2/4. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV) introduced S 31 [LOC | WW], the "Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2013", on January 22, 2013. This bill would make permanent the current partial ban on state internet access taxes and multiple and discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce.

The current moratorium, which is codified at 47 U.S.C. § 151 note, is scheduled to expire on November 1, 2014.

The Congress enacted the original Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) in late 1998. The original ban was for three years. The Congress enacted three temporary extensions, in 2001, 2004 and 2007. The Congress has also added to the definitions, and exemptions.

The current ban provides 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.

The statute currently provides that "No State or political subdivision thereof may impose any of the following taxes during the period beginning November 1, 2003, and ending November 1, 2014: (1) Taxes on Internet access. (2) Multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce." The statute then sets forth at length the grandfathered taxes, and exemptions.

S 31 has two substantive clauses. First, it states that "Section 1101(a) of the Internet Tax Freedom Act (47 U.S.C. 151 note) is amended by striking `taxes during the period beginning November 1, 2003, and ending November 1, 2014:´ and inserting `taxes:´." (Parentheses in original.) That is, it makes the current ban permanent.

Second, it states that "The amendment made by this section shall apply to taxes imposed after the date of the enactment of this Act."

Sen. Ayotte (at right) stated in a release that "E-commerce is thriving largely because the Internet is free from burdensome tax restrictions. Unfortunately, tax collectors see it as a new revenue source, and they must be stopped ... This legislation will provide certainty to the marketplace, helping the Internet continue to be a driving force for jobs and growth."

Sen. Heller stated in this release that "Nevadans and every American should be able to access the Internet without penalties from the federal government. The Internet Tax Freedom Act will ensure a long-standing federal policy that prevents the government from raising taxes, and preserves the Internet as a tool for education and innovation. I am pleased to work with Senator Ayotte on this issue and encourage Congress to work together to extend this act permanently".

This bill was referred to the Senate Finance Committee (SFC). Neither Sen. Ayotte nor Sen. Heller are members.

Also, on January 29, 2013, Rep. Steve Chabot (R-IN) introduced HR 434 [LOC | WW]. A member of his staff told TLJ that it is identical to S 31. It was referred to the House Judiciary Committee (HJC). Rep. Chabot is a senior member.

When the HJC considered the bill that last extended the ITFA, Republicans and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) sought a permanent ban. However, Democrats were the majority party in the House in 2007, and the HJC instead approved a four year extension, which the full House then passed. The Senate then passed a bill with a seven year extension, and the House agreed to the Senate amendment.

That bill was HR 3678 [LOC | WW], the "Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act of 2007", in the 110th Congress. 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, "Senate Approves 7 Year Extension of Internet Tax Ban" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,663, October 26, 2007, and "House Passes Senate Version of Internet Tax Ban Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,666, October 31, 2007.

See also, related story in this issue titled "Other ICT Tax Issues for the 113th Congress".

2/4. The just introduced S 31 and HR 434 address only a small subset of the larger set of burdensome state and local taxes directed at information and communications technology (ICT). These bill only address internet access taxes and multiple and discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce.

There will likely be other bills introduced in the 113th Congress to address other state ICT tax problems.

For example, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and/or others may reintroduce in the 113th Congress the "Wireless Tax Fairness Act of 2011". See, HR 1002 [LOC | WW] and S 543 [LOC | WW] from the 112th Congress. These bills would limit state taxation of wireless services, including "mobile services, mobile service providers, or mobile service property".

Second, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and/or others may reintroduce in the 113th Congress the "Business Activity Tax Simplification Act". See, HR 1439 [LOC | WW] from the 112th Congress. Rep. Goodlatte, who is now Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (HJC), has been sponsoring related bills for many Congresses.

Third, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Sen. Wyden and/or others may reintroduce in the 113th Congress the "Digital Goods and Services Tax Fairness Act". See, HR 1860 [LOC | WW] and S 971 [LOC | WW] from the 112th Congress. These bills 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."

Fourth, Representatives or Senators may reintroduce in the 113th Congress the "Telecommuter Tax Fairness Act". See, HR 2600 [LOC | WW] from the 111th Congress. These bills 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.

Also, none of these bills would do anything to limit abusive or burdensome taxes on ICT imposed by the federal government.

For example, there is the federal excise tax on telephone service, codified at 26 U.S.C. § 4251, et seq. See, HR 428 [LOC | WW] from the 112th Congress, introduced by former Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV). Now Sen. Dean Heller (R-NV reintroduced this bill on February 4, 2013 in the 113th Congress as S 213 [LOC | WW].

There are also federal ICT taxes imposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) through its universal service tax and subsidy programs.

2/1. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a report [36 pages in PDF] titled "Mobile Privacy Disclosures: Building Trust Through Transparency".

It enumerates numerous "suggestions" and "recommendations" for the businesses and organizations involved in mobile communications regarding their privacy related practices and disclosures.

Recommendations Contained in the Report. It states that the mobile platforms (that is, the mobile operating systems providers, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Blackberry) "should ... Provide just-in-time disclosures to consumers and obtain their affirmative express consent before allowing apps to access sensitive content like geolocation". Platforms should also "Promote app developer best practices."

It also states that platforms should consider "providing just-in-time disclosures and obtaining affirmative express consent for other content that consumers would find sensitive in many contexts, such as contacts, photos, calendar entries, or the recording of audio or video content".

They should also consider "developing a one-stop ``dashboard´´ approach to allow consumers to review the types of content accessed by the apps they have downloaded", "developing icons to depict the transmission of user data", "providing consumers with clear disclosures about the extent to which platforms review apps prior to making them available for download in the app stores and conduct compliance checks after the apps have been placed in the app stores", and "offering a Do Not Track (DNT) mechanism for smartphone users".

It states that app developers should "Have a privacy policy and make sure it is easily accessible through the app stores", "Provide just-in-time disclosures and obtain affirmative express consent before collecting and sharing sensitive information (to the extent the platforms have not already provided such disclosures and obtained such consent);" and "Improve coordination and communication with ad networks and other third parties, such as analytics companies, that provide services for apps so the app developers can provide accurate disclosures to consumers". (Parentheses in original.)

It also states that app developers "should ... Consider participating in self-regulatory programs, trade associations, and industry organizations, which can provide guidance on how to make uniform, short-form privacy disclosures."

The report recommends that advertising networks and other third parties "should ... Communicate with app developers so that the developers can provide truthful disclosures to consumers" and "Work with platforms to ensure effective implementation of DNT for mobile".

The report also recommends that app developer trade association "can ... Develop short form disclosures for app developers", "Promote standardized app developer privacy policies that will enable consumers to compare data practices across apps", and "Educate app developers on privacy issues".

The Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) praised most of the FTC report. However, it added in a statement that it has two areas of concern. First, "The recommendation that platforms provide reports about the scanning they do for privacy in a curated store could actually backfire. Stores may opt to do less or no privacy scanning of apps if they perceive a liability risk created by this report. This would not be a good outcome for app makers or consumers."

Second, the ACT wrote that "the report relies on a technology snapshot and may not represent the where the industry appears to be headed: offering better consumer controls and data isolation."

Legal Consequences of this Report. This report does not state what are the legal consequences of this report. The five member Commission voted 4-0-1 to approve this "report". Commissioner Joshua Wright did not participate. However, this is neither a promulgation of rules, nor a notice of proposed rulemaking.

The FTC does not have a general statutory grant of authority to regulate business practices that impact the privacy interests of their customers. Although, it does have limited authority under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) to regulate businesses' online activities to protect children's privacy. See, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501-6506. The COPPA bans operators of web sites and online services that are directed to children from collecting information from children under thirteen without parental consent. Although, FTC rules give it a broader meaning.

Also, the FTC has broad general authority with respect to "unfair or deceptive acts or practices" in interstate commerce. See, Section 5 of the FTC Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. § 45. The FTC has promulgated rules under the COPPA. See, story titled "FTC Releases Expanded COPPA Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,494, December 19, 2012. But, it has not written privacy related rules under Section 5. Rather, it institutes privacy related enforcement actions under Section 5 (which actions place others on notice as to what acts the FTC considers to be violations of Section 5), and it issues reports.

The just released report states that the FTC "is ensuring that it has the necessary technical expertise, understanding of the marketplace, and tools to monitor, investigate, and prosecute deceptive and unfair practices in the mobile arena". However, the report fails to disclose what affect violating the "suggestions" and "recommendations" in this report may or may not have on future FTC decisions to bring enforcement actions.

To date, most of the FTC's enforcement actions under Section 5 of the FTC related to online privacy have alleged that a web site operator's violation of its own published policy constitutes "deceptive" practices. The just released report does not disclose whether or not the FTC will bring enforcement actions, absent violation of a published policy, on the basis, for example, that violation of "suggestions" or "recommendations" contained in this report constitute "unfair" practices within the meaning of Section 5 of the FTC Act.

Outgoing FTC Chairman Jonathan Leibowitz gave a speech with the release of this report. He spoke in vague terms. He said that "Law enforcement remains central to our consumer protection mission". Also, the FTC has a "policy function", and "So on the policy side, we are releasing a report ..."

He added that "Some companies are doing a good job following these principles and protecting consumer privacy, but if other companies don't wake up and do better, industry is more likely to face more proscriptive laws down the road."

Rep. Barton and Rep. Markey. Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), senior members of the House Commerce Committee (HCC), often work together on privacy related issues.

They stated in a joint release that "The FTC is correct to point out that more must be done to protect the privacy of mobile device users. We believe consumers should have notice and give consent before their personal information is collected or shared. Protecting consumer privacy in the mobile environment is crucial, particularly when it comes to children and teens. We plan to reintroduce the Do Not Track Kids Act this Congress to ensure that our children are fully protected when they go online."

The two introduced HR 1895 [LOC | WW], the "Do Not Track Kids Act", on May 13, 2011, early in the 112th Congress. See, story titled "Rep. Markey and Rep. Barton Release Draft of Do Not Track Kids Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,236, May 9, 2011. No committee or subcommittee marked up this bill.

They have not yet reintroduced this bill in the 113th Congress.

1/31. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a civil complaint [17 pages in PDF] in the U.S. District Court (NDCal) against Path alleging violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act and the COPPA in connection with its collection of personal information in violation of its privacy policy and collection of information from children.

The FTC also announced that the FTC and Path have agreed to settle this case.

The complaint states that "Path develops, markets, distributes, or sells software applications for mobile devices to consumers" and "has operated a social networking online service" that enables users to share a personal journal with others. Path required users to submit certain personal information. It also collected and stored personal information from the user's mobile device address book, without notice.

The complaint further alleges that Path maintained a privacy policy, but violated the terms of that policy with its data collection practices.

The complaint states that Path informed users through its privacy policy that it automatically collected certain enumerated information. But, Path's privacy policy did not use the word "only". And, Path did not disclose in its privacy policy that it also collected data from address books on mobile devices.

That is, this complaint pleads "deceptive" conduct by omission.

Under the proposed consent decree [25 pages in PDF] Path admits no wrongdoing. The decree enjoins Path from further violation of the FTC Act and COPPA, orders destruction of information collected in violation of the FTC Act and COPPA, and imposes a civil penalty of $800,000.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) stated in a release that "Once again the FTC has determined that another company has not only violated its own privacy policies, but also took advantage of children. How many more times does this need to happen before my colleagues in Congress are convinced to act?"

Rep. Barton added that "I am appreciative of the steps that have been taken by the industry, but it is simply not enough. Thankfully, the FTC Act gives the agency the authority to hold companies to their own privacy policies. If we didn't have this law, there would be absolutely no accountability. Every company should have a privacy policy and adhere to it."

See also, statement of FTC Chairman Jonathan Leibowitz, and FTC release.

This cast is FTC v. Path, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, D.C. No. C-13-0448.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for morning hour, and at 12:00 NOON for legislative business. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

The Senate will not meet.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Triangle Software v. Garmin, App. Ct. No. 2012-1275, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (EDVa) in a patent infringement case involving vehicle navigation technology. Location: Courtroom 402.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Clear With Computers v. Hyundai, App. Ct. No. 2012-1291. Location: Courtroom 203.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in K-Tech v. Time Warner and K-Tech v. Directv, App. Ct. Nos. 2012-1425 and 2012-1446. Location: Courtroom 203.

TIME CHANGE. 10:00 AM. 10:15 AM. The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) will hold a hearing titled "America's Immigration System: Opportunities for Legal Immigration and Enforcement of Laws against Illegal Immigration". The witnesses will be Vivek Wadhwa (Duke University), Michael Teitelbaum (Harvard Law School), Puneet Arora (Immigration Voice), Julian Castro (Mayor of San Antonio, Texas), Julie Wood (Guidepost Solutions), Chris Crane (American Federation of Government Employees), Jessica Vaughan (Center for Immigration Studies), and Muzaffar Chishti (New York University Law School). See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.

10:30 AM. The House Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications and Technology and the House Foreign Affairs Committee's (HFAC) Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade and Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations will hold a joint hearing titled "Fighting for Internet Freedom: Dubai and Beyond". The witnesses will be Robert McDowell (FCC Commissioner), David Gross (Wiley Rein), Sally Wentworth (Internet Society), and Harold Feld (Public Knowledge). See, HCC notice and notice and HFAC notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

10:30 AM. The Copyright Office (CO) will host a presentation by Peter Jaszi (American University law school) titled "Best Practices in Fair Use". See, notice. Location: Coolidge Auditorium, Jefferson Building, 101 Independence Ave., SE.

12:00 NOON. The Heritage Foundation (HF) will host a discussion of the book [Amazon] titled "A Nation Forsaken - EMP: The Escalating Threat of an American Catastrophe". The speaker will be Michael Maloof, the author. Webcast by HF. Free. Open to the public. See, notice. Location: HF, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast and teleconferenced panel discussion titled "Single Claim Restriction Requirements: The Interplay Between 35 USC Section 112 and 35 USC Section 121". The speakers will be Thomas Irving (Finnegan Henderson), Orlando Lopez (Burns & Levinson), Daniel Sullivan (USPTO), Robert Titus (Eli Lilly), and Keisha Rodic (Drinker Biddle & Reath). Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice.

12:30 PM. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (HOGRC) will hold a business meeting. See, notice. Location: Room 2154, Rayburn Building.

12:45 - 2:00 PM. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will host a lunch. The speaker will be Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), the House Majority Leader. Free. Open to the public. Webcast by AEI. See, notice and registration page. Location: AEI, 12th floor, 1150 17th St., NW.

4:00 PM. The House Commerce Committee (HCC) will hold the first part of a two part business meeting to adopt the HCC's oversight plan [7 pages in PDF] for the 113th Congress. See, notice and HCC memorandum. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Cantor's schedule.

9:30 AM. The House Commerce Committee (HCC) will hold the second part of a two part business meeting to adopt the HCC's oversight plan [7 pages in PDF] for the 113th Congress. See, notice and HCC memorandum. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

9:30 AM. The House Science Committee (HSC) will hold a hearing titled "American Competitiveness: The Role of Research and Development". The witnesses will be Richard Templeton (P/CEO of Texas Instruments), Shirley Ann Jackson (President of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute), and Charles Vest (President of the National Academy of Engineering). The HSC will webcast this hearing. See, notice. Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Boston Scientific v. Cordis, App. Ct. No. 2012-1316. Location: Courtroom 402.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in SpendingMoney v. American Express, App. Ct. No. 2012-1481, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DConn) in a patent infringement case. Location: Courtroom 402.

11:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT). See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 2, January 3, 2013, at Page 292. Location: NIST, Portrait Room, Administration Building, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

12:30 - 1:45 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "O'Brien v. Leegin: Perspectives on State-Law Resale Price Maintenance Actions". The speakers will be Schonette Walker (Maryland Office of the Attorney General), James Armstrong (Foulston Siefkin), John Asker (NYU business school), Benjamin Labow (California Department of Justice), and Will Wohlford (Morris Laing). Free. No CLE credits. See, notice. See also, story titled "SCUS Holds That All Vertical Price Restraints Are Subject to Rule of Reason" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,603, June 28, 2007.

6:30 PM. The Washington Press Club Foundation will host an event titled "69th Annual Congressional Dinner". The reception begins at 6:30 PM. The dinner and program begin at 8:00 PM. Location: Grand Ballroom, Mandarin Oriental, 1330 Maryland Ave., SW.

Rep. Cantor's schedule states that no votes are expected in the House.

8:30 - 11:15 AM. Day two of a two day meeting of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT). See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 2, January 3, 2013, at Page 292. Location: NIST, Portrait Room, Administration Building, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD.

8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The American Council for Technology Industry Advisory Council (ACT-IAC) will host an event titled "Executive Management Series on Mobility". Prices vary. See, notice. Location: American Institute of Architects, 1735 New York Ave., NW.

8:45 AM - 5:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Federal-State Joint Conference on Advanced Services will host an event titled "Broadband Summit". See, notice. Webcast. Free. Open to the public. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.

9:00 AM - 4:15 PM. The U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCESRC) will hold an event titled "China’s New Leadership and Implications for the United States". Free. Open to the public. See, USCESRC notice and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 23, February 4, 2013, at Pages 7859-7860. Location: Room 2118, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda again includes consideration of three appeals court nominees: Richard Taranto (USCA/FedCir), Robert Bacharach (USCA/10thCir), and William Kayatta (USCA/1stCir). See, notice. See also, story titled "Richard Taranto and the Federal Circuit" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,497. Webcast. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in FlashPoint Technology v. USITC, App. Ct. No. 2012-1149, and appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) in a Section 337 proceeding regarding HTC and electronic imaging devices. Location: Courtroom 402.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will consider on the briefs Martin Feiffin v. Microsoft, App. Ct. No. 2012-1357. Location: Courtroom 201.

2:30 PM. The Senate Intelligence Committee (SIC) will hold a hearing on the nomination of John Brennan to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). See, notice. Location: Room 216, Hart Building.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Seminar on Enforcement Bureau Nuts and Bolts". The deadline for reservations and cancellations is 12:00 NOON on February 6. Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice. Location: Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1501 K St., NW.

Rep. Cantor's schedule states that no votes are expected in the House.

9:00 AM - 2:00 PM. The Heritage Foundation (HF) and Taiwan Benevolent Association of America (TBAA) will host an event titled "Shoring Up the US Taiwan Partnership". The speakers will be Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Walter Lohman (HF), Taidi Fang (TBAA President), Joanna Lei (former member of the Legislative Yuan), Rupert Chambers (U.S.-Taiwan Business Council President), Claude Barfield (American Enterprise Institute), Matthew Goodman (Center for Strategic and International Studies), Derek Scissors (HF), Randy Schriver (Project 2049), Dean Cheng (HF), Stephen Yates (DC International Advisory), and Vincent Wang (University of Richmond). Webcast by HF. Free. Open to the public. Lunch will be served. See, notice. Location: HF, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument en banc in Robert Bosch v. Pylon Manufacturing, App. Ct. No. 2011-1363, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DDel) in patent infringement case involving windshield wipers. The August 7, 2012 order of the Federal Circuit which sua sponte ordered rehearing en banc states that the issue are (1) "Does 28 U.S.C. § 1292(c)(2) confer jurisdiction on this Court to entertain appeals from patent infringement liability determinations when a trial on damages has not yet occurred?", and (2) "Does 28 U.S.C. § 1292(c)(2) confer jurisdiction on this Court to entertain appeals from patent infringement liability determinations when willfulness issues are outstanding and remain undecided." See also, October 13, 2011 opinion of the three judge panel of the Federal Circuit, amicus curiae brief of the IPO, and amicus curiae brief of the AIPLA. Location: Courtroom 201.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument en banc in CLS Bank v. Alice Corporation, App. Ct. No. 2011-1301, an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DC) in a software patent infringement case. At issue is patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Federal Circuit's October 9, 2012 order granting rehearing en banc states that the two issues are (1) "What test should the court adopt to determine whether a computer-implemented invention is a patent ineligible "abstract idea"; and when, if ever, does the presence of a computer in a claim lend patent eligibility to an otherwise patent-ineligible idea?", and (2) "In assessing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 of a computer-implemented invention, should it matter whether the invention is claimed as a method, system, or storage medium; and should such claims at times be considered equivalent for § 101 purposes?". See also, July 9, 2012 opinion of the three judge panel, amicus curiae brief of the CCIA, amicus curiae brief of the BSA, and amicus curiae brief of Twitter, LinkedIn, Travelocity, and others. Location: Courtroom 201.

Deadline for all parties, except foreign governments to submit comments, and requests to testify at the February 20, 2013 hearing, of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (OUSTR) to assist it in making its Special 301 identifications of countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. See, story titled "OUSTR Seeks Special 301 Comments on Countries that Deny Adequate IPR Protection" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,500, December 31, 2012. See also, notice in the Federal Register, December 31, 2012, Vol. 77, No. 250, at Pages 77178-77180.

2:30 - 3:30 PM. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) will host an event titled "The Future of the WTO". The speakers will be Anabel González (Costa Rica Minister of Foreign Trade), John Murphy (U.S. Chamber of Commerce), Linda Dempsey (National Association of Manufacturers), and Scott Miller (CSIS). Free. Open to the public. See, notice. Location: CSIS, Room B1, 1800 K. St., NW.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a program titled "Export Controls and Economic Sanctions 2013: Recent Developments and Current Issues". The speakers will be Carol Kalinoski and Thomas Scott (Ladner & Associates). The price to attend ranges from $89 to $129. CLE credits. See, notice. For more information, call 202-626-3488. The DC Bar has a history of barring reporters from its events. Location: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K St., NW.

9:00 - 10:30 AM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Where Do America’s Broadband Networks Really Stand?". The speakers will be Mindel de la Torre (Chief of the FCC's International Bureau), John Horrigan (Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies), Scott Wallsten (Technology Policy Institute) and Richard Bennett (ITIF). See, notice. Location: ITIF/ITIC, Suite 610A, 1101 K St., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a second hearing on guns. This hearing, of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights, is titled "Proposals to Reduce Gun Violence: Protecting Our Communities While Respecting the Second Amendment". Webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) International Telecommunications Committee will host an event titled "International Dimensions of Cybersecurity". CLE credits. Prices vary. See, notice. Reservations and cancellations are due by 12:00 NOON on February 11. Location: Wiley Rein, 1776 K St., NW.

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 1998-2013 David Carney. All rights reserved.