Source: http://www.techlawjournal.com/alert/2008/02/04.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 11:00:51+00:00

Document:
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,710, February 4, 2008.
February 4, 2008, Alert No. 1,710.
2/1. Microsoft announced in a release that "it has made a proposal to the Yahoo! Inc. ... Board of Directors to acquire all the outstanding shares of Yahoo! common stock for per share consideration of $31 representing a total equity value of approximately $44.6 billion."
Yahoo issued a release in response in which it stated that "it has received an unsolicited proposal from Microsoft to acquire the Company", and its "Board of Directors will evaluate this proposal carefully and promptly in the context of Yahoo!'s strategic plans and pursue the best course of action to maximize long-term value for shareholders."
Microsoft stated in its release that "The online advertising market is growing at a very fast pace, from over $40 billion in 2007 to nearly $80 billion by 2010. The resulting benefits of scale along with the associated capital costs for advertising platform providers make this a time of industry consolidation and convergence."
"Today this market is increasingly dominated by one player", wrote Microsoft, without mentioning Google by name. "Together, Microsoft and Yahoo! can offer a competitive choice while better fulfilling the needs of customers and partners."
The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Task Force on Antitrust and Competition Policy will hold a hearing titled "Hearing on the State of Competition on the Internet" on February 8, 2008. See, HJC notice.
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), the Chairman of the HJC, and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), the ranking Republican on the HJC, wrote in a joint statement that "Microsoft's bid to acquire Yahoo is certainly one of the largest technology mergers we’ve seen and presents important issues regarding the competitive landscape of the Internet. The House Judiciary Committee’s Task Force on Antitrust and Competition Policy intends to give the proposal a careful examination by holding a hearing next week. The Committee will hear from experts who will weigh in on whether this proposed consolidation works to further or undermine the fundamental principles of a competitive Internet.
The transaction would require regulatory approvals.
Cord Blomquist of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) stated in a release that "Unfortunately for consumers, the FTC will face pressure by the same groups that lobbied against the proposed Google/DoubleClick merger ... And again, many of the arguments won't be about competition, but instead will focus on privacy concerns."
He added that "With the Google/DoubleClick approval now serving as precedent, the FTC should be able to dismiss these arguments. The FTC approval must make a decision based on competition, which this deal increases significantly ... But, since that the deal is still pending in the EU and several groups are challenging the approval in the US, ‘Microhoo!’ may languish for a while."
2/3. Google's Chief Legal Officer, David Drummond, issued a statement on February 3, 2008, regarding Microsoft's offer to purchase Yahoo. He wrote that "Microsoft's hostile bid for Yahoo! raises troubling questions. This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It's about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation."
Drummond continued. "Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC? While the Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies -- and then leverage its dominance into new, adjacent markets."
He also stated, "Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft -- despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses -- to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors' email, IM, and web-based services?"
Drummond urged regulatory action. "Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions -- and consumers deserve satisfying answers."
2/1. The House is scheduled to consider S 781 [LOC | WW], the "Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007", on Wednesday, February 6, 2008, under suspension of the rules. See, Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF] for week of February 4.
The Senate passed this bill on December 17, 2007. The House passed its versions of this bill, HR 2601 [LOC | WW], also titled the "Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007", on December 11, 2007. The two bills a substantially the same, and have broad bipartisan support.
See also, story titled "House Commerce Committee Approves Do Not Call Registry Fee Extension Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,666, October 31, 2007, and story titled "Senate Commerce Committee Approves Bill to Revise and Extend Do Not Call Registry Fees" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,620, August 1, 2007.
S 781 extends the authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to collect Do-Not-Call Registry fees to fiscal years after fiscal year 2007. In 2003, the Congress enacted and President Bush signed HR 395 (108th Congress), the "Do-Not-Call Implementation Act". It provided that the FTC may only collect fees through 2007. See also, stories titled "Senate Passes Do Not Call Implementation Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 605, February 17, 2003, and "Bush Signs Do Not Call Implementation Act" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 621, March 12, 2003.
The 2003 Act made it illegal for telemarketers to call consumers with whom they do not have a prior business relationship. It also limits the times of day they can call, the use of auto dialing technology, and the area codes accessible to telemarketers. The 2003 Act provides fines for calling numbers on the Do Not Call Registry, and requires telemarketers to keep their call lists up to date with the Registry.
S 781 also lower fees for telemarketers who access the database to $54 per area code, or a maximum of $14,850. Currently, telemarketers pay $62 for each area code, with the first five area codes free, and total fees capped at $17,050. The bill also provides that the FCC shall not charge for the first 5 area codes of data. The bill also provides for future adjustments of fees according to changes in the Consumer Price Index.
S 781 prohibits telemarketers from entering into fee and data sharing arrangements, "including any arrangement to divide the costs to access the registry among various clients of a telemarketer or service provider".
The bill also adds to the FTC's reporting requirements, and extends rulemaking authority to the FTC to carry out the amendments in the bill.
2/1. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced in a release that "its professional staff has commenced a cost-benefit study of an upcoming auditor attestation requirement for smaller companies under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002."
This release also states that "In connection with the study, the four-member Commission unanimously proposed on Jan. 31, 2008, the one-year extension of the Section 404(b) auditor attestation requirement for smaller companies that SEC Chairman Christopher Cox had previously announced in testimony before the House Small Business Committee in December 2007. The postponement would allow time for completion of the study. Under the proposed extension, the Section 404(b) requirements would apply to smaller public companies beginning with fiscal years ending on or after Dec. 15, 2009."
The SEC also announced that it will conduct a web based survey of companies that are subject to Section 404; and "in-depth interviews including companies that are just now becoming compliant". It added that it will publish a notice in the Federal Register seeking comments on the proposed extension of the auditor attestation requirement for smaller companies.
Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) (at right), the Chairman of the House Small Business Committee, stated in a release that "I have repeatedly called on the SEC to delay implementation and conduct this study, and I am very pleased that they are taking action. It is essential, however, that their analysis be designed with the needs of entrepreneurs in mind. That is the only way it will meet its intended goal".
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 was HR 3763 in the 107th Congress. It is now Public Law No. 107-204.
Section 404 is titled "Management assessment of internal controls". Subsection 404(b) provides, in full, as follows: "(b) INTERNAL CONTROL EVALUATION AND REPORTING -- With respect to the internal control assessment required by subsection (a), each registered public accounting firm that prepares or issues the audit report for the issuer shall attest to, and report on, the assessment made by the management of the issuer. An attestation made under this subsection shall be made in accordance with standards for attestation engagements issued or adopted by the Board. Any such attestation shall not be the subject of a separate engagement."
Small public technologies companies have long argued that Section 404, and the SEC's implementation of it, is imposing huge burdens on them, with little benefit to investors. These arguments are supported by the May 8, 2006, Government Accountability Office (GAO) report [93 pages in PDF] titled "Sarbanes-Oxley Act: Consideration of Key Principles Needed in Addressing Implementation for Smaller Public Companies". See also, story titled "GAO Reports that Section 404 of Sarbanes Oxley Burdens Small Public Companies" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,366, May 9, 2006.
See also, the AeA's February 2005 report titled "Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404: The 'Section' of Unintended Consequences and its Impact on Small Business".
1/29. The U.S. District Court (DC) issued a Memorandum Opinion [PDF] in EFF v. DOJ, denying the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF) motion for reconsideration of the District Court's previous ruling against the EFF on its request from records from the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the National Security Agency's (NSA) wiretapping.
The District Court rejected the EFF's assertion that a subsequent article in the Washington Post supports the EFF's contention that the requested records are legal analysis rather than operational details.
The EFF requested records, brought this action, pursuant to the Federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which is codified a 5 U.S.C. § 552.
This case is Electronic Frontier Foundation v. Department of Justice, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, D.C. No. 07-00403 (TFH), Judge Thomas Hogan presiding.
1/30. The Copyright Royalty Judges published a notice in the Federal Register that announces, describes, recites, and sets the comment deadline for, it proposed rules that set the rates and terms for the making of an ephemeral recording of a sound recording by a business establishment service for the period 2009-2013. Comments or objections are due by February 29, 2008. See, Federal Register, January 30, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 20, at Pages 5466-5470.
1/30. The Copyright Royalty Judges published a notice in the Federal Register that announces the commencement of a proceeding to determine the Phase II distribution of 1998 and 1999 royalties collected under the cable statutory license. Petitions to participate and the filing fee are due by February 29, 2008. See, Federal Register, January 30, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 20, at Page 5596-5597.
1/30. The Copyright Royalty Judges published a notice in the Federal Register that requests comments regarding controversies at Phase I and Phase II for distribution of the 1999 through 2005 royalty funds collected under the satellite carrier statutory license. The deadline to submit comments is February 29, 2008. See, Federal Register, January 30, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 20, at Page 5597.
settlement in connection with the 2004 and 2005 cable royalty funds. The notice also requests comments on a motion for partial distribution in connection with those funds. Comments are due by February 29, 2008. See, Federal Register, January 30, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 20, at Pages 5597-5598.
1/31. Yahoo named Roy Bostock its new non-executive Chairman, replacing Terry Semel, effective January 31, 2008. Jerry Yang remains CEO. See, Yahoo release.
1/31. Solveig Singleton joined the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI) as Adjunct Fellow specializing in intellectual property and communications policy. She previously worked at the Progress & Freedom Foundation (PFF).
The House will not meet. See, Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF] for week of February 4.
The Senate will meet at 2:00 PM. It will resume consideration of S 2248 [LOC | WW], the "Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2007".
10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International Telecommunication Advisory Committee will meet to prepare advice on U.S. positions for the April 2008 meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL) Permanent Consultative Committee II (Radiocommunication including broadcasting) (PCC.II) and on various matters associated with the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). See, notice in the Federal Register, January 16, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 11, at Page 2978. Location: Room 6B516, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), 445 12th St., SW.
The House will meet at 2:00 PM for legislative business. Votes will be postponed until 6:30 PM. The House will consider S 781 [LOC | WW], the "Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007". See, Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF] for week of February 4.
8:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT) will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 15, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 10, at Page 2458-2459. Location: Employees Lounge, Administration Building, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.
8:30 AM - 5:30 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will jointly host a public workshop titled "2008 International Technical Assistance Workshop: Charting the Future Course of International Technical Assistance at the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission". See, notice. Location: FTC Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.
9:00 AM - 1:30 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) will host a "summit on issues relating to the deployment and use of Next Generation 911 technology and the coordination of those efforts among Public Safety Answering Points, the telecommunications industry and manufacturers". See, notice [PDF] and registration page. Location: Commission Meeting Room, FCC, 445 12th St., SW.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in LSI Industries v. Imagepoint, a patent infringement case, App. Ct. No. 2007-1292. Location: Courtroom 201, 717 Madison Place, NW.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in O2 Micro International v. Beyond Innovation Technologies, a patent infringement case, App. Ct. No. 2007-1302. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (EDTex), D.C. No. 2-04-CV-32 (TJW). See, District Court's March 21, 2007, Memorandum Opinion and Order [PDF]. Location: Courtroom 402, 717 Madison Place, NW.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Ampex v. Eastman Kodak, a patent infringement case, App. Ct. No. 2007-1089. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (DDel), D.C. No. 04-1373-KAJ. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Metropolitan Life v. Bancorp, App. Ct. No. 2007-1312. Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.
12:00 NOON - 1:30 PM. The Federal Bar Association (FBA) will host an event titled "The 9/11 Act -- Overview and Authorities". The price to attend ranges from $10-$15. See, registration page. Location: Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Town Hall, 601 S. 12th St., Arlington, VA.
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Cyberspace and International Practice Committees will host an event titled "Broadband Deployment and Take-up: What Are the Experiences of Various Countries?" This event offers continuing legal education (CLE) credits. See, notice and registration page. The price to attend ranges from $25 to $135. Registrations are due by 5:00 PM on February 4. Location: Dow Lohnes, 1200 New Hampshire Ave., NW.
TIME? Day one of a two day closed meeting of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Defense Science Board. The DOD has not disclosed the agenda. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 1, at Pages 173-174. Location: Pentagon, Arlington, VA.
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's calendar [PDF] for week of February 4.
8:30 AM - 5:00 PM. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission will hold a public meeting titled "The Implications of Sovereign Wealth Fund Investment on National Security". See, notice in the Federal Register, January 22, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 14, at Pages 3804-3805. Location: Room 562, Dirksen Building, Capitol Hill.
10:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) will hold a hearing titled "Oversight Hearing of the Department of Justice". See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Gammino v. Southwestern Bell, one of several related patent infringement cases involving an algorithm for blocking international telephone calls. This appeal, App. Ct. No. 2007-1201, is from the U.S. District Court (NDTex), D.C. No. 3:2005cv00850, which entered summary judgment for Southwestern Bell (AT&T). See, 512 F.Supp.2d 626. Location: Courtroom 201, 717 Madison Place, NW.
10:00 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will hear oral argument in Avocent Huntsville v. Aten International, a patent infringement case, App. Ct. No. 2007-1553. This is an appeal from the U.S. District Court (NDAlab). Location: Courtroom 203, 717 Madison Place, NW.
TIME? Day two of a two day closed meeting of the Department of Defense's (DOD) Defense Science Board. The DOD has not disclosed the agenda. See, notice in the Federal Register, January 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 1, at Pages 173-174. Location: Pentagon, Arlington, VA.
11:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee's (HJC) Task Force on Antitrust and Competition Policy will hold a hearing titled "Hearing on the State of Competition on the Internet". See, notice. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
10:00 AM. Deadline for all parties except foreign governments to submit comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (OUSTR) to assist it in making Special 301 identifications of countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights 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. 1,703, January 22, 2008, and notice in the Federal Register, January 16, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 11, at Pages 2958-2959.
Deadline to submit initial comments to the Copyright Office (CO) in response to its Notice of Inquiry (NOI) regarding the meaning of the Copyright Act's term "cable system", and issues related to the phantom signal phenomenon. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 12, 2007, Vol. 72, No. 238, at Pages 70529-70540, and story titled "Copyright Office Issues Notice of Inquiry Regarding Cable Systems" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,688, December 13, 2007.
Deadline to submit comments to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking regarding ODNI policies for collecting and maintaining personally identifiable records and processes for administering requests for records under the Privacy Act of 1974, which is codified at 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b). See, notice in the Federal Register, January 2, 2008, Vol. 73, No. 1, at Pages 113-125. These proposed rules allow for the disclosure of information to courts, government agencies, Congress, any Congressional committee or subcommittee, and a consumer reporting agency (in accordance with 31 U.S.C. § 3711(e)). These proposed rules also enumerate numerous exemptions of records systems under the Privacy Act.

References: v. 
 § 552
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 552
 § 3711