Source: http://techlawjournal.com/home/newsbriefs/2002/11b.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 08:10:02+00:00

Document:
TLJ News: November 6-10, 2002.
Both versions of the bill authorize funding for various new research and education programs pertaining to cyber security at the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
The Senate bill also requires that the NIST "shall develop, and revise as necessary, a checklist setting forth settings and option selections that minimize the security risks associated with each computer hardware or software system that is, or is likely to become, widely used within the Federal government."
11/8. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Commissioner Thomas Leary gave a speech titled "Efficiencies and Antitrust: A Story of Ongoing Evolution" at a bar convention in Washington DC. See, prepared text.
11/8. Erkki Liikanen, European Commissioner for Enterprise and Information Society, gave a speech titled "The Results of the Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue" (TABD) in Chicago, Illinois, in which he addressed cyber security, data privacy, and the recently drafted antitrust guidelines.
He stated, "On networked economy, a considerable number of issues remain under consideration. This year, cyber security has become the newest issue that we added. This is of considerable interest to both governments and industry, and close co-operation is foreseen on it. It will be of particular importance to balance the requirements imposed by cyber security with issues such as civil rights, data privacy, and proportionate data retention costs. We also agreed that there is a need for broad awareness of security issues in all sectors of the economy, and the TABD could usefully help by asking its members in all the sectors to report on what is undertaken and what the issues are faced."
He also stated, "On Mergers & Acquisitions, the Guidelines for coordinating future merger reviews between U.S. and EU antitrust agencies have just been finalised. The Guidelines reflect best practices, and the objectives are to enhance cooperation, minimize the risk of divergent outcomes, and reduce the burdens on parties involved in merger investigations. These are of course objectives that correspond well to the TABD's recommendations in this area."
See also, guidelines titled "US-EU Merger Working Group: Best Practices on Cooperation in Merger Investigations".
Statute. The Congress addressed both closed captioning and video description in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 47 U.S.C. � 613, at subsection (g), defines video description as "the insertion of audio narrated descriptions of a television program's key visual elements into natural pauses between the program's dialogue".
47 U.S.C. � 613(f) provides that "Within 6 months after February 8, 1996, the Commission shall commence an inquiry to examine the use of video descriptions on video programming in order to ensure the accessibility of video programming to persons with visual impairments, and report to Congress on its findings. The Commission's report shall assess appropriate methods and schedules for phasing video descriptions into the marketplace, technical and quality standards for video descriptions, a definition of programming for which video descriptions would apply, and other technical and legal issues that the Commission deems appropriate."
FCC Rule. The FCC adopted a Report and Order [MS Word] in the proceeding titled "Implementation of Video Description of Video Programming". This is MM Docket No. 99-339. The Report and Order states that "we conclude that we have the authority to adopt video description rules, and require the top broadcast stations and multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) to provide programming with video description on the top programming networks." The FCC asserted authority under � 613 and � 151, which is a broad introductory section stating the purpose of the FCC.
In particular, the Report and Order requires that "affiliates of the top four commercial broadcast TV networks in the top 25 TV markets to provide 50 hours per calendar quarter of prime time and/or children�s programming with video description" and that "MVPDs with 50,000 or more subscribers to provide 50 hours per calendar quarter of prime time and/or children�s programming with video description on each of the top five national nonbroadcast networks they carry."
Appeals Court. The Appeals Court held that � 613 requires that the FCC promulgate closed captioning regulations, but that it merely write a report regarding video description. Moreover, � 151 provides no authority to promulgate regulations that significantly implicate program content. The FCC's video description rule exceeds its statutory authority, and hence, the rule must be vacated.
The Court wrote that � 613(f) and (g), "the sole subsections dealing with video description -- merely defined ``video description�� and required the FCC to prepare a report to Congress. 47 U.S.C. � 613(f)-(g). Unlike the provisions covering closed captioning," � 613 "did not authorize the Commission to adopt regulations implementing video descriptions."
It also wrote that � 151 "has not been construed to allow the FCC to regulate programming content is because such regulations invariably raise First Amendment issues."
11/8. There is nothing in the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) in MPAA v. FCC about web pages. The FCC's rule covers broadcasters and MVPDs, but not webcasters. Nor does any other FCC rule mandate web programming practices to make web pages accessible to visually impaired persons.
Hypothetically, if an agency were to write rules regulating web pages, such rules would likely require the creation of content. For example, such rules might require writing text for alt tags for images.
11/8. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) issued its "unpublished" disposition [PDF] in Church of Christ v. FCC, a petition for review of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) order approving Fox Television Stations' acquisition of the licenses and assets of ten television stations owned by Chris Craft Industries. It upheld the FCC order.
11/7. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced, but did not release, a report by its Spectrum Policy Task Force at its November 7 open meeting.
Lauren Van Wazer of the SPTF made a brief presentation. Commissioners offered comments. And, the FCC issued a press release [PDF], and a set of PowerPoint slides used by Van Wazer. FCC staff stated that the report itself might be released next week.
The SPTF was formed early last summer by FCC Chairman Michael Powell. It solicited public comments, and received over 200. It also held a series of public workshops in August.
Van Wazer stated at the FCC meeting that one of the findings of the SPTF is that "spectrum access is a much more significant problem than scarcity". She stated that another finding is that spectrum can be parceled in time, space and frequency. She also stated that the SPTF found that new technologies allow systems to be more tolerant of interference. Finally, she said that the SPTF found that spectrum rights and responsibilities are not always clearly defined.
She also stated that the report contains 39 recommendations. She listed a few her presentation. The FCC press release provides a little more elaboration.
First, said Van Wazer, the FCC should evolve its spectrum policy towards a more market oriented approach. Second, the FCC should adopt a new metric, which she called "interference temperature", to quantify and manage interference.
Third, the FCC should implement ways to increase access to spectrum, through the use of the time dimension, in addition to frequency and space. The FCC's release states that the SPTF "found that new technological developments now permit the Commission to increasingly consider the use of time, in addition to frequency, power and space, as an added dimension permitting more dynamic allocation and assignment of spectrum usage rights. This would provide access to unused or underused spectrum through time-sharing of spectrum between multiple users and lead to more efficient use of the spectrum resource."
Finally, the FCC should migrate from its current command and control model of spectrum management. It should also employ exclusive use and commons approaches.
The Commissioners praised the SPTF and the report. However, Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy noted that "the Commission has not endorsed this report". Commissioner Kevin Martin stated that he is concerned about "unlicensed underlays" and interference. He questioned whether a proposal in the report is enforceable in practice.
Chairman Powell also released a statement [PDF]. Also, he gave a speech on October 30 on this subject titled "Broadband Migration III: New Directions in Wireless Policy".
Tom Wheeler, P/CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), stated in a release that "The absence of a national spectrum policy has hurt consumers by denying them new services and creating a competitive imbalance with the rest of the world. Applause can be the only response to the FCC's decision to develop a comprehensive spectrum policy."
The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) President Matthew Flanigan stated in a release that "market oriented approaches envisioned by the FCC's Spectrum Policy Task Force promise to bring certainty and stability to our nation's spectrum management processes".
Lauren Van Wazer can be reached at 202 418-0030 or lvanwaze@fcc.gov. This is ET Docket No. 02-135.
11/7. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted, but did not release, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding equal employment opportunity rules for broadcasters and multi-channel video programming distributors (MVPDs). See, FCC release [PDF].
This is the FCC's third attempt. The last two sets of rules were held unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir). See, opinion in Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod v. FCC. 141 F.3d 344 (1998) and opinion in MD/DC/DE Broadcasters Association v FCC, 236 F.3d 13, reh'g den. 253 F. 3d 732 (2001) pet for cert. Filed, MMTC v MD/DC/DE Broadcasters Association. No. 01-639 (October 17, 2001).
While the NPRM has not been released, FCC Commissioners and staff described it as minimal set of rules requiring outreach, record keeping and reporting. However, it does not include a requirement that licensees submit annual reports on the race and gender make-up of their workforce.
Each of the four Commissioners issued statements. See, statements [in PDF] by Powell, Abernathy, Copps, and Martin. This is MM Docket No. 98-204.
11/7. The U.S. Court of Appeals (6thCir) issued its opinion in Verizon v. Strand, a challenge to a state public utilities commission order requiring ILECs to offer network elements and services to competitors through published tariffs and to combine UNEs for competitors. The District Court held both invalid. The Appeals Court affirmed as to the tariff requirement, but vacated as to the UNEs requirement.
Background. GTE North, which became Verizon North, upon GTE's merger with Bell Atlantic, is an incumbent local exchange carrier (ILEC) in the state of Michigan. The Michigan Public Services Commission (MPSC) issued an order requiring ILECs to offer network elements and services to competitors through published tariffs and to combine unbundled network elements (UNEs) for competitors. The order used GTE's Total Service Long Run Incremental Cost (TSLRIC) studies to establish the rates at which GTE would be compelled to sell UNEs to its competitors. The order also stated that the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Act) requirement that GTE allow competitors to access unbundled elements of GTE's local network did not preclude GTE's competitors from requesting access to pre-assembled, fully operational local service platforms.
District Court. GTE North filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (WDMich) against John Strand, Chairman of the MPSC, and other members of the MPSC, seeking a declaratory judgment that the MPSC order is invalid. The District Court held, on summary judgment, that the tariff requirement is invalid, because it would allow competitors to circumvent the negotiation and arbitration process set out in 47 U.S.C. � 252. It further held that requiring incumbents to combine previously unbundled network elements at competitors' request violated the plain language of the Act, which requires incumbents to provide competitors access to network elements "in a manner that allows requesting carriers to combine such elements". The MPSC appealed.
Appeals Court. This is the second time this case has been appealed to the Sixth Circuit. See also, GTE North v. Strand, 209 F.3d 909 (6th Cir. 2000). In the present appeal, the Court affirmed the District Court with respect to the tariff requirement, but vacated with respect to the bundling requirement. The District Court had relied upon the reasoning of the U.S. Court of Appeals (8thCir) in Iowa Utilities Board v. FCC, 219 F.3d 744 (8th Cir. 2000). The Supreme Court, during the pendency of this appeal, reversed on that issue.
11/7. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a document [19 pages in PDF] titled "Examination Guidelines for 35 U.S.C. � 102(e), as amended by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999, and further amended by the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2002, and 35 U.S.C. � 102(g)".
Section 102 pertains to conditions for patentability. It was amended by the American Inventor's Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA), and again by the DOJ Authorization bill, which President Bush signed last Saturday, October 2.
Title III of HR 2215 pertains to intellectual property. Its Subtitle B is named "Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2002". As a stand alone bill, it was S 320. For example, within this Subtitle B, Section 13204 contains language clarifying the effective date of international applications which may qualify for the provisional rights based on early publication. Section 13205 contains language amending 35 U.S.C. � 102(e) to provide that the USPTO will only rely on information published in the English language in patent applications when it makes the determination of novelty during the examination of a patent application. This limits the evidence from foreign applications that may be considered "prior art".
The document just released by the USPTO provides the USPTO's interpretation of the statute, as amended by the AIPA and the just signed DOJ authorization bill. It is a detailed analysis written for patent practitioners. The USPTO document also interprets prior art rejections based on 35 U.S.C. � 102(g).
11/7. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy promoted Matthew Brill to the position of Senior Legal Advisor. He has been her Legal Advisor for wireline matters. He can be reached at 202 418-2532. Abernathy also named Carolyn Groves as her Senior Counsel for wireless and international issues, starting December 9. Groves is currently a partner in the Washington DC office of the law firm of Wilkinson Barker & Knauer. John Branscome, an attorney in the Auctions Division of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), has been advising Abernathy on wireless and international issues on an interim basis. He will return to the WTB in December. See, FCC release [PDF].
11/7. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Roel Campos commented on SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt's resignation announcement. Campos stated in a release that "Chairman Pitt took the extraordinary step this week of offering his resignation as chairman of the SEC. This is not the time to say goodbye or Godspeed because Chairman Pitt will be with us for an undetermined period of time in the transition. It does seem appropriate to me to memorialize briefly Chairman Pitt's act of courage and sacrifice. ... His resignation is a model of dignity and grace."
11/7. William Kolasky, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, gave a speech in Washington DC titled "Global Competition Convergence and Cooperation: Looking Back and Looking Ahead". He addressed US EU relations, the International Competition Network (ICN), convergence of competition values, and other topics.
Commissioner Swindle, Thomas Niles (President of the U.S. Council for International Business), Joseph Alhadeff (VP/CPO of Oracle), and others spoke with reporters after the meeting.
11/6. Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, who will likely soon be the Committee Chairman, issued a release [PDF] that lists his "early priorities". He wrote that "I�ll also continue to work toward a bipartisan solution to the foreign sales corporation dispute so American companies can better function in the global marketplace."
Copps continued that the Communications Act "contemplates that interested members of the public will have a full opportunity to challenge license transfer applications. In addition, the Commission has recognized, in its policy governing the treatment of confidential information, that petitioners to deny generally must be afforded access to ``all information submitted by licensees that bear upon their applications.�� Under this policy, even confidential information must be produced, pursuant to a protective order, with an opportunity for petitioners to comment."
Finally, the RIAA letter asks that universities "Inform students of their moral and legal responsibilities to respect the rights of copyright owners", "Specify what practices are, and are not, acceptable on your school�s network", "Monitor compliance", and "Impose effective remedies against violators".
EPIC elaborates that "Monitoring the content of communications is fundamentally incompatible with the mission of educational institutions to foster critical thinking and exploration. Monitoring chills behavior, and can squelch creativity that must thrive in educational settings. Furthermore, in order to monitor at the level desired by the copyright industry -- to detect file transfers ``without authorization�� -- institutions would have to delve into the content and intended uses of almost every communication. Such a level of monitoring is not only impracticable; it is incompatible with intellectual freedom."
11/6. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a Forfeiture Order in the amount of $133,000 against Callais Cablevision of Grand Isle, Louisiana, for violations of 47 C.F.R. �� 76.605(a)(12), 76.611(a) and 76.612, which protect aeronautical safety communications from interference caused by leakage from cable systems and violation of 47 C.F.R. �11.11, which requires cable systems to install the Emergency Alert System (EAS) equipment needed to transmit national emergency messages. Cable signal leakage from Callais Cablevision's cable systems interfered with the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Remote Communication Air Ground (RCAG) facility in Grand Isle, Louisiana. See also, FCC release.
Go to News from November 1-5, 2002.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.