<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>JOLT Digest &#187; Broadcast</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/category/telecommunications/broadcast/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest</link>
	<description>JOLT Digest offers up-to-date information on current events in law and technology.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 03:03:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-18</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-18#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2009 05:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agency Rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Jacobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Andrew Jacobs
Marine Corps Bans Social Networking Sites 
In a directive issued Monday, the U.S. Marine Corps banned the use of social networking sites on its Marine Corps Enterprise Network, Wired and InformationWeek report. Characterizing these sites &#8212; including Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter &#8212; as &#8220;a proven haven for malicious actors and content,&#8221; the Corps [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Andrew Jacobs</p>
<p><strong>Marine Corps Bans Social Networking Sites </strong></p>
<p>In a directive issued Monday, the U.S. Marine Corps banned the use of social networking sites on its Marine Corps Enterprise Network, <a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/08/marines-ban-twitter-myspace-facebook/">Wired</a> and <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/government/security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219100352">InformationWeek</a> report. Characterizing these sites &#8212; including Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter &#8212; as &#8220;a proven haven for malicious actors and content,&#8221; the Corps hopes the ban will protect the network from cyberattacks and keep adversaries from acquiring user-generated information leaks. The directive does not limit Marines&#8217; access to social networking sites on non-military networks, and a follow-up press statement encouraged the use of social media by Marines on their own ISPs.</p>
<p><strong>Senate Hears Debate on Radio Performance Rights</strong></p>
<p>The Senate Judiciary Committee heard debate Tuesday on the proposed Performance Rights Act, which would compel terrestrial radio stations to pay royalties recording artists, Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/senate-hears-royalty-debate-pitting-big-content-vs-big-radio.ars">reports</a>. Under current copyright law, webcasters and satellite radio stations pay royalties to both a song&#8217;s writer and its performer, while terrestrial stations are only obliged to pay songwriters. The debate pits two powerful interest groups, among others, against each other: the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) staunchly opposes the bill, while the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has voiced its strong support.</p>
<p><strong>FTC Takes New View of Online Privacy</strong></p>
<p>The <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124949972905908593.html">Wall Street Journal</a> and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/business/media/05ftc.html?_r=2">The New York Times</a> report new FTC consumer protection head David Vladeck plans to shift the agency&#8217;s approach to online privacy protection. In a New York Times interview, Vladeck <a href="http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/an-interview-with-david-vladeck-of-the-ftc/">states</a> he hopes to address the &#8220;notice and consent&#8221; framework that he considers &#8220;no longer sufficient&#8221; online, as it has resulted in privacy disclosures that are rarely read or understood. He also plans to consider not only economic harm, but also the &#8220;dignity interest&#8221; that arises in online information collection. Though no new rulemaking is yet planned, updated FTC privacy guidelines are expected next summer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/flash-digest-news-in-brief-18/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Flash Digest: News in Brief</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-10</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-10#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2009 01:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jmilkey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[6th Circuit Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[District Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telecommunications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tyler Lacey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=147</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Tyler Lacey
Federal Prosecutors Launch New Attack Against Online Gamblers in the United States
On June 9, the New York Times reported that federal prosecutors asked four American banks to freeze accounts containing money believed to be used for distributing winnings to online poker players. Wells Fargo, one of the contacted banks, received a court order [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Tyler Lacey</p>
<p><strong>Federal Prosecutors Launch New Attack Against Online Gamblers in the United States</strong></p>
<p>On June 9, the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/10poker.html?_r=1">reported</a> that federal prosecutors asked four American banks to freeze accounts containing money believed to be used for distributing winnings to online poker players. Wells Fargo, one of the contacted banks, received a court order requiring that the funds be frozen. Professor I. Nelson Rose of Whittier Law School described the move as &#8220;surprising&#8221; and as a &#8220;gamble&#8221; by the prosecutors. Professor Rose also said that it is unclear what laws apply to the seizure of individuals&#8217; money.</p>
<p><strong>Canadian Government Decides Not to Regulate Internet Video and Audio Broadcasts</strong></p>
<p>Canadian radio and television broadcasters are <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/cancon.htm">required</a> by the <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/home-accueil.htm">Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission</a> (CRTC) to broadcast a minimum amount of Canadian content. On June 9, Ars Technica <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/canadian-isps-avoid-canadian-content-levies.ars">reported</a> that the CRTC issued a <a href="http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2009/2009-329.htm">report</a> saying that although internet audio and video do count as &#8220;broadcasting&#8221; for the purposes of their regulatory schemes, they will retain a regulatory exemption from providing Canadian content. The CRTC&#8217;s decision, while currently supported by major providers of online audio and video such as Google, leaves open the possibility that the CRTC will impose future regulations.</p>
<p><strong>Electronic Frontier Foundation Urges Court to Hold Email Protected Under the Fourth Amendment</strong></p>
<p>On June 10, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed an <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/Warshak_EFF_Amicus_Brief.pdf">amicus brief</a> in the Sixth Circuit&#8217;s ongoing case <em>Warshak v. United States</em>. The brief argues that the Justice Department violated Warshak&#8217;s Fourth Amendment expectation of privacy in his email. The EFF <a href="http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/06/11">reports</a> that &#8220;the government acquired over 27,000 emails spanning over six months from Warshak&#8217;s email provider, all without probable cause.&#8221; The basis of EFF&#8217;s <a href="http://www.eff.org/cases/warshak-v-usa">position</a> is that email should receive the same protection against unlawful search and seizure as is given to phone calls, postal mail, and private papers kept at home.</p>
<p><strong>Court Abused Discretion by Failing to Apply <em>eBay</em> Factors</strong></p>
<p>On June 9, Patently-O <a href="http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/06/injunctive-relief-district-court-abused-discretion-by-failing-to-consider-ebay-factors.html">reported</a> that the Federal Circuit <a href="http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1228.pdf">remanded</a> a patent dispute case back to the district court because it failed to consider the <em>eBay</em> factors in its refusal to grant a permanent injunction to the patent holder. In the <em><a href="http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-130.pdf">eBay case</a></em>, the Supreme Court required a patentee seeking injunctive relief to &#8220;demonstrate (1) that it has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law are inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that considering the balance of hardships between the plaintiff and defendant, a remedy in equity is warranted; and (4) that the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/patent/flash-digest-news-in-brief-10/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Action by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC 08-260)</title>
		<link>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/federal-communications-commission/action-by-the-federal-communications-commission-fcc-08-260</link>
		<comments>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/federal-communications-commission/action-by-the-federal-communications-commission-fcc-08-260#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 04:25:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sarah Sorscher</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Broadcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Communications Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dmitriy Tshyevich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miriam Weiler]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/?p=77</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FCC Approves Unlicensed White Space Use
By Dmitriy Tishyevich – Edited by Miriam Weiler
Action by the Federal Communications Commission, by Second Report and Order (FCC 08-260)
On November 4, the Federal Communications Commission unanimously approved the use of unlicensed wireless devices that operate in “white spaces,” the unused spectrum between licensed broadcast television channels that can be [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>FCC Approves Unlicensed White Space Use</strong><br />
By Dmitriy Tishyevich – Edited by Miriam Weiler</p>
<p>Action by the Federal Communications Commission, by Second Report and Order (FCC 08-260)</p>
<p>On November 4, the Federal Communications Commission unanimously <a href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286566A1.pdf">approved</a> the use of unlicensed wireless devices that operate in “white spaces,” the unused spectrum between licensed broadcast television channels that can be used to provide broadband connectivity and other services similar to Wi-fi. The Commission&#8217;s approval extends to all WSDs that include a geolocation capability and a spectrum-sensing technology that will allow the device to determine what spectrum may be accessed at the particular location.</p>
<p>The decision comes after four years of debate, pitting an alliance of technology companies against parts of the entertainment industry. <a href="http://www.wirelessinnovationalliance.org/index.cfm?objectid=A25E1FC0-F1F6-6035-B3635EA7D5386BE0">Companies</a> such as Microsoft, Google, and Motorola urged the Commission to open the channels for general usage. A coalition comprised of broadcasters, theaters, sports franchises and other cell phone operators opposed the decision, arguing that white space devices (WSDs) operating within the unlicensed spectrum will cause interference in the neighboring licensed channels.</p>
<p>The New York Times, the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7709775.stm">BBC</a> and <a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081104-open-skies-for-white-space-broadband-as-fcc-gives-thumbs-up.html">ars techinca</a> provide a summary of the Commission&#8217;s order. Larry Page, co-founder of Google and proponent of opening up white spaces, <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/vote-for-broadband-in-white-spaces.html">comments</a> on the Commission&#8217;s approval.<span> </span>Andrew Seybold of FierceWireless, the wireless industry&#8217;s daily monitor, <a href="http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/white-spaces-decision-will-haunt-fcc/2008-11-06?utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_source=rss&amp;cmp-id=OTC-RSS-FW0">warns</a> that despite the precautions undertaken by the Commission, the new devices will likely cause interference with current services. TechCrunch <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/04/googles-election-day-victory-fcc-approves-unlicensed-use-of-white-spaces-spectrum/">suggests</a> that Google&#8217;s push for open use of white spaces is part of its strategy to create more connection points for mobile devices, including those powered by Android, the Google mobile device platform.<span id="more-77"></span></p>
<p>In a <a href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286566A2.pdf">statement</a>, FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin called the approval of the use of the white spaces spectrum &#8220;a significant victory for consumers,&#8221; and said that it had the potential to improve wireless broadband connectivity and to bring about new Internet-based products and services. Addressing the concerns voiced by a coalition of broadcasters, who argued that WSDs may disrupt existing services, Chairman Martin noted that the Commission had taken the unusual step of conducting interference testing prior to approval to ensure that these devices could be deployed safely.</p>
<p>He emphasized that prior to entering the market, WSDs will undergo a rigorous certification process, and will be required to use geo-location to demonstrate that they can operate in a particular location without causing interference.</p>
<p>Commissioner Michael J. Copps issued a separate <a href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286566A3.pdf">statement</a>. He observed that few other engineering analyses conducted by the FCC had been as lengthy or as open as the present one, and acknowledged that testing had shown that there was merit in the initial positions argued for by each of the two opposing sides in the debate. Conceding that there can &#8220;never be metaphysical certainty when it comes to interference issues,&#8221; Copps maintained that the geo-location requirement and the testing and certification process the new devices will adequately protect the licensed users of the television band.</p>
<p>In a separate <a href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286566A4.pdf">statement</a>, Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein emphasized the significant potential the approval had for fostering competition and bringing broadband access to rural areas, and said that it will give the United States the opportunity to reclaim its place as a world leader in broadband deployment.</p>
<p>Although Adelstein suggested that in this instance, the Commission may have &#8220;put[] expediency ahead of an open process,&#8221; resulting in &#8220;unnecessary resentment from parties that believe they were not given a fair hearing,&#8221; he said that the independent engineering staff justified the decision on the basis of their expert analysis.</p>
<p>Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate also issued a separate <a href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-286566A5.pdf">statement</a> approving in part and dissenting in part. She recognized that allowing unlicensed use of white spaces would enable the use of entirely new services and devices, but cautioned that it would also pose a real risk of interfering with existing services. She highlighted that the Commission will create a database of existing operations in particular channels and geographic areas that will remain unavailable to unlicensed operators. Requiring providers to verify that channels are available prior to accessing them will ensure that broadcast operations will receive complete protection from interference, according to Tate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/federal-communications-commission/action-by-the-federal-communications-commission-fcc-08-260/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
