The scope of the FTC’s proposed study of patent assertion entities is “far broader than necessary to serve the proper performance of the functions of the FTC,” said InterDigital in a filing to the FTC released Wednesday (http://1.usa.gov/1ho7tkd). The FTC voted in September to begin exploring a proposed PAE study, which it would launch using its authority under Section 6(b) of the FTC Act (CD Sept 30 p15). InterDigital said it doesn’t believe it’s a PAE as the FTC defined it in its study proposal, though many of the company’s critics have defined it as one. The FTC defined PAEs as “firms with a business model based primarily on purchasing patents and then attempting to generate revenue” by asserting their intellectual property rights “against persons who are already practicing the patented technologies.” Intellectual property groups and other companies often defined as PAEs also expressed significant concerns with the proposed study.
Jimm Phillips
Jimm Phillips, Associate Editor, covers telecommunications policymaking in Congress for Communications Daily. He joined Warren Communications News in 2012 after stints at the Washington Post and the American Independent News Network. Phillips is a Maryland native who graduated from American University. You can follow him on Twitter: @JLPhillipsDC
A fatal Metro-North Railroad crash in New York City this month renewed public awareness about implementation of the positive train control safety system, but PTC stakeholders told us they don’t believe the crash will ultimately change the dynamics of the technology’s implementation at the FCC and other agencies. The Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, which required railroads to implement PTC communications systems, gives nearly all responsibility for implementing PTC to the Department of Transportation and the Federal Railroad Administration, said an FCC official. But the FCC has been facilitating the deployment of some PTC technologies because they involve spectrum, said an official there.
The debate over legislation targeting so-called abusive patent litigation officially shifted to the Senate Tuesday, as patent stakeholders testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the Patent Transparency and Improvements Act (S-1720) and other bills that would address aspects of the issue. Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said S-1720 takes “significant steps to address the problem of patent trolls and misuse of the patent system,” but is also “balanced and targeted to preserve the rights of legitimate patent holders whose inventions help drive our economy.” Committee ranking member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said it’s important the Senate address patent litigation because it’s a threat to the U.S. patent system, in particular noting the effects of “deceptively evasive demand letters.”
The Senate must “push the envelope even further” on curbing abusive patent litigation than the House did when it passed the Innovation Act (HR-3309) earlier this month, said Application Developers Alliance President Jon Potter Monday during a CEA-sponsored Google Hangout session. The Senate Judiciary Committee is to begin considering the Patent Transparency and Improvements Act (S-1720) at a hearing Tuesday. The bill, introduced by committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, mirrors some portions of HR-3309 but draws more heavily from legislative recommendations from the White House. The bill does not include provisions on fee-shifting or changes to discovery rules for patent cases -- two items that drew criticism from some opponents during the debate in the House (CD Dec 6 p11). The Senate bill would also give the FTC the authority to take action against patent assertion entities that send deceptive demand letters. The Senate should particularly focus on stays on patent lawsuits against end-users and provisions that would improve patent quality during the review process at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Potter said Monday. Tuesday’s hearing will shape the Senate debate, but so will the opinions of constituents who will speak with their senators over the holidays, Potter said. Opponents of HR-3309 argued that the bill would hurt small businesses -- something Engine Advocacy co-founder Mike McGeary called “false.” The debate over possible legislation has brought together advocates “from all walks of life,” with a majority of them coming from small businesses, he said. Despite the criticism, the House passed HR-3309 with a bipartisan majority, which itself was a “clear signal to the Senate that the time for action is now,” McGeary said. “This is something that can’t wait for another election cycle.”
The National Institute of Standards and Technology-facilitated Cybersecurity Framework, as currently constructed, “will not stop attacks by advanced threat actors using sophisticated tactics such as exploiting previously unknown vulnerabilities (zero-day attacks) or using never seen before malware,” said Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., in comments filed with NIST last week. NIST had solicited public input on the preliminary version of the framework, which the agency released in late October (CD Oct 23 p1). That feedback will aid the agency and industry partners as they ready a final version of the framework for release in February. Comments were due Friday.
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s staff was negotiating with the wireless industry Wednesday over a possible deal to allow cellphone unlocking, but they hadn’t agreed on acceptable terms as of the afternoon, said agency and industry officials in interviews. Wheeler was hoping to reach agreement in time to disclose it at the FCC’s monthly meeting Thursday, a commission official said. The meeting was already set to include a presentation from staff about efforts to promote cellphone unlocking. An FCC spokesman declined to comment, referring us to Wheeler’s earlier statements on the issue. Wheeler has been pushing wireless carriers to voluntarily allow unlocking through the CTIA Consumer Code -- something that industry observers have seen as being likely to take place in the face of possible government regulation (CD Nov 18 p1).
AT&T “would be supportive of rules around the [broadcast incentive] auction that would limit the amount of spectrum any one company could garner,” as long as “everyone is bound” to those rules, CEO Randall Stephenson said Tuesday at a UBS investor conference. “That seems like a reasonable place for us. ... The more restrictions you begin to put on the auction participants, the more it drives the value down and the more risk you have of a failed auction.”
The FCC should move ahead with its plan for a three-tiered framework for managing users on the 3.5 GHz band, Verizon Communications said in a filing Friday. The FCC has proposed managing spectrum sharing on the band through the Spectrum Access System. The Priority Access Licenses-based framework would give incumbent government users the highest tier of access, followed by a tier for priority access licensees and a lower tier for general access users.
The House approved the Innovation Act (HR-3309) Thursday on a 325-91 vote, confirming expectations that the bill would pass (CD Dec 5 p7). Majorities from both parties voted for both the final bill and a manager’s amendment from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., that made technical changes to the bill’s language. The 130 Democrats who voted for the final bill did so despite continued opposition led by two leading House Judiciary Democrats. HR-3309’s supporters were able to vote down most -- but not all -- amendments Thursday that would have fundamentally changed the bill, which if enacted would curb what it terms abusive patent litigation. The bill would aid the U.S. patent system, which was “never intended to be a playground for litigation extortion and frivolous claims,” Goodlatte said.
The House Rules Committee voted Tuesday to move forward eight of 26 submitted amendments to the Innovation Act (HR-3309) for full House consideration, in a bid to streamline consideration of the bill. Proponents say the measure would address abusive patent litigation. The cleared amendments included a bill manager’s amendment from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., which would make technical changes to the wording of the bill passed out of House Judiciary last month (CD Nov 22 p13). House Rules also cleared a “Democratic substitute” version of HR-3309, contained in an amendment by House Judiciary ranking member John Conyers, D-Mich., and Intellectual Property Subcommittee ranking member Mel Watt, D-N.C. Industry stakeholders told us they believe HR-3309 has a very good chance of passing the House, though the level of support it might receive from each party remained unclear Wednesday.