5/3. Rep. John Carney (D-DE) introduced HR 1693 [LOC | WW], the "Research and Development Tax Credit Extension Act of 2011". This is one of many bills introduced in every Congress to amend 26 U.S.C. § 41(h) to make permanent, to temporarily extend, and/or to modify, the research and development (R&D) tax credit.

HR 1693 would make the R&D tax credit permanent. It would also raise from 14% to 17% the alternative simplified research credit.

The credit was first enacted in 1981 as a temporary measure. Since then the Congress has repeatedly extended it for one or a few years. With so many extensions, some companies have come to expect the credit to be continued, and often plan accordingly, even when the credit is allowed to lapse. Extensions have always been retroactive, with the exception of one year 15 years ago.

The last extension was enacted in Section 731 of HR 4853 [LOC | WW], a huge tax bill enacted in the closing days of the lame duck session at the end of the 111th Congress. The credit is now set to expire on December 31, 2011. See, story titled "Tax Bill Enacted With R&D Tax Credit Extension" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,182, December 18, 2010.

By keeping the credit temporary, administration and Congressional budget staff, in making revenue projections, can operate under the fiction that tax revenues will increase when the credit expires. That is, temporary extensions of the R&D tax credit are part of the ongoing budgetary smoke and mirrors process.

By keeping the issue on the agenda, candidates for federal office, and especially incumbents, can rely upon a continuous flow of endorsements and campaign contributions from supporters of the credit.

There are no original cosponsors of HR 1693. It was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee (HWMC).

Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA) spoke at a conference in Washington DC hosted by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) on May 4, 2011, at which she advocated making the R&D tax credit permanent.

"Recently I joined a bipartisan group of my colleagues, lead by Kevin Brady and John Larsen, in introducing legislation to make the research and development tax credit permanent", said Rep. Matsui (at right), referring to another bill, HR 942 [LOC | WW], titled the "American Research and Competitiveness Act of 2011".

HR 942 would raise the alternative simplified research credit to 20%, and make that permanent. However, it would only extend the basic R&D tax credit for one year, to December 31, 2012.

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), Rep. John Larsen (D-CT), Rep. Matsui, and others circulated a "Dear colleague" letter [PDF] on March 22, 2011, urging others to support HR 942, which they introduced on March 8, 2011.

They stated that "Our legislation would simplify and strengthen the U.S. credit by increasing the ``alternative simplified credit´´ from 14% to 20% and making it permanent, while providing a one-year bridge for those companies that still use the ``traditional credit,´´ to December 31, 2012."

Rep. Matsui stated on May 4 that "Congress has continued to kick this can down the road. But, it is my hope that it will become a reality this year". Her late husband, former Rep. Bob Matsui (D-CA), also sponsored bills to make the R&D tax credit permanent.

Related House Bills:

• HR 1601 [LOC | WW], the "The Tax Cuts for America Act of 2011", introduced on April 15, 2011, by Rep. Henry Cuellar (R-TX), a bill to permanently extend many expiring provisions of tax law, but not the R&D tax credit.
• HR 1329 [LOC | WW], an untitled bill, introduced on April 1, 2011, by Rep. Leonard Lance (NJ). It would permanently extend the R&D tax credit. This bill also contains a protectionist provision. It would increase the R&D tax credit for taxpayers whose gross receipts are predominantly from domestic production activities. See also, Rep. Lance's release.
• HR 871 [LOC | WW], an untitled bill, introduced on March 2, 2011, by Rep. Heath Shuler (D-NC). It is substantially identical to HR 1329.
• HR 689 [LOC | WW], the "21st Century Investment Act of 2011", introduced by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-MD) and others on February 14, 2011, a bill to make the credit permanent, and to increase the credit for research conducted within the US.

Senate Bills:

• S 825 [LOC | WW], the "Job Creation Through Innovation Act", introduced on April 14, 2011, by Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), a bill to permanently extend the R&D tax credit, increase the credit for domestic manufacturers, and other things.
• S 155 [LOC | WW], the "Domestic Jobs Innovation Bonus Act", introduced on January 25, 2011, by Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI), a protectionist bill that would not extend the existing R&D tax credit, but that would increase the credit for domestic manufacturers.

5/6. The Public Knowledge (PK) and New America Foundation (NAF) sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asking it to "investigate" "Caps on broadband usage imposed by Internet Service Providers". The letter suggests that these could have anticompetitive purposes.

The two Washington DC based interest groups are particularly interested in an FCC investigation of AT&T's policies regarding usage caps and pricing for exceeding these caps.

However, while the letter suggests interrogatories for the FCC to send to service providers, it stops short of advocating any new price, service, or other regulation. It merely raises the specter of anticompetitive conduct, and asks the FCC to collect evidence that the PK and NAF would site in future comments and complaints.

The letter, signed by the PK's Harold Feld and the NAF's Sacha Meinrath, acknowledges that "broadband caps are not inherently problematic". But, "they carry the omnipresent temptation to act in anticompetitive and monopolistic ways".

The letter explains that caps on "those services, such as voice telephony and video programming, that compete with internet-delivered non-ISP controlled offerings" could be anticompetitive.

That is, the argument may be that if a broadband internet access service (BIAS) provider were to charge its customers extra for exceeding a monthly usage cap as a result of use of a VOIP service that competes with the BIAS provider's voice service, and use of the BIAS provider's service does not count towards the cap, then that cap policy might be anticompetitive behavior directed at competing voice service providers.

And, a similar allegation of anti-competitive behavior might be made regarding video services that compete with the BIAS provider's video services.

The FCC articulated such a concern in its 2008 Comcast order. It concluded that BitTorrent, with whom's peer to peer service Comcast interfered, is "a competitive threat to cable operators such as Comcast because Internet users have the opportunity to view high-quality video with BitTorrent that they might otherwise watch (and pay for) on cable television. Such video distribution poses a particular competitive threat to Comcast's video-on-demand (``VOD´´) service." (See, paragraph 5, at page 3. Parentheses in original.)

The FCC order also stated that Comcast's network management practices pose "significant risks of anticompetitive abuse". (Paragraph 47, at page 28.)

The FCC adopted this order [67 pages in PDF] on August 1, 2008. It released that order on August 20, 2008. That order is FCC 08-183 in WC Docket No. 07-52. See also, story titled "FCC Asserts Authority to Regulate Network Management Practices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,805, Monday, August 4, 2008.

But then, on April 6, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) issued its opinion [36 pages in PDF] in Comcast v. FCC, vacating the August 2008 order. See, story titled "Court of Appeals Vacates FCC's Comcast Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,072, April 7, 2010.

The PK/NAF letter adds that "If used properly, data caps can" be "a tool in easing network congestion. However, there is a constant threat that ISPs use network congestion as a pretext to act on other motives."

It also states that "the caps recently implemented by AT&T are particularly aggressive. Unlike competitors whose caps appear to be at least nominally linked to congestions during peak-use periods, AT&T seeks to convert caps into a profit center by charging additional fees to customers who exceed the cap".

5/7. The House is scheduled to begin consideration of HR 754 [LOC | WW], the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011" on Thursday, May 12, 2011. This is a bill to authorize appropriations for sixteen federal agencies involved in intelligence related activities.

It contains few substantive provisions. Moreover, the actual authorizations are not listed in this bill, but rather are in an annex, which is kept secret.

However, this bill would create a new program intended to detect transfers of information to entities such as WikiLeaks. The Senate version of the bill contains the same provision. See, S 719 [LOC | WW], also titled "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011".

In addition, the Senate version of the bill would also create a new administrative process to be used against government employees who transfer classified information. It would provide the government a procedure that is simpler, and less burdened by due process requirements, than criminal prosecutions.

In short, the intelligence committees are proposing to deal with the WikiLeaks phenomenon by increasing the security and surveillance of government computer networks, and by cracking down on government employees who leak information.

Nothing in these bills would create any new governmental authority to prosecute individuals associated with entities like WikiLeaks, or reporters employed by entities like the New York Times.

House Bill. The bill as reported by the House Intelligence Committee (HIC) would create an "automated insider threat detection program for the information resources in each element of the intelligence community in order to detect unauthorized access to, or use or transmission of, classified intelligence". See, Section 402.

The bill would define "information resources" as "networks, systems, workstations, servers, routers, applications, databases, websites, online collaboration environments", and any thing else designated by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI).

The HIC's May 3, 2011, report explains that "Incidents like the unauthorized disclosure of classified information by Wikileaks also show us that despite the tremendous progress made since 9/11 in information sharing, we still need to have systems in place that can detect unauthorized activities by those who would do our country harm from the inside." See, House Report No. 112-72.

The minority views section of the report states that "we must make cybersecurity a priority", but complains that "the majority embarked on a whirlwind process to get" this bill out of committee.

The bill would require that this new program have "initial operating capability" by October 1, 2012, and "full operating capability" by October 1, 2013.

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), the Chairman of the HIC, introduced this bill on February 17, 2011. The HIC amended and approved it on March 10, 2011. The HIC approved an amendment in the nature of a substitute that added the "automated insider threat detection program" provision. The HIC held no public hearing on this provision. The March 10 markup was partially closed.

Senate Bill. The related bill in the Senate is S 719. Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) introduced it on April 4, 2011. The Senate Intelligence Committee (SIC) approved it the same day. It contains the same "automated insider threat detection program" provision as the House bill.

In addition, the Senate bill, but not the House bill, contains a provision that would create a new administrative criminal procedure (nominally "disciplinary actions") for government employees. See, Section 403.

This provision would require the DNI to write regulations that would apply to "each employee of an element of the intelligence community". These regulations would require that such employees sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

These regulations would require that these NDAs impose "prepublication review requirements" on such employees. These regulations would require that these NDAs impose requirements upon such employees regarding "disclosing classified information without authorization at any time during or subsequent to employment". And, these regulations would require that these NDAs impose penalties, including loss of pension benefits.

The SIC report explains that "The Committee has had long-standing concerns about unauthorized disclosures of classified information. A particular source of frustration has been that leakers are rarely seen to suffer consequences for leaking classified information. In order to better supplement criminal prosecution remedies for unlawful disclosures, the Committee has urged the Executive Branch to make fuller use of administrative sanctions. Up to now, those sanctions have consisted of security clearance revocation, suspension, or termination as a means of deterring and punishing leakers." See, Senate Report No. 112-12.

It continues, "Unfortunately, these sanctions are not generally available for use against a key source of leaks, former Intelligence Community employees. The purpose of Section 403 is to provide an additional administrative option for the Intelligence Community to deter leakers who violate the prepublication review requirements of their non-disclosure agreements."

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO), and Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) voted against S 719 in committee.

Sen. Wyden (at left) wrote in his dissenting view for the SIC report that "my concern is that giving intelligence agency heads the authority to take away the pensions of individuals who haven't been formally convicted of any wrongdoing could pose serious problems for the due process rights of intelligence professionals, and particularly the rights of whistleblowers who report waste, fraud and abuse to Congress or Inspectors General."

He concluded that "this provision could be used to undermine or violate the due process rights of intelligence agency employees, with a corresponding impact on their family members and dependents."

The full Senate has not yet approved either HR 754 or S 719.

5/7. Section 403 of S 719 [LOC | WW], the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011", would create a new administrative punishment process for unauthorized disclosure of classified information by employees at government agencies involved in intelligence.

This provision would build on a strategy long used by companies to protect trade secrets and proprietary information -- the non-disclosure agreement (NDA). These intelligence agency NDAs, like private sector NDAs, would be contractual, and enforceable beyond the termination of employment.

Section 403 would also create what amounts to a criminal punishment process in a nominally administrative proceeding. It would create a process that circumvents a panoply of due process protections that apply to criminal proceedings.

Companies must turn to the courts for enforcement of their NDAs. This provision of S 719 would give intelligence agencies internal enforcement authority. Companies can seek damages and injunctive relief. This provision would enable government agencies to punish.

S 719 is designed to place government employees in fear of losing their jobs and pensions if they disclose what turns out to be classified information.

The sharing of information with other federal government agencies, state and local government agencies, regulated industries, private companies, trade groups, and others, is essential to the efficient and effective operation of government, particularly with respect to communications networks and computer systems, where almost all of the facilities are in private hands.

Arguably, S 719 would have a chilling effect upon information sharing by government officials, both that which would harm national security, and that which would advance government policy goals.

No Defenses, Limitations or Exceptions. S 719 would enable intelligence related agencies to punish employees for transferring classified information without authorization.

Knowledge that the information was classified would not be an element of the offense. Rather, failure to comply with "prepublication review requirements" -- that is, to ask for permission to disclose a document -- would be the relevant element of the offense.

Moreover, S 719 contains no other defenses, limitations or exceptions. The bill would not be limited to transfer of classified information that posses a threat to intelligence operations or national security.

Nor does the bill recognize as defenses either (1) improper classification, (2) that the document in question was already in the public domain, or (3) that the  public good of release outweighed the threat to national security.

Nor does the bill create any protection for whistleblowers who go through proper channels to report waste, fraud and abuse at government agencies.

Espionage Act, Criminal Prosecution and Due Process. There already exists an Espionage Act, which is codified at 18 U.S.C. § 798. It is a criminal prohibition. And, to the extent that it does not contemplate the internet or computer systems, it is outdated.

It provides, in part, that "Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information ... concerning" certain enumerated codes, designs, and intelligence activities "Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both".

Last December, late in the 111th Congress, former Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), and Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) introduced S 4004 [LOC | WW], the "Securing Human Intelligence and Enforcing Lawful Dissemination Act" or "SHIELD Act". On February 10, 2012, they reintroduced this bill as S 315 [LOC | WW], while Rep. Peter King (R-NY) introduced HR 703 [LOC | WW] on February 15, 2011, in the House.

These bills would, among other things, revise the statute to enable prosecutors to reach persons like Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. See also, story titled "Senators Introduce Bill to Amend Espionage Act to Reach WikiLeaks and Others" and related stories in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,174, December 10, 2010.

S 719, like the SHIELD Act, attempts to limit leaks to the likes of Assange, but it does not take the approach of amending the Espionage Act. Rather, it would create what amounts to a criminal prohibition, backed up by punishment, but outside of the judicial system, and lacking the procedural protections afforded in criminal judicial proceedings.

Also, by slipping this provision into an an intelligence authorization bill, the jurisdiction and expertise of the Judiciary Committees is being circumvented.

This bill, and the SIC report, go to great lengths to try to posture this new proceeding as administrative rather than criminal. The bill would not amend the Espionage Act, or any other section of Title 18. Nominally, it would not even put a prohibition or punishment in a federal statute or regulation. Rather, it would assume the posture that the prohibition and punishment are in an employment contract, and that the government would merely be carrying out the terms of a contract voluntarily executed by employees.

Also, the argument underlying Section 403 is that the bill provides for no deprivation of life, liberty or property, which would entail due process. It does not provide for the taking of life or liberty. One could not be executed or imprisoned under this bill. However, the position that there is no deprivation of property is a stretch. The key punishment of this bill is deprivation of a government employee's pension, which for many government employees is one of their most valuable assets.

Section 403 is at bottom, a proposal to take an existing criminal prohibition from the Espionage Act, as it applies to certain government employees, and place it an administrative agency proceeding, and enforce it in a manner that evades the due process and public transparency requirements afforded by the Constitution.

Finally, when assessing the commitment of the intelligence agencies to Constitutional rights, one might observe that they did not ask that Section 403 to be included in the bill. As Sen. Wyden noted in his dissent, "neither the DNI nor any of the intelligence agency heads have asked Congress for this authority".

Overclassification. The federal government broadly classifies a huge amount of records, often without rational basis, and often in a manner that does not put individuals on notice as to what is classified.

Witnesses at a House Judiciary Committee (HJC) last December quoted from various officials and reports, and offered their own assessments. The December 16, 2011, hearing hearing was titled "Espionage Act and the Legal and Constitutional Issues Raised by WikiLeaks". See also, HJC web page with hyperlinks to prepared testimony of other witnesses.

Gabriel Schoenfeld (Hudson Institute) stated that "our national security system is saddled with pervasive mis- and overclassification". See, prepared testimony.

Abbe Lowell (McDermott Will) testified that "Too often, government officials during their day's work find it easier to classify information or classify it at a higher level than necessary because it requires more effort and consideration to do less. No one gets in trouble for classifying something that should be unclassified". See, prepared testimony.

Thomas Blanton (George Washington University, National Security Archive) stated that there is "massive overclassification" and "excessive government secrecy". He added that there are "documents that are classified and unclassified at the same time, sometimes with different versions from different agencies or different reviewers, all because the secrecy is so subjective and overdone". See, prepared testimony.

Nothing in this bill would prevent the government from punishing an employee for sharing classified information that should not have been classified in the first place.

The House will not meet. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of May 9.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) will host a panel discussion titled "Copyright & Commerce: Guarantees or Promises?". The speakers will include Marybeth Peters, Jon Baumgarten (Proskauer Rose), and Katharine Weymouth (Publisher of the Washington Post). See, notice. Location: Newseum, Knight Studio, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch for planning and elections. For more information contact Micah Caldwell at mcaldwell at eapdlaw dot com or Mark Brennan at mark dot brennan at hoganlovells dot com. Location: Hogan Lovells, 555 13th St., NW.

Deadline for Apple and other companies to respond to the April 25, 2011, letter [PDF] from Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) and other House Commerce Committee (HCC) members regarding location data collection by cell phones and tablets. See also, letter to Google, letter to Microsoft, letter to Nokia, letter to Research in Motion, and letter to Hewlett Packard (HP). And see, story titled "House Republicans Write Apple and Others Re Cell Phone and Tablet Location Data Collection" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,225, April 25, 2011.

The House will meet at 12:00 NOON for morning hour, and at 2:00 PM for legislation business. It will consider non-technology related items. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of May 9.

8:00 -10:00 AM. Broadband Census News LLC will host a panel discussion titled "Digital Video Recorders, the Cablevision Decision, and Industry Licensing Agreements". Breakfast will be served. See, notice and registration page. This event is also sponsored by the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and the Public Knowledge (PK). Location: Clyde's of Gallery Place, 707 7th St., NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Feature Group IP West v. FCC, App. Ct. No. 10-1257, a petition for review of orders of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) denying a petition for forbearance from applying certain FCC rules regarding intercarrier compensation. See, FCC's brief [70 pages in PDF]. Judges Tatel, Griffith, and Randolph will preside. Location: Courtroom 11, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law will hold a hearing titled "Protecting Mobile Privacy: Your Smartphones, Tablets, Cell Phones and Your Privacy". The witnesses will be Jessica Rich (Deputy Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection), Jason Weinstein (Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the DOJ's Criminal Division), Justin Brookman (Center for Democracy and Technology), Alan Davidson (Google), Ashkan Soltani, Bud Tribble (Apple), and Jonathan Zuck (Association for Competitive Technology). The SJC will webcast this hearing. See, SJC notice. See also, April 20 letter from Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) to Apple CEO Steve Jobs, and story titled "Sen. Franken Writes Steve Jobs Regarding Location Data Retention by iPhones and 3G iPads" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,224, April 20, 2011. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

11:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Competition in the Internet Ecosystem". The speakers will be Robert Atkinson (ITIF), Jeffrey Eisenach (Navigant Economics), Michael Calabrese (New America Foundation), and Jonathan Sallet (O'Melveny and Meyers). See, notice and registration page. Location: Room 1539, Longworth Building, Capitol Hill.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [58 pages in PDF] regarding development of a technical interoperability framework for a nationwide public safety broadband network in the 700 MHz band. The FCC adopted this NPRM on January 25, 2011, and released the text on January 26, 2011. It is FCC 11-6 in PS Docket No. 06-229, WT Docket 06-150, and WP Docket 07-100. See, notice in the Federal Register, February 24, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 37, at Pages 10295-10299.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to some portions of its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [139 pages in PDF] regarding changes to the two universal service tax and subsidy programs titled "Lifeline" and "Link Up". The FCC adopted this NPRM on March 3, 2011, and released the text on March 4, 2011. It is FCC 11-32 in WC Docket Nos. 11-42 and 03-109, and CC Docket No. 96-45. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 23, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 56, at Pages 16481-16519.

Deadline to submit requests to participate in the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee's (ITS/PAC) web conference on ITS. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 25, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 79, at Page 22940.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for morning hour, and at 12:00 NOON for legislation business. It will consider non-technology related items. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of May 9.

8:55 AM - 3:00 PM. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission will hold a hearing titled "The Implications of China's Military and Civil Space Programs". See, notice in the Federal Register, May 2, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 84, at Pages 24565-24566. Location: Room H-309, Capitol Building.

9:00 AM - 4:15 PM. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will host an event titled "Examining Phone Bill Cramming: A Discussion". See, notice and agenda. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

10:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security will hold a hearing titled "The USA PATRIOT Act: Dispelling the Myths". See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Finance Committee (SFC) will hold a hearing titled "The U.S.- Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement". See, notice. Location: Room 215, Dirksen Building.

10:15 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights will hold a hearing titled "The AT&T/T-Mobile Merger: Is Humpty Dumpty Being Put Back Together Again?". The witnesses will be Randall Stephenson (P/CEO of AT&T), Philipp Humm (P/CEO of T-Mobile USA), Daniel Hesse (CEO of Sprint Nextel), Hu Meena (P/CEO of Cellular South), Gigi Sohn (Public Knowledge), and Larry Cohen (Communications Workers of America). See, notice. The SJC will webcast this hearing. Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) will preside. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Ethical Traps in E-Discovery". Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice and registration page.

5:00 PM. Deadline to submit requests to testify at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO) June 1, 2011, hearing regarding its ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 25, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 79, at Pages 22854-22861. See also, story titled "USPTO to Hold Hearing on Inter Partes Reexamination Proceedings" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,226, April 26, 2011.

6:00 - 7:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event. The speaker will be Geoffrey Stone (University of Chicago law school). The deadline to register is 12:00 NOON on May 9. Prices vary. Location: Davis Wright Tremaine, 1919 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

EXTENDED TO JULY 11. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to the December 3, 2010, petition for declaratory ruling (PDR) filed by the CTIA regarding the scope of the federal ban on state and local entry regulation, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(3)(A), and the state of Connecticut's new regulatory regime for wireless service provides. See, CTIA's PDR part 1 and part 2. This proceeding is WT Docket No. 11-35.. See, CTIA's request to extend comment deadlines, and FCC's extension notice in the Federal Register, April 18, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 74, at Pages 21742-21743.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for morning hour, and at 12:00 NOON for legislation business. It will begin consideration of HR 754 [LOC | WW], the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011", subject to a rule. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of May 9.

Supreme Court conference day (discussion of argued cases, and decision on cert petitions). Closed.

9:00 AM. The House Ways and Means Committee (HWMC) will hold a hearing titled "The Need for Comprehensive Tax Reform to Help American Companies Compete in the Global Market and Create Jobs for American Workers". See, notice. Location: Room 1100, Longworth Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC) will hold a hearing titled "Economic Ramifications of Cyber Threats and Vulnerabilities to the Private Sector". The witnesses will be Gordon Snow (Assistant Director of the FBI's Cyber Division), Harriet Pearson (IBM), Sara Santarelli (Verizon), and Thomas Kellermann (AirPatrol Corp.) See, notice. Location: Room 253, Russell Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda again includes consideration of the nominations of Virginia Seitz (to be Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel), Donald Verrilli (DOJ Solicitor General), Lisa Monaco (AAG in charge of the DOJ's National Security Division), Bernice Donald (Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (6thCir)), Henry Floyd (USCA/4thCir), Kathleen Williams (USDC/SDFl), Nelva Ramos (USDC/SDTex), Richard Jackson (USDC/DColo), and Sara Darrow (USDC/CDIll). The agenda also again includes consideration of S 623 [LOC | WW], the "Sunshine in Litigation Act". The SJC rarely follows its published agendas. The SJC will webcast this event. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) will hold a hearing titled "Export Controls, Arms Sales, and Reform: Balancing U.S. Interests, Part 1". The witnesses will be Ellen Tauscher (Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security), Eric Hirschorn (head of the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security), and James Miller (Department of Defense). See, notice. Location: Room 2172, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The House Intelligence Committee (HIC) will hold a closed hearing titled "FY 2012 Budget Overview". Location: Room HVC-304, Capitol Visitor Center.

10:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will hold an event titled "open meeting". See, tentative agenda and story titled "FCC Releases Tentative Agenda for May 12 Meeting" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,225, April 25, 2011. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

12:00 NOON - 1:45 PM. The New America Foundation (NAF) will host a panel discussion titled "Can the FCC Convert Satellite Spectrum into Wireless Competition?". The speakers will be Sanjiv Ahuja (Ch/CEO of LightSquared), Reed Hundt (REH Advisors LLP), Parul Desai (Consumers Union), Bill Ingram (Cricket/Leap), Larry Krevor (Sprint Nextel), Michael Calabrese (NAF), and Sascha Meinrath (NAF). See, notice. Location: National Press Club, Holeman Lounge, 529 14th St., NW.

2:30 PM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Reform Committee (SHSGRC) will hold a hearing titled "Ten Years After 9/11: Is Intelligence Reform Working?". See, notice. The SHSBRC will webcast this hearing. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft FIPS-180-4 [35 pages in PDF] titled "Secure Hash Standard (SHS)". See also, notice in the Federal Register, February 11, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 29, at Pages 7817-7818.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislation business. It will continue consideration of HR 754 [LOC | WW], the "Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011", subject to a rule. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule for week of May 9.

RESCHEDULED FROM MAY 3. 10:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will hold a hearing titled "FCC Process Reform". The witnesses will be the five members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). See, notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

1:00 PM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES) and the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Office for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) will host a teleconferenced meeting regarding testing for conformity with interoperability standards for public safety communications. This meeting pertains to Project 25 (P25). These agencies state that "An initial goal of P25 is to specify formal standards for interfaces between the components of a land mobile radio (LMR) system. LMR systems are commonly used by emergency responders in portable handheld and mobile vehicle-mounted devices. Although formal standards are being developed, no process is currently in place to confirm that LMR equipment advertised as P25-compliant meets all aspects of P25 standards." The deadline to request to attend is May 6. The deadline to submit written comments is May 6. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 29, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 83, at Pages 23992-23993.

4:45 - 6:15 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Cloud Computing: Will It Reduce IT Costs?". Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice and registration page.

5:00 PM. Deadline to submit applications to participate in the June 20, 2001, cyber security research workshop hosted by the National Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NCO/NITRD) titled "Abnormal Behavior Detection Finds Malicious Actors". This is part of its series titled "Assumption Buster Workshops". See, NITRD issue summary, and notice in the Federal Register, April 25, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 79, at Pages 22925-22926.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [152 pages in PDF] regarding disability access and S 3828 [LOC | WW], the "Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010" (CVAA), signed into law on October 8, 2010, and S 3304 [LOC | WW]. This NPRM proposes to adopt rules implementing the new Section 716 of the Communications Act. The CVAA, at S 3304, Title I, Section 104, gives the FCC sweeping direction and authority to regulate "user equipment, network equipment, and software" to ensure that it is "accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities". The FCC adopted this item on March 2, 20111, and released the text on March 3, 2011. It is FCC 11-37 in CG Docket No. 10-213, WT Docket No. 96-198, CG Docket No. 10-145. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 14, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 49, at Pages 13799-13849.

The House will be in recess the week of Monday, May 16 through Friday, May 20.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Warren C. Havens v. FCC, App. Ct. No. 02-1359. Judges Sentelle, Ginsburg and Garland will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its 2nd Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (2ndFNPRM), regarding broadcasting near tribal lands. This item is FCC 11-28 in MB Docket No. 09-52. The FCC adopted and released this item on March 3, 2011. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 16, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 51, at Pages 14362-14366.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding video relay service (VRS) rates. The FCC adopted this item on April 14, 2011, and released it on April 15, 2011. It is FCC 11-62 in CG Docket Nos. 10-51 and 03-123. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 2, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 84, at Pages 24442-24443.

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 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
3034 Newark St. NW, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2011 David Carney. All rights reserved.