5/9. The House passed HR 4438 [LOC | WW], the "American Research and Competitiveness Act of 2014", by a vote of 274-131, on Friday morning, May 9, 2014. This bill would revise and permanently extend the research and development tax credit.

Republicans voted 212-1. Democrats voted 62-130. Democrats endangered in the upcoming election mostly voted yes. See, Roll Call No. 211.

It is highly unlikely that this bill will become law in the 113th Congress. President Obama has threatened to veto it. See, story titled "Obama Administration Opposes R&D Tax Credit Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,655, May 7, 2014.

The Republican leadership is placing the House Republicans in the position in the November elections of being the party that supports research and development and the benefits that it brings. But, this effect may largely be nullified by the fact that most of the Democrats facing serious challenges voted for the bill, while those incumbents who hold safe seats tended to be the ones who voted against the bill.

See also, story titled "House Ways and Means Committee Approves Bill to Make R&D Tax Credit Permanent" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,652, May 2, 2014.

Bill Summary. The current research and development tax credit, which is codified at 26 U.S.C. § 41, expired on December 31, 2013.

The Congress has for several decades provided for only short extensions. HR 4438 would permanently extend it, retroactive to the date of expiration.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) summary of this bill states that it allows a research credit for "(1) 20% of the qualified or basic research expenses that exceed 50% of the average qualified or basic research expenses for the 3 preceding taxable years, and (2) 20% of amounts paid to an energy research consortium for energy research."

It also "Reduces such credit rate to 10% if a taxpayer has no qualified research expenses in any one of the 3 preceding taxable years."

Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), the sponsor of the bill, said during floor debate that it "simplifies this provision so that small-and medium-size businesses can also take advantage of this credit."

Floor Debate. There was little discussion of the actual content of the bill during floor debate. While the content is dry and complex, this lack of discussion may be further indication that no one actually expects this bill to become law.

During floor debate, no one spoke against the concept of an R&D tax credit, or the language in the bill. Opponents of the bill criticized it solely for not also including other items.

Some Democrats criticized the bill for not also including offsetting provisions. They argued that it would increase the federal budget deficit.

Some Democrats criticized the bill for not also including other tax credits, increased subsidies for universities, increased spending on education, or other spending programs that would increase the deficit.

Several Democrats praised the contents of the bill, then voted against it. For example, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) stated in the House that "Congress needs to do so much more to improve our national economy, and updating the R tax credit is an important policy that will encourage businesses to invest in new technologies which in turn will create jobs and shape a better economy in our future." She also said "I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4438." But, she voted no.

Rep. Brady (at right) stated that "America used to lead the world in research incentives, but today we have fallen to 27th. China, Russia, and other global competitors are quickly surpassing us in their share of the economy devoted to research."

Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), Chairman of the HWMC, said that "the President of the United States voted to extend the research and development tax credit unpaid for when he was a Senator. He signed legislation twice to extend the research and development tax credit unpaid for." Also, after some Democrats stated that they opposed the bill because it is not paid for, he pointed out their prior votes to extend the credit unpaid for.

Rep. Camp stated during floor debate that "our current Tax Code is broken. It is hurting families and hurting our ability to create good-paying jobs in this country. Last week we learned that the economy grew 0.1 percent in the first quarter of 2014."

He continued that "Beyond having the dubious distinction of the highest corporate rate in the world, the United States is the only country that also allows important pieces of its Tax Code, like the research and development tax credit, to expire on a regular basis. Businesses can't grow and invest when the Tax Code is riddled with instability and uncertainty. The research and development credit, the permanent extension we have before us today, has been part of the U.S. Tax Code since 1981. Renewed year after year, the credit has long been bipartisan and an effective way to incentivize U.S. companies to innovate, create new products, and invest in the United States."

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) stated that this bill will bring "new investments to the energy industry, medical research, STEM advancements, and information technology, among others."

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), a former Chairman of the HWMC, stated that "The Senate has spoken on this issue. This is not going to become law."

5/9. The Congress first enacted the research and development tax credit in 1981. It has remained a temporary measure, albeit one that is constantly extended. Everyone involved expects it to be extended. This bill would make it permanent, and revise it to make it available to more companies.

There are powerful policy arguments for both making it permanent and revising it. Also, members' public statements taken literally suggest that there is overwhelming support for these proposals.

Yet, this bill is highly unlikely to be enacted in the 113th Congress, for several reasons. First, candidates, and especially incumbents, benefit from this being a constant issue, and hence, a cause for substantial campaign contributions.

Second, expirations and short extensions facilitate budgetary deception. A tax credit decreases the tax liability of companies that qualify for the credit. A credit therefore decreases projected tax revenues, and increases projected deficits. Only the other hand, when a credit expired, it no longer decreases projected future tax revenues -- unless the credit is extended. The Congress and President have for over three decades been providing for only short extensions, and allowing the credit to expire, only to revive it retroactively. When revenue and deficit projections are made without considering the reality that the credit will in fact be extended, this overestimates tax revenues, and underestimates the deficit. This is phony bookkeeping is intended to deceive the public. Presidents and Congresses, both Democratic and Republican, have been employing this tactic to make deliberately false revenue and deficit projections for decades. If HR 4438 were enacted into law, it would limit Democrats' and Republicans' ability to cook the books in this manner. Many in both parties do not want to give this up.

Third, while this bill has Democratic cosponsors, it is primarily a House Republican bill. President Obama seeks to govern, particularly on tax and budgetary matters, as if there were no House Republicans, and as if the Constitution did not state that "All Bills for the raising Revenue shall originate in the House ..." See, Article I, Section 7, Paragraph 1.) Regardless of the merits of this bill, President Obama will oppose it.

Nor will Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the Senate Majority Leader, bring this bill to the Senate floor.

Because of the opposition from President Obama and key Senate Democrats, this bill is not likely to move any further. House Republicans understand this. This bill's bleak prospects gave House Republicans the opportunity to try to use this bill to influence upcoming House elections. It also gave them the opportunity to vote for this bill without jeopardizing the usefulness of a permanently temporary credit in maximizing campaign contributions, and for budgetary smoke and mirrors.

One of the things that Representatives and Senators constantly do is take positions, regardless of legislative outcomes, to further their re-election goals. The Republican leadership is taking a position, and enabling House Republicans to take a very public position, in support of the research and development tax credit, and the economic benefits that it brings.

The House Republican leadership is also causing the Obama administration and many Democratic Representatives to take a position against the R&D tax credit.

However, the House Republican leadership strategy will likely have only limited effect. The impact on House elections in November may be significantly nullified by the fact that most of the Democrats facing serious challenges voted for the bill, while those incumbents who hold safe seats tended to be the ones who voted against the bill.

Moreover, President Obama is not on the ballot in November. Neither is Sen. Reid.

Republicans voted 212-1. See, Roll Call No. 211. Rep. John Campbell (R-GA) was the only Republican who voted no.

Democrats voted 62-130. That is, 32.3% of Democrats voted yes.

Democrats who represent districts that are home to tech companies and their employees were somewhat more likely to vote yes than Democrats generally. But, this does not account for many of the yes votes.

The larger determinant of the vote of Democrats was whether or not they may expect to face significant election challenges in November of 2014. Endangered Democrats were much more likely to vote yes. This is observable from an examination of the percentage of the vote won in the 2012 general election. Those with smaller winning margins were much more likely to vote yes.

Examine, for example, the state of Washington, home to Microsoft, Amazon and other tech companies. Its four Republicans, who represent the districts that cover areas south and east of Seattle, all voted yes. Rep. Dave Reichart's (R-WA) district stretches from the Seattle suburbs east into the center of the state. The rest of the Seattle area is represented by Democrats, who split 3-3. Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA), and Rep. Joe Heck (D-WA) voted yes, while Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA), Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), and Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA) voted no.

Next, compare the 2012 percentages of the vote won by those who voted for the bill -- Rep. DelBene (53.6%), Rep. Kilmer (59.0%), and Rep. Heck (58.2%) -- to the percentages won by those who voted no -- Rep.Larsen (60.9%), Rep. Smith (71.4%), and Rep. McDermott (79.5%).

The Silicon Valley area is represented only by Democrats. They split on this vote. Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) voted yes, while Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), and Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) voted no.

Next, compare the winning percentages of the Silicon Valley and nearby members who voted no -- Rep. Eshoo (70.2), Rep. Lofgren (72.9), Rep. Speier (74.2), Rep. Doris Matsui (74.6), Rep. Sam Farr (72.8), and Rep. Barbara Lee (69.1) -- to the winning percentages of those who voted yes -- Rep. Swalwell (52.2), Rep. Jerry McNerney (54.7), Rep. Ami Bera (50.8), and Rep. Honda (73.3). All of the safe seat Democrats voted no, except Honda. All of the vulnerable Democrats voted yes.

There are two Democrats who represent districts in tech heavy northern Virginia, Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) and Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA). Both voted yes.

Consider also the following Democrats, and their 2012 election percentages, all of whom voted for the bill: Rep. Daniel Maffei (D-NY) (48.4), Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) (48.4), Rep. Carol Porter (D-NH) (49.7), Rep. Ron Barber (D-AZ) (50.1), Rep. Ann Kuster (D-NH) (50.2), Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-FL) (50.3), Rep. Pete Gallego (D-TX) (50.3), Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) (50.5), Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-CT) (51.5), Rep. William Enyart (D-IL) (51.6), Rep. Sean Maloney (D-NY) (51.7), Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-CA) (51.9), Rep. Julia Brownley (D-CA) (52.0), Rep. Earl Perlmutter (D-CO) (53.3), Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-IL) (53.3), Rep. Joe Garcia (D-FL) (53.6), Rep. John Barrow (D-GA) (53.7), Rep. Rahall (D-WV) (54.0), Rep. Rick Nolan (D-MN) (54.5), Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) (54.8), and Rep. Dave Loebsack (D-IA) (55.4).

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) (48.7) is the one notable vulnerable Democrat, who is running for re-election, who voted against the bill.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) won in 2012 with only 53.2%, and he voted against the bill. But, he is not running for re-election. (Also, Rep. John Campbell (R-CA) (59.1), the only Republican to vote against the bill is not running for re-election.)

On the other hand, Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) (49.3), Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-NC) (50.1), and Rep. Bill Owens (D-NY) (50.3) voted for the bill, and are not running for re-election.

In short, the list of Democrats who voted for this bill is a who's who of narrowly elected and vulnerable Democrats. All of these endangered Democrats will be able to campaign, and seek endorsements and contributions, on their having voted to permanently extend the R&D tax credit. This will do much to undermine the Republican strategy of using this bill to influence the 2014 elections.

5/8. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) held a business meeting on May 8, 2014 (held over from April 23) at which it adopted an advisory opinion (AO) regarding application of the federal election campaign finance regulatory regime to Bitcoins. This AO ducks important questions, and leaves much uncertainty.

The AO states that the committee that requested this AO may accept Bitcoins, and may purchase Bitcoins, but must sell these and deposit the proceeds into its campaign depository before spending these funds. But, there was no majority of this six member body on the issue of whether or not the requestor may acquire goods and services with Bitcoins it receives as contributions. Also, the requestor stated in advance that it would only accept Bitcoin contributions of up to $100. The FEC has not opined on Bitcoin contributions of over $100.

Hence, this AO is narrow, and leaves much uncertainty regarding the future use of Bitcoins in federal election campaigning.

The vote to approve this AO was 6-0. The FEC is governed by six members who are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Three must be Republicans and three Democrats. On this issue, as with some other issues, FEC Democrats emphasized regulation of elections, while FEC Republicans emphasized free speech.

This document is FEC AO 2014-02. See also, story titled "FEC to Consider Bitcoin Advisory Opinions" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,642, April 18, 2014.

Make Your Laws PAC, Inc. , also known as MYL, filed its request [11 pages in PDF] for an advisory opinion (AO) on February 11, 2014.  MYL is, within the meaning of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) and regulations thereunder, a non-connected political committee.

This AO concludes that "the requestor may accept bitcoin contributions as proposed in its advisory opinion request and supplemental filings subject to valuation and reporting procedures similar to those that the Commission has previously recognized in analogous circumstances."

Also, "the requestor may purchase bitcoins with funds from its campaign depository for investment purposes but may not make disbursements using those purchased bitcoins because Commission regulations require the committee’s funds to be returned to a campaign depository before they are used to make disbursements."

Finally, the AO states that "The Commission could not approve a response by the required four affirmative votes as to whether MYL may acquire goods and services with bitcoins it receives as contributions."

In its request, MYL only requested a AO that it could accept contributions of up to $100. The FEC AO opines that it may.

The FEC has not in this AO, or in any other AO, opined on Bitcoin contributions in excess of $100.

Lee Goodman, a Republican, wrote that the FEC "lacks any statutory authority to impose a $100 limit on bitcoin contributions as a general rule". He explained that Bitcoins are not cash or currency, and hence, are not governed by the FECA's $100 limit on cash contributions. Rather, Bitcoins are in kind contributions, subject to the FECA's much higher limits on such contributions.

Goodman added that the "Political committees that have proceeded to accept bitcoins in the absence of Commission guidance have done so properly and may continue to do so. The Supreme Court has made clear that "prospective speakers are not compelled by law to seek an advisory opinion from the FEC before the speech takes place." Innovation and technology should not and will not stand idly by while the Commission dithers." (Quoting from the Supreme Court's opinion in Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).)

In contrast, Democrats Ann Ravel, Steven Walther and Ellen Weintraub wrote in their statement that "The bitcoin system raises serious concerns with regard to a political committee's obligation to identify its contributors and determine the legality of contributions it receives, as required by the Act."

Also, they wrote that Bitcoin "contributions are most like cash contributions, on which the Act imposes strict limits" of $100 per contributor per election.

They added that "the $100 limitation on MYL's acceptance of bitcoins was a material aspect of the proposed transaction upon which we relied".

Disclosure. Many years ago the FEC served a subpoena for the production of records on David Carney, author of this article. Interview notes and calendars were responsive to the subpoena, but nothing was produced, and communications were hostile. Readers may wish to consider this in assessing the objectivity of any TLJ articles about the FEC.

5/3. Gary Becker died. He was a long time professor of economics at the University of Chicago. He won a Nobel Prize in economics in 1992. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has rejected his advice about broadband regulation.

In 2002, Becker and others filed a comment with the FCC in which they argued that the FCC "should not regulate broadband Internet access at this time. In the current market, there is no justification for substituting government regulatory criteria for the competitive process of the marketplace in arriving at optimal technologies, access arrangements, and business models. The results of such regulation can only suppress investment into new technologies and services that would otherwise increase consumer choice and enhance the development of advanced communications networks." See also, story titled "Nobel Economists Comment on Broadband Regulation" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 426, May 7, 2002.

In 2010 Becker coauthored a paper titled "Network Neutrality and Consumer Welfare" which was published in the Journal of Competition Law and Economics.

They wrote that "there is significant and growing competition among broadband access providers and that few significant competitive problems have been observed to date. ... We conclude that antitrust enforcement and/or more limited regulatory mechanisms provide a better framework for addressing competitive concerns raised by proponents of net neutrality."

The FCC has not followed his advice. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) has twice overturned FCC efforts to regulate broadband internet access. It has done so because the FCC has lacked statutory authority, not because the FCC has not followed Chicago school economic analysis.

Also, the FCC is scheduled to adopt new rules at its meeting on Thursday, May 15 that regulate broadband internet access service. This proceeding is GN Docket No. 14-2. See also, FCC agenda and story titled "FCC Announces Tentative Agenda for May 15 Meeting" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,646, April 24, 2014.

Back in 1959, another Chicago school economist, Ronald Coase, who died last year, wrote the seminal article, "The Federal Communications Commission", published in the Journal of Law and Economics, which argued for exclusive rights in spectrum, and allocation by competitive auctions.

He argued that "the allocation of resources should be determined by the forces of the market rather than as a result of government decisions".

Spectrum industries "do not call for any fundamental changes in the legal and economic arrangements which serve other industries". He argued that users should hold exclusive rights in spectrum, and the appropriate way to allocated that spectrum is by competitive bidding.

Coase also explained that "Quite apart from the malallocations which are the result of political pressures, an administrative agency which attempts to perform the function normally carried out by the pricing mechanism operates under two handicaps. First of all, it lacks the precise monetary measure of benefit and cost provided by the market. Second, it cannot, by the nature of things, be in possession of all the relevant information possessed  by the managers of every business which uses or might use radio frequencies, to say nothing of the preferences of consumers for the various goods and services in the production of which radio frequencies could be used."

It took the FCC 35 years to begin to follow this advice. While the FCC has held auctions since 1994, it continues to meddle with "forces of the market" when it auctions spectrum. The FCC is scheduled to adopt two orders at its May 15 meeting regarding the upcoming broadcast television spectrum incentive auction in which the FCC may limit competition. The proceedings are WT Docket Nos. 12-268 and 12-269.

5/10. Lee Kun-hee, Chairman of Samsung Electronics, had a heart attack.

5/8. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler named Kim Hart his Press Secretary. See, FCC release. She was previously Director of Corporate Communications at Neustar. Before that, she worked for Politico. And before that, she worked for The Hill.

The House will not meet the week of May 12-16, except for pro forma sessions. See, House calendar.

The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM.

Day one of a three day event titled "2014 GovSec Conference and Expo". See, event web site. Location: Washington Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place, NW.

9:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and Brookings Institution (BI) will host a program titled "35 Years Later: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Taiwan Relations Act". The speakers will include Shen Lyushun (Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative). See, CSIS notice and BI notice. Location: CSIS, 1616 Rhode Island Ave., NW.

12:00 NOON. Marc Levoy (Stanford University) will deliver a presentation titled "Google Glass and the Future of Photography". This is a ticketed event. The price to attend ranges from free to $5. See, notice. Location: National Press Club, 13th Floor, 529 14th St., NW.

12:00 NOON - 1:00 PM. The American Bar Association's (ABA) Section of Antitrust Law will host a teleconferenced panel discussion titled "In-House Counsel Antitrust Update for March & April". Prices vary. No CLE credits. See, notice.

CANCELLED. 6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Transition to All IP Networks: Update on Issues and Progress at State Commissions". The speakers will be __. Prices vary. CLE credits. No webcast. The deadline for registrations and cancellations is 5:00 PM on May 9. See, notice. Location: __.

EXTENDED TO JUNE 26. Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding whether to eliminate or modify the network non-duplication and syndicated exclusivity rules. The FCC adopted and released this FNPRM on March 31, 2014. It is FCC 14-29 in MB Docket No. 10-71. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 69, April 10, 2014, at Pages 19849-19860. See, Public Notice (DA 14-525) extending deadlines.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding location surveillance. This FNPRM is FCC 14-13 in PS Docket No. 07-114. The FCC adopted it on February 20, 2014, and released it on February 21. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 60, March 28, 2014, at Pages 17819-17847. See also, story titled "FCC Proposes Changes to Location Surveillance Rules" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,629, February 24, 2014.

EXTENDED TO JUNE 12. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Public Notice (PN) that requests comments to refresh the record regarding the ability of non-English speakers to access emergency information. This PN is DA 14-336 in EB Docket No. 04-296. The FCC released it on March 11, 2014. See also, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 60, March 28, 2014, at Pages 17490-17493. See, April 24 Public Notice (DA 14-552) extending deadlines.

The House will meet at 1:00 PM in pro forma session.

Day two of a three day event titled "2014 GovSec Conference and Expo". At 8:45 AM Thomas Donilon (previously National Security Advisor to President Obama) will give a speech titled "America's Foreign, Defense & Cyber Policy: An Insider’s Perspective". At 11:30 AM, there will be a presentation titled "Cyber Supply Chain Risk". At 1:30 PM, there will be a panel titled "Privacy vs National Security: How Snowden Changed the Debate -- Patriot or Traitor?". At 2:45 PM, there will be a presentation titled "The Rise of Critical Infrastructure Attacks: Understanding the Privileged Connection". See, event web site. Location: Washington Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place, NW.

9:00 - 11:00 AM. The Brookings Institution (BI) will host a panel discussion titled "Hacking America's Health". See, notice. Location: BI, 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a hearing on two nominees for the Court of Appeals, and five nominees for District Courts. The nominees are Julie Carnes (USCA/11thCir), Jill Pryor (USCA/11thCir), Leslie Abrams (USDC/MDGa), Michael Boggs (USDC/NDGa), Mark Cohen (USDC/NDGa), Leigh May (USDC/NDGa), and Eleanor Ross (USDC/NDGa). Webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Sorenson Communications v. FCC, App. Ct. No. 13-1122. This pertains to Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service (IPCTS). See also, FCC brief filed on March 13, 2014. Judges Brown, Griffith and Millett will preside. This is the third item on the Court's agenda. Location: USCA Courtroom, Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

1:00 - 2:30 PM. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Music Licensing 2014: Songs and Sound Recordings". The speakers will be __. Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice.

2:30 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) will hold a hearing titled "Economic Espionage and Trade Secret Theft: Are Our Laws Adequate for Today's Threats?". This hearing was previously scheduled for March 25, 2014. The witnesses will be __. See, notice. See also, S 2267 [LOC | WW], the "Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2014", and stories titled "Sen. Coons Introduces Bill to Create Federal Private Right of Action for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets" and "Summary of S 2267, the Defend Trade Secrets Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,653, May 5, 2014. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

Deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding whether "whether additional guidance, clarification, or modification regarding the ``answered´´ and ``ring no answer´´ categories of call attempts described in Appendix C of the Rural Call Completion Order is necessary." The FCC adopted its Report and Order on October 28, 2013, and released it on November 8, 2013. It is FCC 13-135 in WC Docket No 13-39. See, FCC's April 21, 2014 Public Notice (DA 14-526), and notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 87, May 6, 2014, at Pages 25682-25683.

8:00 AM - 5:00 PM. The George Mason University law school's Law and Economics Center (LEC) will host a conference titled "The Future of Privacy and Data Security Regulation". FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen will be the keynote speaker. See, notice. For more information, call Jeff Smith at jsmithq at gmu dot edu or 703-993-8382. Location: GMU law school, 3301 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA.

Day three of a three day event titled "2014 GovSec Conference and Expo". At 10:30 AM, there will be a panel titled "Managing Cyber Risk Factors: Defensive Strategies for Protecting Critical
Infrastructure". See, event web site. Location: Washington Convention Center, 801 Mount Vernon Place, NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Appropriations Committee's (SAC) Subcommittee on Defense will hold a hearing titled "Defense Research and Innovation". See, notice. Location: Room 192, Dirksen Building.

12:15 - 1:30 PM. The DC Bar Association's Media Law Committee will host a lunch meeting to discuss issues that affect journalists, including libel suits, subpoenas to obtain sources, content regulation, freedom of information requests, and access to courts and other public places. Free. Bring your own lunch. No CLE credits. See, notice. Location: Washington Post, 1150 15th St., NW.

1:00 - 3:00 PM. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) will host a panel discussion titled "Innovations in Elections: Making Voting Accessible for Everyone". See, notice. Location: National Press Club, 13th Floor, First Amendment Room, 529 14th St., NW.

1:00 - 2:30 PM ET. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "Should I Tweet About That? Ethics, Advertising, and the Internet after ABA Ethics Opinion 465". The speakers will be Jennifer Ellis, Ellen Pansky, Peter Joy, and Dennis Rendleman. Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice.

2:00 - 3:00 PM. The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) will host a webcast event titled "Quarterly Economic and Tech Industry Outlook". The speaker will be Shawn DuBravac. Prices vary. See, notice.

2:30 - 4:00 PM. The Brookings Institution (BI) will host an event titled "High-Speed Train Technology: A New Frontier in U.S.-Japan Relations?". The speakers will be Kenichiro Sasae (Ambassador of Japan), Mireya Solís (BI), and Edward Rendell (BI). See, notice. Location: BI, 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

3:00 - 5:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "2014 International Trade Law & Policy Debate". The speakers will be Elizabeth Drake (Stewart and Stewart), Matthew McCullough (Curtis law firm), and Benjamin Caryl (Kelley Drye & Warren). The price to attend ranges from $5 to $10. No CLE credits. No webcast. For more information, call 202-626-3463. The DC Bar has a history of barring reporters from its events. See, notice. Location: U.S. International Trade Commission, Courtroom A, 500 E St., SW.

Supreme Court conference day. See, October Term 2013 calendar.

8:45 AM - 3:15 PM. The U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission will host an event titled "Stability in China: Lessons from Tiananman and Implications for the United States". There will be panels titled "Tiananmen and Contemporary Economic, Political, and Social Challenges in China", "Expression of Dissent in China Today", and "Freedom of Expression and Media Control: Implications for the United States". Free. Open to the public. Webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 608, Dirksen Building.

9:00 AM - 4:00 PM. The Department of Commerce's (DOC) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote Sensing, which advises the NOAA on the licensing of commercial remote sensing satellite systems, will meet. Open to the public. See, notice in the Federal Register Vol. 79, No. 72, April 15, 2014, at Pages 21212-21213. Location: DOC, Room 1412, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW.

9:30 AM. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee's (SHSGAC) Subcommittee on Investigations will hold a hearing titled "Online Advertising and Hidden Hazards to Consumer Security and Data Privacy". The witnesses will be __. See, notice. Location: Room 342, Dirksen Building.

10:30 AM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Open Meeting". See, agenda and story titled "FCC Announces Tentative Agenda for May 15 Meeting" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,646, April 24, 2014. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, Room TW-C305, 445 12th St., SW.

12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM ET. The American Bar Association (ABA) will host a webcast panel discussion titled "The Current State of Mobile Health: Legal and Regulatory Issues". The speakers will be Paul DeMuro, Rene Quashie, Carolyn Petersen, and Lee Kim. Prices vary. CLE credits. See, notice.

12:30 - 6:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and Engineering. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 85, May 2, 2014, at Pages 25155-25156. Location: NSF, Suite 1235, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.

1:00 - 2:30 PM. The Brookings Institution (BI) will host an event titled "TTIP in Light of Turkish Trade Policy and Economic Relations with the United States". The main speaker will be Nihat Zeybekci (Turkey's Minister of Economy). See, notice. Location: BI, 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

2:15 PM. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) will hold a hearing on nominees, including Nina Hachigian to be U.S. representative to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). See, notice. Location: Room 419, Dirksen Building.

Deadline to submit to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) National Protection and Programs Directorate petitions for reconsideration of the DHS' classifications of critical infrastructure in which "a cybersecurity incident could reasonably result in catastrophic regional or national effects". This is part of the regulatory process created by the Obama administration, and Executive Order 13636, in particular. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 74, April 17, 2014, at Pages 21780-21782. See also, story titled "DHS Announces Petition for Review Process for Critical Infrastructure Classifications" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,640, April 16, 2014.

Deadline to submit comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft SP 800-56 B Rev. 1 [132 pages in PDF] titled "Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key-Establishment Schemes Using Integer Factorization Cryptography".

Deadline to submit comments to the U.S. Coast Guard in response to its notice in the Federal Register (FR) that it intends to enter into a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with General Dynamics "to develop, demonstrate, evaluate, and document viable technical approaches for securely forwarding maritime-related smart phone (voice image position and text) through Next Generation/Enhanced 9-1-1 (NG 911) into the Coast Guard Rescue21 System". (Parentheses in original.) See, FR, Vol. 79, No. 72, April 15, 2014, at Pages 21255-21256. This is Docket Number USCG-2014-0233.

Deadline to submit comments to the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Advisory Committee on Commercial Operations of Customs and Border Protection in advance of its May 22, 2014 meeting in Miami, Florida. The CBP engages in several technology related activities, including enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) by seizing infringing goods, seizure of domain names, and warrantless searches of laptops, tablets, phones and other devices at entry points. The agenda for the meeting includes discussion of "the recommendations on the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Working Group's work to determine the feasibility of a Partnership Program for IPR" and "application of the Document Imaging System as a tool for IPR authentication". See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 86, May 5, 2014, at Pages 25608-25609, and CBP notice.

8:30 AM - 2:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory Committee for Computer and Information Science and Engineering. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 85, May 2, 2014, at Pages 25155-25156. Location: NSF, Suite 1235, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.

12:00 NOON. The Internet Caucus will host an event titled "The FCC Is Auctioning Off the Public’s Spectrum: How Will It Affect The Internet?". See, notice. Location: __.

Deadline to submit comments to the Copyright Office in response to its notice of inquiry that "announces the initiation of a study to evaluate the effectiveness of existing methods of licensing music". See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 51, March 17, 2014, at Pages 14739-14743.

EXTENDED FROM MARCH 17. Extended deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding mobile communications services aboard airborne aircraft. This item is FCC 13-157 in WT Docket No. 13-301. The FCC adopted it on December 12, 2013, and released it on December 13, 2013. See, notice in the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 51, March 17, 2014, at Pages 14634-14635, and Public Notice (DA 14-327), extending this deadline.

Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau in response to its Public Notice (PN) regarding FCC rules that require fax advertisements sent to a consumer who has provided prior express invitation or permission to include an opt-out notice. This PN is DA 14-556 in CG Docket Nos. 02-278 and 05-338. The FCC released it on April 25, 2014.

Deadline to submit exhibitor applications for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) event titled "2014 National Trademark Expo" to be held on October 17-18, 2014. See, notice.

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 1998-2014 David Carney. All rights reserved.