5/12. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), and others introduced HR 1860 [LOC | WW | PDF], the "Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2011", in the House.

On the same day, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Sen. John Thune (R-SD) introduced S 971 [LOC | WW], the companion bill in the Senate.

Introduction. The bill would limit the ability of state and local governments to tax digital goods and services. It would not affect state taxation or regulation of telecommunications, internet access service, or audio or video programming service.

It would bar a state from imposing multiple or discriminatory taxes on the sale of digital goods or services (DGS). It would limit state DGS taxation to retail transactions. States could only tax the DGS seller or customer. States could only tax DGS sales when the address of the customer to the transaction is in its state.

However, the bill would allow a state to impose a sales tax on an out of state DGS seller, for a retail DGS sale, when the customer's address is in state.

The bill is 13 pages in PDF. It contains many key prohibitions, and many key definitions, all of which are stated with a relative efficiency of words. However, actually applying these rules to the wide variety of taxing hypotheticals that may arise, especially in light of the already in place Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) and the Supreme Court's Quill decision, may involve some complexity and lingering uncertainty. See, related story in this issue titled "Summary of HR 1860".

There was a related bill in the House in the 111th Congress, HR 5649 [LOC | WW], the "Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2010", introduced on June 30, 2010, by former Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) and Rep. Smith. It was similar, but not identical to HR 1860.

There have also been numerous bills over the years that pertain to state taxation that is in some way related to use of information and communications technologies. See, related story in this issue titled "Legislation to Limit State ICT Based Taxation".

There are also opponents of such legislation, including states that aggressively tax sales and/or that attempt to levy taxes on out of state individuals and businesses, as well as from groups that represent brick and mortar retail sellers that would like to see their online competitors subjected to more taxes.

The Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA), for example, lobbies for legislation that would enable more state taxation of online and remote sellers. See also, HR 5660 [LOC | WW], the "Main Street Fairness Act", introduced in the 111th Congress, by former Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-MA).

It should also be noted that different states pursue different taxing strategies. While some states, such as California, are aggressive in attempting to impose sales taxes on distant online sellers, other states have no sales tax at all. Sen. Wyden's state of Oregon has no sales tax.

Sponsors' Comments. Rep. Smith stated in a release that "In our modern economy, more and more consumers are buying digital goods and services rather than tangible goods. While books are still sold in stores across the country, readers can now download hundreds of digital books, newspapers and magazines instantaneously with the click of a mouse from the comfort of their home. But as technology advances, it is important that tax policies do not unfairly penalize consumers who choose to download digital goods rather than purchase their tangible counterparts. This legislation promotes tax fairness and ensures that consumers are not discouraged from purchasing digital goods."

Rep. Cohen, the lead cosponsor, stated in this release that "Digital goods and services are quickly becoming a driving force in our national economy. We need to establish a uniform framework for the taxation of digital goods and services so consumers won't be double-taxed. Our Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2011 would accomplish such a goal.".

The other original cosponsors are Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) and Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL). The House bill was referred to the HJC. Rep. Smith is the Chairman. Rep. Smith also announced that the HJC's Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law will hold a hearing on this bill "this month". Rep. Coble is the Subcommittee Chairman, and Rep. Cohen is its ranking Democrat. The House will be in recess the week of May 16-20.

Sen. Wyden (at right) asked rhetorically in a release, "Would consumers be as willing to try out a new I-Phone app if they have to pay taxes for every download? How many app's would even be available if every provider had to collect and comply with a different tax law or user fee in every state and/or locality?"

He added that "taxes discourage both product usage and innovation. It would be a mistake to crush the U.S. growing digital goods and services industry before it has an opportunity to reach its full potential. This bill gives the new and innovative digital economy the breathing room it needs to grow this exciting new market and create the good paying jobs that will result."

Sen. Wyden also wrote that "The creation and consumption of downloadable digital goods, like books, songs, ringtones and video games, and the provision of digital services, like health care monitoring and cloud computing, represent a rapidly growing segment of our national economy. ... The lack of a national framework addressing how State and local taxes can be imposed upon these products has led to a confusing process that will only grow more burdensome for consumers and the providers of digital commerce as new, innovative and emerging technologies become available." See, Congressional Record, May 12, 2011, at Page S2941.

The Senate bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee (SFC). Sen. Wyden is a member.

Rick Boucher lost his bid for re-election in November of 2010. However, he wrote a statement that was published in the Congressional Record, June 30, 2010, at Page E1255-6, in which he summarized existing state taxation of digital goods and services.

Boucher, who was sponsor of the predecessor version of this bill, wrote that "The first state tax on digital goods was imposed in 2007. One year later, eleven additional states considered legislation to impose new taxes on digital goods, and in 2009 fourteen states considered legislation addressing the taxation of digital goods and services. Several states have attempted to impose telecommunication-specific taxes on downloaded music sold by communication providers, taxes which would not be imposed on similar products sold by non-communication companies."

He also noted this his bill was endorsed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), Verizon, Apple, Time Warner, and Electronic Arts.

Reaction. Steve Largent, head of the CTIA, and a former member of the HCC, praised these bills, and the sponsors. He stated in a release that "It makes no sense to levy additional, and sometimes hidden, state and local taxes against items that consumers purchase via the Internet and not in stores. Once passed, this legislation would provide tax administrators and consumers a better understanding of how music, books and other downloadable products should be taxed. At the same time, it would continue to encourage digital commerce to flourish and assist the nation’s economic recovery and enhance American economic competitiveness."

Similarly, Walter McCormack, head of the US Telecom, stated in a release that "By providing a national framework for state and local taxation of digital goods and services, this legislation will give consumers a consistent set of expectations for what they will actually pay when they purchase digital goods, such as e-books, videos, music or software. A tangle of varying and discriminatory taxes, which are under discussion in many states and localities searching for new sources of revenue, will confuse consumers and place an unfair financial burden on those who choose to go online to make certain purchases."

The Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) stated in a release that this bill "rightly prevents multiple states from taxing the same downloaded song, movie, or book as it travels across the Internet to a consumer. It means if the good is taxed, it happens once and only once. The legislation ties the hands of revenue-hungry state and local governments by not allowing them to double or triple tax the digital equivalent of a CD or book you'd buy in a store.

See also, statement of the National Taxpayers Union.

On the other side, the RILA, which represents brick and mortar retailers, states in its web site that it "supports federal legislation that would grant states the authority to require businesses to collect and remit, through a simplified system, state sales and use taxes on remote sales, including sales made over the Internet and through other remote methods."

It also "supports state action seeking to allow states collection authority by establishing nexus for online-only retailers through various means, or through direct state assessments of online-only retailers that have established facilities in a given state, as stop-gap measures until federal action to level the playing field can be enacted."

The RILA argues that "brick-and-mortar retailers are required to collect sales taxes while many online and catalog retailers are not. This difference is not only unfair to brick-and-mortar retailers, who create jobs in the community, but it is also costing states and localities, which are already facing severe budget crises, billions of dollars in lost revenue that could benefit vital public services."

On the other hand, out of state internet based sellers do not rely upon the state's police for protection, do not send their children to the state's schools, and do not otherwise avail themselves of most of the government services funded by the state's taxes.

5/12. HR 1860 [LOC | WW | PDF], the "Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act of 2011", would impose several limitations upon state taxing authority.

First, it would provide that "No State or local jurisdiction shall impose multiple or discriminatory taxes on or with respect to the sale or use of digital goods or digital services."

HR 1860 also provides definitions of the words used in this provision. The term "discriminatory tax" means a tax "on or with respect to the sale or use of any digital good or digital service at a higher rate than is generally imposed on or with respect to the sale or use of tangible personal property or of similar services that are not provided electronically".

So, for example, a state could not tax a software program delivered electronically at a higher rate than it taxes the same software purchased on a DVD, or a downloaded e-book at a higher rate than an ink and paper book purchased in a brick and mortar store.

The bill also defines "digital service" to mean "any service that is provided electronically, including the provision of remote access to or use of a digital good". However, it does not include a "telecommunications service, Internet access service, or audio or video programming service". (But, the Internet Tax Freedom Act does cover internet access service. See, related story in this issue titled "Legislation to Limit State ICT Based Taxation".)

The bill does not include any reference to "cloud computing". However, it is likely the intent of the sponsors of this bill to include cloud computing services within the meaning of "digital service". Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) stated in the Senate that digital services includes cloud computing. See, Congressional Record, May 12, 2011, at Page S2941.

Some state taxing authorities engage in highly creative interpretations of statutes and court precedent to levy taxes on distant parties with little contact with the taxing state. Were HR 1860 to be enacted as introduced, some states might nevertheless impose taxes on cloud computing services in a manner that would violate a prohibition contained in the bill, were such state to construe cloud computing services to be a digital service within the meaning of the bill.

The bill would also provide that "Taxes on or with respect to the sale of digital goods or digital services may only be imposed on or with respect to a sale to a customer." Moreover, the bill defines "customer" as "a person that purchases a digital good or digital service, for a purpose other than resale". Thus, this bill would preclude taxing sales to distributors. Only retail sales may be taxed. There could not be multiple taxes imposed at successive stages.

The bill would also provide that "Taxes on or with respect to the sale of digital goods or digital services may only be imposed on and collected only from a customer or a seller", and "may be imposed only by the State and local jurisdictions whose territorial limits encompass the customer's tax address".

HR 1860 does not reference the Quill holding. The Supreme Court ruled in Quill v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992) that state and local taxing authorities are barred under the Commerce Clause from requiring remote sellers without a substantial nexus to the taxing jurisdiction to collect sales taxes for sales to persons within the jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court added that Congress may extend such authority. It wrote in Quill that "Congress is now free to decide whether, when, and to what extent the States may burden interstate mail order concerns with a duty to collect use taxes."

HR 1860 states that it is an exercise of the "Congress’ plenary power under article I, section 8, 2 clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States (commonly known as the ‘‘commerce clause’’) ..." (Parentheses in original.)

The ban on "multiple" taxes would clearly preclude multiple taxation of the same transaction by a state.

But what of multiple taxation by multiple states, such as with the state of the customer imposing a tax on the customer, and the state of the seller imposing a tax on the seller, for the same transaction? The provision that a tax "may be imposed only by the State and local jurisdictions whose territorial limits encompass the customer's tax address" would appear to prohibit the state of the seller from imposing a tax, but allow the state of the customer to impose a tax, thus eliminating double taxation across two states.

But then, what of the authority of the state of the customer to impose a tax on the distant seller. The clause that states that a tax may be imposed on "a customer or a seller", combined with the clause that states that only the state that encompasses "the customer's tax address" can impose a tax, would appear to authorize the state of the customer in a digital goods or services transaction to impose a tax on a distant out of state seller.

So, what of the dormant commerce clause, state usurpation of federal power to regulate interstate commerce, the due process rights of the seller, and the Quill opinion?

Sen. Wyden wrote that "this legislation will use the address of the consumer to determine which jurisdiction has the authority to tax a digital purchase, as long as the State has passed a law to do so and is lawfully able under the Internet Tax Freedom Act and the Supreme Court's Quill decision".

Are the state powers defined by this bill still limited by that portion of the Quill holding that provides that a state can only tax a seller with a substantial nexus to the taxing state? Or, is this bill a grant of authority to the states to collect a tax on a seller without a substantial nexus to the taxing state, provided that the customer's address is in the taxing state?

The language of the HR 1860 states the latter. For example, notwithstanding Quill, if HR 1860 were enacted, any state could impose a sales tax on Apple for iTunes songs sales to customers whose address is in that state.

Some states now take the position that the holding in Quill only reaches sales taxes. Some states are using administrative processes, rather than state legislation, to assert taxing authority.

The bill states that "No tax on or with respect to the sale or use of tangible personal property, telecommunications service, Internet access service, or audio or video programming service may be construed by any regulation, administrative ruling, or otherwise, to be imposed on or with respect to the sale or use of a digital good or a digital service."

HR 1860 would also provide that "A seller that relies in good faith on information provided by a customer to determine the customer’s tax address or addresses shall not be held liable for any additional tax based on a different determination of the customer’s tax address or addresses."

5/12. Since the 1990s the Congress has considered, and sometimes enacted, legislation to restrict the ability of states to levy abusive, discriminatory, multiple or extraterritorial taxes related to the use of information or communications technologies. This article describes some of these legislative efforts.

Throughout, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), previously as Rep. Wyden, has been one of the key proponents of such legislation.

First, the Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) and its extensions have limited state taxation of internet access service and other things. The Congress enacted the original ITFA in 1998. Sen. Wyden was a sponsor in the Senate. The ITFA has been the only notable legislative success in this area.

The original ITFA had a three year sunset. The Congress extended the limited moratorium contained in the bill in 2001, in 2004, and again in 2007. It is now set to sunset in 2014. See, HR 3678 [LOC | WW], the "Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act of 2007". See also,

• stories titled "Summary of HR 3678" and "House to Consider Extension of Act Limiting Internet Taxes" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,655, October 16, 2007.
• story titled "Senate Approves 7 Year Extension of Internet Tax Ban" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,663, October 26, 2007
• story titled "House Passes Senate Version of Internet Tax Ban Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,666, October 31, 2007.

The ITFA, which is codified at 47 U.S.C. § 151 note, provides, in part, that "No State or political subdivision thereof may impose ... Taxes on Internet access" or "Multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce". There are, however, grandfathered taxes, and numerous exceptions.

Second, there is HR 1002 [LOC | WW] and S 543 [LOC | WW], the "Wireless Tax Fairness Act of 2011", introduced in March of this year. These bills would limit state taxation of wireless services. They would limit taxation of "mobile services, mobile service providers, or mobile service property".

They define "mobile services" as "commercial mobile radio service ... or any other service that is primarily intended for receipt on, transmission from, or use with a mobile telephone or other mobile device, including but not limited to the receipt of a digital good".

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) is the sponsor of the House bill. Rep. Smith and Rep. Cohen are original cosponsors. Sen. Wyden is the sponsor of the Senate bill.

Third, there is HR 1439 [LOC | WW], the "Business Activity Tax Simplification Act of 2011", introduced on April 8, 2011. It would limit the ability of states to impose taxes based upon business activities, or BAT.

It provides, in part, that no state "shall have power to impose, assess, or collect a net income tax or other business activity tax on any person relating to such person's activities in interstate commerce unless such person has a physical presence in the State during the taxable period with respect to which the tax is imposed".

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) has been introducing BAT bills for many Congresses, without success. Former Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) also sponsored these bills.

Fourth, there have been bills that would limit abusive state taxation of the incomes of individuals who live out of state, but who use internet and computer technology to telework for a company in the tax imposing state.

For more on this issue, see stories titled "Supreme Court Denies Cert in Challenge to State Income Tax on Out of State Teleworkers" and "Connecticut Legislators Seek End to New York's Taxation of Out of State Workers" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,244, November 1, 2005.

For legislative proposals to address this issue, see for example:

• S 2785 (108th Congress), the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2004".
• S 1097 (109th Congress), the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2005".
• S 785 (110th Congress) [LOC | WW], the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2007", sponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT).
• HR 2558 (109th Congress), the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2005", sponsored by former Rep. Chris Shays (D-CT).
• HR 1360 (110th Congress) [LOC | WW], the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2007", sponsored by former Rep. Chris Shays (D-CT).
• HR 2600 (111th Congress) [LOC | WW], the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act of 2009", introduced by Rep. James Himes (D-CT) on May 21, 2009.

The House will be in recess the week of Monday, May 16 through Friday, May 20. The House will next meet at 2:00 PM on May 23.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM.

9:00 AM. There will be a panel discussion titled "Reducing Risk and Cost for IT Systems in the Federal, Public & Private Sectors". See, notice. For more information, contact David Rastatter at 703-707-2754, erastatter at hpti dot com. Location: Zenger Room, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

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.

10:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Cybersecurity Roundtable: Protecting Small Businesses". See, notice. The FCC will webcast this event. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th St., SW.

12:00 NOON - 3:00 PM. The Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) will host an event titled "Growing Trade, Growing Jobs: The Benefits and Challenges of Free Trade". The keynote speakers will be Stan McCoy (Assistant USTR for IP & Innovation) and Mike Moore (New Zealand Ambassador to the US). There will also be a panel titled "How Expanding Trade Benefits U.S. Job Creation" and another panel titled "Exploring Patents, Copyrights, Data Flow & IT Services". This event is free and open to the public. To register, contact Erin Humiston at erin at ipi dot org or 972-874-5139. Location: Holeman Lounge, National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW.

5:00 PM. Deadline to submit requests to participate in the two day meeting of the Copyright Office (CO) on June 2-3, 2011, regarding bringing sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972 under federal jurisdiction. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 89, Monday, May 9, 2011, at Pages 26769-26771. See also, notice in the Federal Register, November 3, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 212, at Pages 67777-67781, and story titled "Library of Congress Issues NOI on Extending Copyright Act to Pre 1972 Sound Recordings" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,150, November 8, 2011.

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.

8:00 -10:00 AM. Broadband Census News LLC will host a panel discussion titled "International Hacking and Cybersecurity: Is the Internet Secure Enough?" "AT&T - T-Mobile: Going Big or Going Home?". Breakfast will be served. This event is open to the public. The price to attend is $47.12. See, notice and registration page. This event is also sponsored by the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) and USTelecom. Location: Clyde's of Gallery Place, 707 7th St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Waves of Innovation: Spectrum Allocation in the Age of the Mobile Internet". The speakers will be Charles Jackson (George Washington University), Matthew Hussey (office of Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)), Thomas Hazlett (George Mason University), Steven Crowley, and Richard Bennett (ITIF). See, notice and registration page. Location: Room 2168, Rayburn Building, Capitol Hill.

TIME? The National Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NCO/NITRD) will host a workshop on cyber security research  titled "Distributed Data Schemes Provide Security". See, NITRD issue summary and notice in the Federal Register, March 28, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 59, at Page 17158-17159. Location: __, Gaithersburg, MD.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) [158 pages in PDF] regarding video description rules. This would reinstate and modify the video description rules adopted by the FCC in 2000, and subsequently vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals, pursuant to 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], at Title II, Section 202. The FCC adopted this item on March 2, 20111, and released the text on March 3, 2011. It is FCC 11-36 in MB Docket No. 11-43. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 18, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 53, at Pages 14856-14871.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding possible elimination of ten year old rules, pursuant to Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980. See, notice in the Federal Register, March 18, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 53, at Pages 14871-14882.

8:30 AM - 3:30 PM. The National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Technology Innovation Program (TIP) Advisory Board will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 1, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 63, at Pages 18166-18167, and notice in the Federal Register, April 22, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 78, at Pages 22673-22674. Location: NIST, Portrait Room, Building 101, Gaithersburg, MD.

1:00 - 4:00 PM. The Department of Transportation's (DOT) Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Advisory Committee (ITS/PAC) will host a web conference on ITS. The deadline to submit requests to participate is May 11. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 25, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 79, at Page 22940.

6:00 - 7:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Management of Federal Spectrum -- A Guide to NTIA Procedures, Intersecting NTIA/FCC Issues, and Navigating the Maze". CLE credits. The deadline to register is 5:00 PM on May 16. Prices vary. Location: Bingham McCutchen, 2020 K St., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee regarding matters to be discussed at its May 25, 2011, meeting. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 28, 2011 Vol. 76, No. 82, at Pages 23796-23797.

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

9:00 AM - 5:30 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences. See, notice in the Federal Register, April 29, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 83, at Page 24062. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Stafford II, Room 555, Arlington, VA.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda 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 PM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Reform Committee (SHSGRC) will hold a hearing titled "Ten Years After 9/11: Is Intelligence Reform Working?: Part II". See, notice. The SHSBRC will webcast this hearing. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

11:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee will meet by teleconference. See, notice in the Federal Register, May 4, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 86, at Pages 25361-25362.

12:00 NOON - 1:00 PM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Life in the Cloud: A View of Cloud Computing for Personal, Business and Government Use". The speakers will be Jeff Bergeron (HP), Karen Kerrigan (Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council), and Robert Atkinson (ITIF). See, notice. Register at hpinnovationrsvp at pstrategies dot com. Location: Room 2203, Rayburn Building, Capitol Hill.

12:30 - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a brown bag lunch. The speaker will be Timothy Reif (General Counsel of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative). Free. No CLE credits. Reporters are barred from this event. See, notice. Location: Wilmer Hale, 1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.

1:00 - 2:00 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Cyberbullying". Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice and registration page.

2:30 PM. The Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) Bureau of Economics (BOE) will host a seminar presented by Daniel O'Brien (FTC) titled "All-units Discounts and Double Moral Hazard". The FTC's notice does not elaborate. However, when a buyer meets its specified threshold, an all units discount requires that the seller give a per unit rebate to the buyer applied to all units. It is a form of loyalty discount. And, the FTC has alleged that certain loyalty discounts in the tech sector are anticompetitive. See for example, In the Matter of Intel Corporation, FTC Docket No. 9341. For more information, contact Loren Smith lsmith2 at ftc dot gov, Tammy John tjohn at ftc dot gov, or Daniel O'Brien at dobrien at ftc dot gov. Location: FTC, Room 4100, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

2:30 - 3:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Ethics of Social Networking". Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice and registration page.

Deadline to submit comments to the Copyright Office (CO) in response to its proposal to amend its rules to "provide reporting of uses of sound recordings performed by means of digital audio transmissions pursuant to statutory license for the period April 1, 2004, through December 1, 2009". See, notice in the Federal Register, April 19, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 75, at Pages 21833-21835.

9:00 AM - 1:00 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences. The agenda for May 20 includes consideration of "Cyberinfrastructure Framework for the 21st Century". See, notice in the Federal Register, April 29, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 83, at Page 24062. Location: NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Stafford II, Room 555, Arlington, VA.

12:30 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) International Telecommunications Committee will host a brown bag lunch titled "Regulatory Trends and State of Play in Established and Emerging Markets Around the World". The speaker will be Andrew Haire (former Deputy Director-General IDA, Singapore). For more information, contact jennifer at thejgroupplanning dot com. Location: Sidley Austin, 1501 K St., NW.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft NIST IR-7511 Rev. 2 [41 pages in PDF] titled "Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP) Version 1.0 Validation Program Test Requirements".

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft NIST IR-7696 [32 pages in PDF] titled "Common Platform Enumeration: Name Matching Specification Version 2.3".

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) [46 pages in PDF] regarding how its rules and policies could be modified to provide greater economic, market entry, communication adoption opportunities, and incentives for Native Nations. This notice is FCC 11-30 in CG Docket No. 11-41. The FCC adopted it on March 3, 2011, and released the text on March 4, 2011. See, notice in the Federal Register: April 5, 2011, Vol. 76, No. 65, at Pages 18759-18761.

11:30 AM - 3:00 PM. There will be an event titled "Public Purpose Mobile Applications Workshop". For more information, contact Justin Faulb at Faulb at lojlaw dot com or Scott Delacourt at Sdelacourt at wileyrein dot com. Location: __.

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved the nomination of Donald Verrilli to be the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Solicitor General. See, SJC release.

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved by voice vote the nomination of Henry Floyd to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals (4thCir).

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved the nomination of Kathleen Williams to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court (SDFl).

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved the nomination of Nelva Ramos to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court (SDTex).

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved the nomination of Richard Jackson to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court (DCO).

5/12. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) held an executive business meeting at which it approved the nomination of and Sara Darrow to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court (CDIll).

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.