When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai axed numerous bureau inquiries and actions earlier this month without prior notice or explanation (see 1702030058 and 1702030070), he was well within his rights under the Administrative Procedures Act, APA and communications law experts tell us. Ending inquiries into issues like zero rating effectively signals taking a different enforcement direction without having to go through a process of eliminating those rules -- an approach numerous agencies under the Trump administration likely will take, some said.
When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai axed numerous bureau inquiries and actions earlier this month without prior notice or explanation (see 1702030058 and 1702030070), he was well within his rights under the Administrative Procedures Act, APA and communications law experts tell us. Ending inquiries into issues like zero rating effectively signals taking a different enforcement direction without having to go through a process of eliminating those rules -- an approach numerous agencies under the Trump administration likely will take, some said.
No disruptive gap in privacy oversight will result if Congress goes forward with GOP plans to kill FCC ISP privacy rules, industry officials representing ISPs told us. They point to Section 222 of the Communications Act as the backstop authority that would give the FCC a role even without the specific rules in place anymore, with an expectation that the FTC eventually would replace that FCC oversight role after later changes to broadband classification. Defenders of the FCC’s rules said both agencies should remain cops on the privacy beat and questioned whether the scenario would play out so neatly. Democratic FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeny and House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., jointly pressed for maintaining the FCC rules.
No disruptive gap in privacy oversight will result if Congress goes forward with GOP plans to kill FCC ISP privacy rules, industry officials representing ISPs told us. They point to Section 222 of the Communications Act as the backstop authority that would give the FCC a role even without the specific rules in place anymore, with an expectation that the FTC eventually would replace that FCC oversight role after later changes to broadband classification. Defenders of the FCC’s rules said both agencies should remain cops on the privacy beat and questioned whether the scenario would play out so neatly. Democratic FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeny and House Commerce Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., jointly pressed for maintaining the FCC rules.
Paice and the Abell Foundation filed a Section 337 complaint at the International Trade Commission on Feb. 2, alleging Ford is importing hybrid vehicles that infringe its patents. Paice, which says it invented many of the most important technologies used in hybrid cars today, alleges it worked closely with Ford for years before Ford broke the business relationship “after learning everything it needed” and used the technology in its hybrid cars without a license. Paice and Abell, a Baltimore charity that co-owns the patents, recently settled a similar Section 337 case with Volkswagen. Paice and Abell seek a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order banning importation and sale of infringing hybrid cars. The ITC is asking for comments by Feb. 16 (here) on public interest issues raised by the complaint.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 30 - Feb. 5:
The Irish High Court Tuesday will begin hearing a case involving Facebook's use of standard contractual clauses (SCCs) that could potentially have ramifications for EU-U.S. trade and the privacy rights of European citizens. In a move similar to the challenge against safe harbor, the Office of the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) is questioning whether SCCs, which many companies use to transfer people's personal data across the Atlantic, provide adequate protection of information (see 1607060009). Tuesday's hearing will focus on whether the court should refer the case on the validity of SCCs to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Several experts Monday said they expect the case will be heard by the EU's high court.
The Irish High Court Tuesday will begin hearing a case involving Facebook's use of standard contractual clauses (SCCs) that could potentially have ramifications for EU-U.S. trade and the privacy rights of European citizens. In a move similar to the challenge against safe harbor, the Office of the Irish Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) is questioning whether SCCs, which many companies use to transfer people's personal data across the Atlantic, provide adequate protection of information (see 1607060009). Tuesday's hearing will focus on whether the court should refer the case on the validity of SCCs to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Several experts Monday said they expect the case will be heard by the EU's high court.
Kudelski and affiliates OpenTV, Nagra and Nagravision filed a complaint Jan. 26 at the International Trade Commission, seeking a Tariff Act Section 337 investigation into patent infringement by set-top boxes and remote controls imported for use with Comcast cable services. Kudelski said Arris is making set-top boxes and Universal Electronics is making voice-enabled remote controls that infringe its patents. After import, the set-tops and remote controls are used with Comcast’s Xfinity X1 service, the complaint said. Kudelski seeks a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders banning the import, sale and lease of infringing devices by Comcast, Arris and Universal Electronics. The ITC is seeking comments by Feb. 9, it said in Wednesday's Federal Register. Comcast disagrees with "Kudelski’s allegations and we will vigorously defend the cases," emailed a spokeswoman for the cable company.
Kudelski and affiliates OpenTV, Nagra and Nagravision filed a complaint Jan. 26 at the International Trade Commission, seeking a Tariff Act Section 337 investigation into patent infringement by set-top boxes and remote controls imported for use with Comcast cable services. Kudelski said Arris is making set-top boxes and Universal Electronics is making voice-enabled remote controls that infringe its patents. After import, the set-tops and remote controls are used with Comcast’s Xfinity X1 service, the complaint said. Kudelski seeks a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders banning the import, sale and lease of infringing devices by Comcast, Arris and Universal Electronics. The ITC is seeking comments by Feb. 9, it said in Wednesday's Federal Register. Comcast disagrees with "Kudelski’s allegations and we will vigorously defend the cases," emailed a spokeswoman for the cable company.