1. Monthly archive
  2. May 2015

May 2015

NAB: FCC Showing 'Unfounded Favoritism' in Auction

The National Association of Broadcasters may be OK with the Federal Communications Commission's early 2016 broadcast incentive auction time frame and supportive of a successful auction for all parties, but it still argues that the FCC is showing "unfounded favoritism for wireless and unlicensed operations over TV broadcasting," effectively treating full power TV stations "as mere obstacles to be cleared out of the way as soon as possible after the auction, regardless of the feasibility of transitioning to a new channel..."

That is according to comments filed by NAB on how the FCC should define "commencement of operations" and how it should not be in such a hurry to displace broadcasters in the station repack following the auction. NAB argues that the FCC's approach to low-powers and translators is the right one, allowing them to remain on the air until a wireless company has begun site commissioning tests (rather than simply signaling its intent to do so). But NAB says that should be the same for full-powers and class As, rather than the current hard 39-month deadline.

FCC chairman's pick for next president? Hillary

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler tipped his hand on who he believes will be the next president: Hillary Clinton. When asked if the 69-year-old Chairman would consider serving another term under the next President, Chairman Wheeler replied to applause and laughter: "She hasn't asked me." "I'll be 71 when I leave this job. So I may just play with the grandkids," Chairman Wheeler said about his plans after he leaves the FCC. It would be no surprise for Chairman Wheeler, a Democrat, to give his tacit endorsement to Clinton, who is the strong favorite to win the Democratic nomination. An aide to Chairman Wheeler clarified, however, that his comments were not an official endorsement and were made in jest.

Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina joins Republican presidential fray

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina is running for President, and judging by her own website and her brief history in politics, her time at the computer maker will play a major role in that bid.

Fiorina announced the news on her Twitter account and on ABC's "Good Morning America" on May 4th. In a video posted to her Twitter account, she said that she's seeking the Republican nomination for President because she believes the US "is at a pivotal point." She is notable in part for being the first (and perhaps only) former technology executive to enter the 2016 race for the White House. She joins a growing number of Republican candidates, including Sens Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL), all vying first for the party's nomination and eventually to compete against the Democratic nominee, widely expected at this early date to be former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. On her "Carly for President" website, Fiorina takes a dig at Clinton, saying "Our founders never intended us to have a professional political class. ... We know that the only way to reimagine our government is to reimagine who is leading it." In 2010, Fiorina, who has never held elective office, ran for a US Senate seat in California against incumbent Sen Barbara Boxer (D-CA). After a bitter fight that saw Fiorina's tenure at HP heavily criticized by Sen Boxer, the former CEO won just 42 percent of the vote.

Carly Fiorina really should have bought CarlyFiorina.org

The race for President has a new candidate: Carly Fiorina, former chief executive of Hewlett-Packard. But while Fiorina is a former tech head -- and therefore presumably savvy in the ways of the Web -- her campaign didn't manage to snap up a major site for its candidate: CarlyFiorina.org. Instead, the site was registered by someone who is bringing up Fiorina's controversial tenure at HP.

“Carly Fiorina failed to register this domain," the site says. "So I'm using it to tell you how many people she laid off at Hewlett-Packard." That's followed by 30,000 frowny faces. Web site-squatting has become a fairly common form of protest against candidates. Given that domain names can be purchased quite easily, and that there are many options to choose from, it's a cost-effective way to embarrass candidates (or presumptive candidates) publicly for a lack of forethought and to get one's message across. For example, "jebbushforpresident.com" is famously owned by a gay couple who use it to foster discussions about sexual orientation, identity and politics. The owner of CarlyFiorina.org isn't quite as clear in his or her motivations and did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The directory record for the site points to a service that protects the privacy of Web site owners, which obscures CarlyFiorina.org's owner's identity. But the site's owner clearly has a grudge to bear against Fiorina.

Carly Fiorina's troubling telecom past

[Oct 2010] Carly Fiorina's had a three-year run as a top executive at Lucent Technologies. Lucent reported a stream of great results beginning in 1996, after Fiorina, who had been a vice-president at AT&T, helped oversee the company’s spin-off from Ma Bell. By the time she left to run HP in 1999 revenues were up 58 percent, to $38 billion. Net income went from a small loss to $4.8 billion profit. Giddy investors bid up Lucent’s stock 10-fold. And unlike HP, where Fiorina instituted large layoffs -- a fact Sen Barbara Boxer (D-CA) loves to mention whenever possible -- Lucent added 22,000 jobs during Fiorina’s tenure. Dig under the surface, however, and the story grows more complicated and less flattering.

The Lucent that Fiorina walked away from, taking with her $65 million in performance-linked pay, was not at all what it appeared. Nor were several of her division’s biggest sales, including the giant PathNet deal. Whatever the exact extent of Fiorina’s role, Lucent was soon sucked in deep, making big loans to sketchy customers. In an SEC document filed just after Fiorina’s departure, the company revealed that it had $7 billion in loan commitments to customers -- many of them financially unstable start-ups building all manner of new networks -- of which Lucent had dispensed $1.6 billion. Such vendor financing deals would have much the same impact on the telecommunications industry that sub-prime mortgages eventually had on the housing industry. In both cases public companies extended loans to customers who were gambling that the good times would keep rolling (and who were especially glad to make those bets with the lenders’ money). In both cases the loans helped puff up lenders’ short-term financial results and stock prices. In both cases the market inevitably turned and the pile of debt collapsed. (PathNet, after taking on another slug of vendor debt from Nortel, filed for bankruptcy protection in 2001 as the industry collapsed.)

Double spammy

By now, it shouldn’t be news. Using illegal spam and bogus news sites to convey false claims for diet products is bound to attract Federal Trade Commission attention. Oh, and did we mention the phony representation that the products were endorsed by Oprah and the people on the TV show "The Doctors"?

Those are just some of the allegations in a case the FTC has filed against Glendale (CA)-based Sale Slash, Purists Choice, Artur Babayan, and Vahe Haroutounian. How does the operation work? The defendants peddle a host of weight loss products which supposedly contain stuff like green coffee, garcinia cambogia, and “Premium White Kidney Bean Extract.” According to the complaint, one way they market the products is by misappropriating people’s e-mail contacts lists. The defendants send -- or hire affiliates to send -- unsolicited messages that look to the recipients to be from friends, family members, or other contacts. To add to the authenticity, the heading often includes the purported sender’s name, reinforcing the impression that the e-mail is from someone the recipient knows. The messages include glowing recommendations of the products, with linksto where consumers can buy them. A federal judge in California entered a temporary restraining order that freezes the defendants' assets. But even at this early stage, the lawsuit sends four messages to marketers:

  • The FTC’s CAN-SPAM Rule draws clear lines between acceptable promotion and deceptive practices. Time for a refresher? Read CAN-SPAM Act: A Compliance Guide for Business.
  • No diet, no exercise? No way. Making bogus weight loss claims could win you a one-way ticket to the center of the FTC’s law enforcement radar screen.
  • Affiliate arrangements won’t insulate wrongdoers from liability. The FTC has taken action -- and will continue to take action -- against multiple links in the affiliate chain responsible for alleged violations of the law.
  • Advertisers like to drop prominent names because they attract the attention of prospective buyers. But if celebrity endorsements are false, guess who else’s attention they attract: The FTC’s.

Why We Need Federal Legislation To Protect Public Speech Online

Imagine that a patient has endured a terrible visit to the dentist. Disturbed by the ordeal, she goes online and posts a review, providing a factual account of her experience as a warning to future patients. Soon after, the patient receives a letter from the dentist’s lawyer threatening legal action if she does not immediately take down the post. Scared that she may have done something wrong, and worried about the cost of going to court, the patient quickly deletes her review. Not only has this patient had her voice unfairly silenced, but many potential patients will not be able to benefit from her experience to choose a better dentist. The type of lawsuit this patient is being threatened with has come to be known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or SLAPP, a term coined in the 1980s by two University of Denver law professors. A SLAPP effectively censors public speech by invoking the court system to intimidate critics. Faced with the time and attorney’s fees involved in defending against such a lawsuit, the easier path for a defendant often is to retract an unflattering statement about a merchant or service provider, even if the statement is true.

This paper provides an overview of the many ways in which SLAPPs are being used, and it explains how they undermine constitutional rights and harm the public interest. The paper then analyzes the existing patchwork of state-level legal protections against SLAPP claims and concludes it is insufficient. To remedy the problem, ITIF recommends that Congress pass a federal anti-SLAPP law that creates a baseline level of protection for citizens’ basic rights of petition and free expression.

Institute of Museum and Library Services
Tuesday, May 19, 2015
9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. EST
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-04-29/pdf/2015-10114.pdf

Agenda

I. Welcome
II. Financial Update
III. Partnership Update
IV. Office of Museum Services Update and Program
V. Office of Library Services Update and Program
VI. Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation Update


Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
10:15 a.m. -- 4:45 p.m. Eastern Standard Time
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-04-29/pdf/2015-09988.pdf

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board will hold a public meeting to examine the historical background, constitutional implications, and oversight of counterterrorism activities conducted under the Executive Order on United States Intelligence Activities (Executive Order 12333). The public meeting will inform the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board’s oversight of and advice pertinent to such activities.

Agenda
10:15 a.m. Doors Open.
10:30 a.m. Opening Remarks.
10:45 a.m. Session 1: Separation of Powers and the History of E.O. 12333.
12:15 p.m. Lunch on your own.
1:15 p.m. Session 2: First and Fourth Amendment Implications of E.O. 12333 Activities: The Impact of New Technologies.
2:45 p.m. Break.
3:00 p.m. Session 3: E.O. 12333 in Practice.
4:30 p.m. Closing remarks.


President Bernie Sanders Would Dismantle NSA Spying

Quietly -- at least relative to his wonk-laden sermons on economic populism -- Sen Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has for years also been one of the Senate's fiercest critics of the National Security Agency's secretive surveillance operations. And, unlike Hillary Clinton, he's been remarkably clear about where he stands. The Vermont independent, who officially announced his White House bid on April 30, is widely viewed by Beltway types as more of a debate-stage prop to bounce liberal ideas off Clinton on her march toward an inevitable Democratic primary victory. But while progressives are hopeful he can serve as an Elizabeth Warren surrogate and challenge Clinton on Wall Street reform, Sen Sanders' candidacy also offers an opportunity to force Clinton to talk more concretely about domestic surveillance -- something he has not minced words about since the Edward Snowden disclosures began in 2013.

"Kids will grow up knowing that every damn thing that they do is going to be recorded some place in a file, and I think that will have a very Orwellian and very inhibiting impact on the way we live our lives," Sen Sanders said just days after the initial batch of Snowden files emerged. "I want our law enforcement people to be vigorous in going after terrorists. But I happen to believe they can do that without disregarding the Constitution of the United States or the civil liberties of the American people." In 2014, Sen Sanders sent a probing letter to Gen. Keith Alexander, then the head of the spy agency, demanding the answer to "one simple question": Has the NSA spied on members of Congress or other elected officials? (The answer, which came later: Probably.) "I am deeply concerned about recent revelations that the National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies are collecting enormous amounts of information about phone calls that Americans make, e-mails that we send, and websites that we visit," Sen Sanders wrote then. "In my view, these actions are clearly unconstitutional."

© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.