Source: http://www.techlawjournal.com/alert/2003/12/05.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 10:55:02+00:00

Document:
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 793, December 5, 2003.
December 5, 2003, 9:00 AM ET, Alert No. 793.
12/4. President Bush signed HR 2622, the "Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003". See, White House release and bill summary.
This is a large bill that includes provisions pertaining to prevention of identity theft and restoration of identity theft victim credit history, use of and consumer access to credit information, accuracy of consumer report information, use and sharing of medical information in the financial system, and financial literacy.
Bush stated at a White House signing ceremony that "This bill also confronts the problem of identity theft. A growing number of Americans are victimized by criminals who assume their identities and cause havoc in their financial affairs. With this legislation, the federal government is protecting our citizens by taking the offensive against identity theft." See, transcript.
He continued that "this law will create a national system of fraud detection so that identity theft can be traced and dealt with earlier. Up to now, victims of identity theft have been left to manage the problem themselves -- ask Michael -- by calling all their credit card companies to shut down each of their accounts. And then the victims must call each of the three major credit rating agencies to report the crime and to protect their credit rating. Under this legislation, victims will only have to make one phone call to receive advice and to set off a nationwide fraud alert. It's an important reform. I appreciate you all for putting this into law. Credit bureaus will then take immediate measures to protect the consumer's credit standing."
Rep. Mike Oxley (R-OH), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, stated in a release that "This is the most significant consumer protection and financial literacy legislation passed by Congress in decades ... With a free credit report and powerful new tools to fight fraud, consumers have the ability make identity theft a crime of the past."
See also, story titled "House and Senate Pass Conference Report on Credit Reporting Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 785, November 24, 2003.
12/4. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc [19 pages in PDF] with the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir) in Brand X Internet Services v. FCC.
This opinion (which is also published at 345 F.3d 1120) presents an obstacle to the FCC in pursuing policies that promote broadband deployment, and development of services, such as voice over internet protocol, that depend on broadband access.
The FCC petition argues that the three judge panel erred by not applying Chevron deference. It wrote that "When courts review legal challenges to an agency’s interpretation of its authorizing statute, they must use the two-part test adopted by the Supreme Court in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984). In this case, however, the panel did not apply the Chevron test to the FCC’s statutory construction. Instead, the panel held that it was bound to accept the statutory interpretation that another panel of this Court had previously adopted in AT&T Corp. v. City of Portland, 216 F.3d 871 (9th Cir. 2000) ... The FCC’s statutory interpretation in this case never received the sort of judicial review to which it is entitled under the Supreme Court’s Chevron doctrine."
The FCC petition does not address in detail the policy consequences of this case. It does state, however, that "Given the momentous issues involved here, it is essential that this Court apply Chevron. At stake in this case is the future evolution of broadband services that promise to fuel economic growth and technological innovation in this country for years to come."
12/4. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) denied the U.S. Telecom Association's (USTA) request for a stay of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) order requiring wireline to wireless number portability.
The USTA and CenturyTel sought a stay of the FCC's November 10, 2003 Memorandum Opinion and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [35 pages in PDF] regarding number portability. The November 10 order requires that wireline carriers must port numbers to wireless carriers in certain circumstances. The November 10 order is FCC 03-284 in CC Docket No. 95-116.
Said USTA P/CEO Walter McCormick, "we are disappointed". See, USTA release. However, Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) P/CEO Steve Largent called it "the right decision". See, CTIA release.
See, stories titled "FCC Releases LNP Order That Addresses Wireline to Wireless" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 776, November 11, 2003; "Powell Addresses Number Portability" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 784, November 20, 2003; "FCC Denies Petition for Stay of Number Portability Order" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 784, November 21, 2003; and "Appeals Court Sets Expedited Briefing Schedule in Number Portability Case" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 785, November 24, 2003.
12/4. John Muleta, Chief of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) wrote a letter [PDF] to AT&T Wireless regarding the extent of AT&T's compliance with the FCC's new number portability rules that went into effect on November 24, 2003.
Muleta (at right) wrote that "Over the past few days, we have received a number of complaints from consumers and carriers, and have noted recent press accounts, indicating that a porting backlog exists for ports from AT&T Wireless to other carriers. We are committed to working with carriers to ensure that the porting process is as smooth as possible for consumers. To that end, I ask that you provide me information detailing the nature of the difficulties that AT&T Wireless appears to be facing with regard to porting numbers to other carriers, and the steps your company is taking to address this issue. Please provide me with this information by next Wednesday, December 10, 2003."
12/2. U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Robert Zoellick gave a speech [PDF] titled "Freeing the Intangible Economy: Services in International Trade" in Washington DC. He advocated free trade in services, addressed e-commerce and telecommunications specifically, and reviewed ongoing negotiations.
Zoellick (at right) defined services as "ideas and effort, expressed in electrons, on paper, film, or in the actions of people. They are knowledge, communications, and planning -- the glue that holds economies together. Services add value to goods and raw materials, and more than trade in physical products, they require interaction between buyers and sellers."
He stated that "The U.S. service industry's share of GDP is about 65 percent" and that "U.S. services account for approximately 30 percent of the value of America's exports".
"Many Americans are unaware that services comprise the largest sector of the U.S. economy. It is no surprise, then, that the prominent role of services in international trade is not widely appreciated", said Zoellick. "Yet billions of dollars worth of services are traded every day. At this very moment, trillions of bits of information -- news reports, computer software, legal opinions, tax forms, medical advice, and movies, just to name a few -- are being exchanged across private computer networks and the Internet."
Zoellick argued that "The services sector also offers innovative opportunities for developing countries to jumpstart growth and development". He reviewed the progress of several nations, and stated that they "scrapped burdensome regulatory and licensing requirements in order to create these opportunities. Further liberalization would also expand avenues for developing countries to trade services among themselves."
E-Commerce. Zoellick stated that "To have e-commerce, countries need low-cost, accessible, and effective telecommunications and Internet systems, unburdened by taxes and fees. They need reliable sources of electricity to operate online. Goods need to be packaged, shipped, and distributed in a timely fashion, with the cooperation, not corruption or costly circumventions, of customs officials. Purchasing requires reliable payment and credit. Goods trademarks need protection from counterfeiters; agricultural products must meet health standards."
"In brief," said Zoellick, "we need efficient services businesses -- in both developed and developing economies. And, I guess I have to add, we still need trade negotiators, however disagreeable, and free trade agreements to open markets and secure transparent, reliable, low-cost rules to enable the most efficient services providers, and producers of goods and farm products, to flourish."
Telecommunications. He stated that "reliable, rapid, affordable communications are a basic necessity for international commerce. In many developing economies, however, even basic telephone service is unobtainable. Without good communication, businesses are largely limited to supplies that can be obtained locally, severely restraining productivity. The customer base is diminished, too."
"Even when basic telecom services exist, the high cost and poor service provided by monopoly suppliers can hamstring local businesses. In Vietnam, one brave company that produces software for firms in the U.K. and Canada is forced to fly its product to clients on CDs because the telecom system is too antiquated for Internet access."
He continued that "When countries have opened their communications markets to trade, they have reaped tangible rewards. The opening of Chile's telecommunication industry in 1994 led to rapid infrastructure modernization and the introduction of new services. Rates for local, long-distance, and international calls dropped by up to 50 percent -- a key factor in the decision by foreign investors like Delta Airlines to open call centers there. Liberalization of El Salvador's telecommunications industry has led to quality and infrastructure improvements, the expansion of cellular service to the entire country, and a reduction in the waiting period for a fixed line from as long as 6 years to a few days. Intel recently stated it would like to expand its operations in Costa Rica -- if the country opens up its telecom monopoly service -- one of our objectives in the CAFTA negotiations."
Trade Negotiations. He stated that "To replicate such success stories, U.S. services proposals seek to build on the Uruguay Round commitments and the landmark 1997 Basic Telecom Services Agreement by opening markets to competition for supplying both basic services, like telephone connections, and value-added services, such as information and Internet businesses. And as our recent telecommunications victory in the WTO against Mexico's Telmex shows, we intend to enforce these new obligations."
Zoellick commented that "free traders have our work cut out for us. You know the resistance we face from people who fear change or dislike competition. There are plenty of protectionists around the world, too."
"We have been pressing for freer trade -- especially in emerging services markets -- globally, hemispherically, and through subregional or bilateral free trade agreements. The strategy of advancing on multiple fronts is paying off, especially in our drive through FTAs to achieve state-of-the-art provisions to assist sectors like those represented here tonight."
Zoellick added that "this month we are moving into the closing stages of our FTA negotiations with Morocco, the five Central American economies, and Australia. These FTAs will have the highest quality services provisions, based on the Chile and Singapore FTAs you helped us enact this year. Next year we will seek to add the Dominican Republic to CAFTA and launch FTA negotiations with Thailand, Panama, Bahrain, Colombia, Peru, and -- when ready -- Ecuador and Bolivia. We will strive to complete our FTA with the five countries of the Southern Africa Customs Union."
He concluded that "we also want to broaden and deepen the coverage of the General Agreement on Trade in Services, or GATS, through the WTO negotiations launched at Doha. To help spur these negotiations, the United States offered to eliminate all tariffs on goods and to make very deep cuts in agricultural tariffs and subsidies. Others passed up this opportunity at Cancun. As their disappointment sank in, we were the first to propose resuming work off the Cancun draft text. Many others have joined us, including all the APEC economies. My sense is that most WTO members will want to resume negotiations early next year; we will look for a serious commitment to move from hand wringing to hands-on work, cooperation, and compromise."
12/4. President Bush signed a proclamation ending the temporary tariffs on imported steel that he imposed in March of 2002.
Bush also stated that "we will continue our steel import licensing and monitoring program so that my Administration can quickly respond to future import surges that could unfairly damage the industry. We will continue negotiations with our trading partners through the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development to establish new and stronger disciplines on subsidies that governments grant to their steel producers." See, Bush statement.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) responded that "This is good news. The tariffs on imported steel may have helped some sectors of the economy, but they certainly hurt others. Too many Iowa manufacturers faced increased production costs because of these tariffs. The President's decision to lift tariffs will bring welcome relief to struggling American factories. Today's decision will help American manufacturers compete against their foreign counterparts.
Sen. Grassley added that "Just as important, the President's bold decision means we can avoid retaliatory tariffs that were being proposed by some of our largest trading partners. Those tariffs would have hurt a lot of innocent companies and workers in the United States and contributed to slower economic recovery. Lifting the steel tariffs to avoid harm to many American workers and farmers across the United States was the right thing to do."
Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, stated that "While last year's decision was helpful to the steel industry, it did not come without costs to other sectors of the U.S. economy. Many manufacturers in steel consuming industries have experienced increased costs as a result of the tariffs."
EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy stated in a release that "I am pleased to see that after nearly two years of litigation, the US has decided to abide by their international obligations by lifting the illegal safeguards. EU steel producers and workers will be relieved, as will those in the seven other countries which stood together with the EU in contesting these measures. But more importantly, this is a test case of how important is a rules-based international trading system for all of us. ... We should now concentrate our efforts in the OECD steel talks to cut down trade distorting subsidies and global excess steel capacity, which is at the root of the problems by the US steel industry."
12/4. Christie Whitman was elected to the Board of Directors of Texas Instruments. She was previously the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Before that, she was the Governor of the state of New Jersey from 1994 through 2000. See, TI release.
12/1. Claudine Malone and Kathy White were elected to the Board of Directors of Novell. See, Novell release.
12/3. Microsoft announced changes to its intellectual property licensing practices. See, Microsoft release.
12/4. Michael Dawson, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Compliance Policy at the Department of the Treasury, gave a speech in Charlotte, North Carolina. He spoke at the Conference on Critical Financial Infrastructure Protection organized by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). This speech was very similar to his speech at the Fourth E-Gov Homeland Security Conference in Washington DC on December 3. See, story titled "Treasury Department Official Addresses Critical Infrastructure Protection" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 792, December 4, 2003.
11/21. The U.S. Court of Appeals (5thCir) issued its opinion [10 pages in PDF] in Coserv v. Southwestern Bell, a case regarding the compulsory arbitration language of 47 U.S.C. § 252(b)(2). The Court held that "only issues voluntarily negotiated by the parties pursuant to § 252(a) are subject to the compulsory arbitration provision". This case is Coserv Limited Liability Corporation and Multitechnology Services LP v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, Public Utility Commission of Texas, Rebecca Klein, Paul Hudson and Julie Parsley, No. 02-51065, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 252
 § 252
 v.