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.
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.
Wi-Fi advocates told the FCC it shouldn’t make changes to its rules for high-frequency spectrum that would be detrimental to unlicensed use of the bands. Microsoft, Public Knowledge and the Open Technology Institute and the Wi-Fi Alliance were among those weighing in. In December, wireless carriers sought changes (see 1612150067). Oppositions to the recon petitions were due at the FCC Tuesday in docket 14-177. Wireless industry commenters, meanwhile, opposed satellite industry petitions asking for the FCC to give fixed satellite service (FSS) downlink spectrum in the 42 GHz band and for less stringent rules on locating earth stations (see 1612160019).
Wi-Fi advocates told the FCC it shouldn’t make changes to its rules for high-frequency spectrum that would be detrimental to unlicensed use of the bands. Microsoft, Public Knowledge and the Open Technology Institute and the Wi-Fi Alliance were among those weighing in. In December, wireless carriers sought changes (see 1612150067). Oppositions to the recon petitions were due at the FCC Tuesday in docket 14-177. Wireless industry commenters, meanwhile, opposed satellite industry petitions asking for the FCC to give fixed satellite service (FSS) downlink spectrum in the 42 GHz band and for less stringent rules on locating earth stations (see 1612160019).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 23-29:
CBP provided further guidance on documents that may be required when it reviews duty-free claims under subheading 9801.00.10, in a CSMS message (here). In a change enacted by the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, products of the U.S. returned within any time frame after having been exported, or products of other countries returned within three years after having been exported, and not advanced in value or improved in condition, are eligible for duty-free treatment (see 1603010043). Previously products of the U.S. were also subject to the three-year time limit.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Jan. 23-27 in case they were missed.
Qualcomm is likely to still face multiple tough legal challenges to the company’s licensing of its patents for baseband processors used in cellphones and other products, even if a new forthcoming Republican majority FTC chooses to reverse course on its antitrust complaint, said industry and public interest lawyers in interviews. The FTC claimed in a complaint filed this month that Qualcomm “engaged in exclusionary conduct that taxes its competitors' baseband processor sales, reduces competitors' ability and incentive to innovate, and raises prices paid by consumers for cell phones and tablets” (see 1701170065). Apple filed a lawsuit last Monday seeking $1 billion in damages on claims Qualcomm overcharged the smartphone manufacturer “billions of dollars” for patent licenses (see 1701230067).