecom), Steve Kraskin (Communications Advisory Counsel), and Carol Mattey (Deputy Chief of the FCC's Wireline Competition Bureau). Location: Wiley Rein, 1776 K St., NW.

2:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 21, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 76, at Page 20844. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

2:30 PM. The Senate Intelligence Committee (SIC) will hold a closed hearing. Location: Room 219, Hart Building.

3:00 PM. The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee (SHSGAC) will hold a hearing titled "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset: Comprehensive Legislation for the 21st Century". See, notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. The schedule for the week includes possible consideration of HR 5175 [LOC | WW], the "Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act" or "DISCLOSE Act", a bill that would regulate political speech. See, Rep. Hoyer's schedule for the week of June 14.

The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM. It will resume consideration of HR 4213 [LOC | WW], the "American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010". This huge bill contains a one year extension of the research and development tax credit.

10:00 AM. The House Homeland Security Committee (HHSC) will hold a hearing titled "Cybersecurity: DHS' Role, Federal Efforts and National Policy". The witnesses will be Greg Schaffer (DHS Assistant Secretary for Cybersecurity and Communications), Richard Skinner (DHS Inspector General), Gregory Wilshusen (GAO), and Stewart Baker (Steptoe & Johnson). The HHSC will webcast this event. Location: Room 311, Cannon Building.

10:00 AM. The House Ways and Means Committee (HWMC) will hold a hearing titled "China's Trade and Industrial Policies". The HWMC notice states that the topics to be covered include "failure to enforce intellectual property rights". Location: Room 1100, Longworth Building.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch titled "The Role of In-House Counsel". The speakers will be Erin Boone (Clearwire), Keith Murphy (Viacom), Sumeet Seam (Discovery Communications), Megan Stull (Google), and Nguyen Vu (Bingham McCutchen). For more information, contact Mark Brennan at mark dot brennan at hoganlovells dot com, Nguyen Vu at nguyen dot vu at bingham dot com, or Lauren Wideman at lauren dot wideman at bingham dot com. Location: Bingham McCutchen, 2020 K St., NW.

1:00 - 2:00 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast and teleconferenced event titled "Seeking Harmony in Music Distribution". See, notice. The price for access ranges from $9.95 to $110.

2:00 PM. The House Foreign Affairs Committee's (HFAC) Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere will hold a hearing titled "Press Freedom in the Americas". See, notice. Location: Room 2172, Rayburn Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. There will be a pair of panels discussions on the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), which is currently being negotiated by the U.S. and other nations. The first panel will include U.S. government representatives: Ben Golant (Copyright Office), Kira Alvarez (Office of the U.S. Trade Representative), and Darren Pogoda (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office). The second panel will include Jim Burger (Dow Lohnes), Steve Metalitz, Matthew Schruers (Computer and Communications Industry Association), and James Love (Knowledge Ecology International). For more information, contact Ben Golant at bgol at loc dot gov or Jennifer Ullman at Jennifer dot ullman at verizon dot com. Prices vary. This event is not open to the public. Location: Dow Lohnes, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's schedule for the week of June 14.

10:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet will hold a hearing titled "Legislative Hearing On Public Safety Broadband Network And H.R 4829". The witnesses will be James Barnett (Chief of the FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau), Charles Dowd (New York City Police Department, Communications Division), Jonathan Moore (International Association of Fire Fighters), Steve Zipperstein (Verizon Wireless), Joseph Hanley (Telephone and Data Systems, Inc.), Brian Fontes (National Emergency Number Association), Dale Hatfield (University of Colorado at Boulder), and Coleman Bazelon (Brattle Group). The HCC will webcast this event. See, notice and HR 4829 [LOC | WW], the "Next Generation 9-1-1 Preservation Act of 2010'". Location: Room 2322, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda again includes consideration of the nomination of John McConnell to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. The SJC rarely follows its published agendas. The SJC will webcast this event. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of Energy (DOE) will hold a meeting to hear public comments about the communications requirements of utilities, including, but not limited to the requirements of the Smart Grid. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 14, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 113, at Pages 33611-33612. Location: DOE, Forrestal Building, Room 8e069, 1000 Independence Ave., SW.

10:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold an event titled "open meeting". The only item on the agenda is adoption of a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) regarding reclassification of broadband internet access services as Title II services. See, notice and story titled "FCC Scheduled to Adopt Broadband Reclassification NOI" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,089, May 28, 2010. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW.

EXTENDED TO JULY 19. Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) regarding interoperability, out-of-band emissions, and equipment certification for 700 MHz public safety broadband networks. See, May 18, 2010, public notice, and June 14, 2010, public notice extending the deadline.

Rep. Hoyer's schedule for the week of June 14 states that the House may meet at 9:00 AM.

12:30 - 1:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a brown bag lunch titled "Introduction to U.S. Privacy and Information Security Law". The speakers will be Carla Hine (McDermott Will & Emery), Megan Olsen (Kelley Drye & Warren), Joel Samuels (Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider), and Katie Brin (Federal Trade Commission). See, notice. This event is free. Location: undisclosed.

Deadline to submit written comments to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) regarding "Enhancement in the Quality of Patents and on United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Quality Metrics". See, notice in the Federal Register, April 27, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 80, at Pages 22120-22121.

Fathers Day.

9:30 - 11:00 AM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Where does the US Really Stand in Broadband and Why?". The speakers will be Robert Atkinson (ITIF), Sacha Meinrath (New America Foundation), George Ford (Phoenix Center) and Matthew Wood (Media Access Project). See, notice. Location: ITIF, Room 610, 1101 K St., NW.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host a brown bag lunch titled "The Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act of 2010". The speakers will be Seth Davidson (Fleischman & Harding), Mike Nilsson (Wiltshire & Grannis), and Linda Kinney (Echostar). Location: Dow Lohnes, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding robocalls, and revisions to FCC rules under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that would harmonize those rules with the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) recently amended Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR). This FCC adopted this NPRM on January 20, 2010, and released the text [37 pages in PDF] on January 22, 2010. It is FCC 10-18 in CG Docket No. 02-278. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 22, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 54, at Pages 13471-13482. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts NPRM Regarding Limiting Some Robocalls" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,037, January 20, 2010.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [45 pages in PDF] regarding universal service low income subsidy programs in Puerto Rico. The FCC adopted and released this item on April 16, 2010. It is FCC 10-57 in WC Docket No. 05-337, CC Docket No. 96-45, and WC Docket No. 03-109. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 7, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 88, at Pages 25156-25159.

6/15. The Senate confirmed Tanya Platt to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for Southern District of Indiana by a vote of 95-0. See, Roll Call No. 185.

6/15. The Senate confirmed Brian Jackson to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana by a vote of 96-0. See, Roll Call No. 186.

6/15. The Senate confirmed Elizabeth Foote to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

6/10. The American Antitrust Institute (AAI) named Pamela Gilbert to its Board of Directors. She replaces Jonathan Cuneo of the Washington DC office of the law firm of Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca. See, AAI release.

6/9. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) held an executive session at which it approved the nomination of Carl Wieman to be an Associate Director of the Executive Office of the President's (EOP) Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

6/11. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a notice in the Federal Register that sets comments deadlines for its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) regarding regulation of ownership of media companies. The FCC adopted and released this item on May 25, 2010. It is FCC 10-92 in MB Docket No. 09-182. See, notice in the Federal Register, June 11, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 112, at Pages 33227-33237. See also, story titled "FCC Adopts Broadcast Ownership NOI" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,087, May 26, 2010. The deadline to submit initial comments is July 12, 2010. The deadline to submit reply comments is July 26, 2010.

6/10. The Copyright Office (CO) published a notice in the Federal Register that amends 37 C.F.R. § 256.2, regarding "Royalty fee for compulsory license for secondary transmission by cable systems". See, Federal Register, June 10, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 111, at Page 32857.

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 1998-2010 David Carney. All rights reserved.