Georgia Institute of TechnologyCenter for Advanced Communications Policy
Atlanta SkylineTechnology Square at night

Telecom/IT Policy Highlights

Volume: 7.08
October 2007

Microsoft Word version / October, 2007 TiPH (175kB)

Adobe PDF version / October, 2007 TiPH (109kB)

Contents:
Overview
Legislative Activities
Policy / Regulatory Activities
Judicial Activities
Studies / Reports
Other Activities and Items of Interest
Upcoming Events
Newsletter Info
  • Overview

    This edition of the TIPH focuses on what was an extremely active month for telecommunications and IT policy. On the legislative front, a number of telecom bills were introduced in Congress this past October. Among these is the “Connect America Now Act,” a bill that would establish a program and provide up to $160 million in funding to allow the states to gather data on broadband deployment within their own jurisdictions. This proposed legislation would augment and support current federal efforts in that area. Also of note is the “Proper Forbearance Procedures Act of 2007.” This bill would amend Section 160 of the Communications Act to mandate that the FCC actually grant or deny petitions for forbearance by carriers. Currently, carriers are able to obtain forbearances simply by not having their petitions rejected by the Commission. The aim of this bill is to establish regulatory certainty in this matter. Finally, the “Internet Tax Freedom Amendments Act of 2007” was signed into law this month. The Act mandates that states cannot tax Internet access or related services, such as e-mail or instant messaging, through November 2014.

    The FCC also had a very active month. At its open meeting on October 31st, the Commission adopted several rulemakings that will dramatically change telecommunications policy. First, the FCC banned the use of exclusivity clauses in the provision of video services for apartment buildings and condominiums. Second, the Commission ruled that number portability rules extend to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services. FCC action on this matter means that consumers who move service to or from a VoIP provider will be able to retain their telephone numbers when changing providers. The FCC continues its busy schedule into November, as the Commission will hold its sixth and final public hearing on media ownership issues in Seattle on Friday, November 9th.

    In other news, several court decisions affecting telecommunications were handed down this past month. Most important of these was a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that upholds the FCC’s 2005 Wireline Broadband Order. Also, a U.S. District Court certified a class action lawsuit brought by the National Federation of the Blind against Target Corporation regarding the accessibility of the retailer’s website.


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Legislative Activities

    Broadband Deployment and Data Collection the Focus of House Bill

    10.18.2007 – The “Connect America Now Act” [H.R. 3893] was introduced in the House of Representatives by Reps. Thomas Allen (D-ME) and Michael Michaud (D-ME). The purpose of the bill would be to create a federal grant program to study broadband deployment in the United States. The authors of the bill note the importance of broadband deployment to national competitiveness, as well as business and job growth.

    If passed into law, the “Connect America Now Act” would establish a “State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program,” to be administered through the Department of Commerce. The program would provide grants to support statewide initiatives to identify and track the availability and adoption of broadband services within each state. Grants provided under the proposed program are to have the following purposes: 1) ensure that all citizens and businesses in a state have access to affordable, reliable broadband service; 2) achieve improved technology literacy, increased computer and home broadband use among such citizens and businesses; 3) establish and empower local grassroots technology teams in each state to plan for improved technology use across multiple community sectors; and 4) establish and sustain an environment ripe for broadband services and information technology investment.

    The proposed legislation was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce for further consideration. A copy of the bill may be found at [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.3893:] (HTML format). [Source: Library of Congress]

    Forbearance Petitions Procedure Bill Introduced in House

    10.22.2007 – Reps. John Dingell (D-MI) and Ed Markey (D-MA) have introduced the “Proper Forbearance Procedures Act of 2007” [H.R. 3914] into the House of Representatives. This bill is intended to address a provision of Communications Act [47 U.S.C. § 160(c)] that concerns the petitioning by carriers for forbearances of regulatory compliance. At issue is the phrase “deemed granted” in the Communications Act, which allows a carrier a forbearance if the FCC does not deny the petition for failure to meet the requirements for the forbearance sought. In other words, under the current legislation, the FCC does not have to actually approve a forbearance, but simply refuse to deny a petition for one, in order for a carrier to win its request.

    If passed into law, the Act would strike two sentences from Section 160 of the Communications Act, and replace them with the following: “The Commission shall grant or deny any such petition within one year after the Commission receives it, except that the Commission may extend the one-year period for an additional 90 days if the Commission finds that the extension is necessary to meet the requirements of subsection (a).” This change would end the practice of what the bill’s sponsors call “the granting of regulatory forbearance by default” by providing the forbearance petition process with more regulatory certainty. The bill would mandate the FCC to actually grant or deny petitions, rather than allow them by not actually refusing the requests.

    For a copy of the bill, please see [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.3914:] (HTML format). [Source: Library of Congress]

    Internet Tax Freedom Act Passed into Law

    10.31.2007 – The President has signed into law the “Internet Tax Freedom Amendments Act of 2007” [Public Law No. 110-108]. This new law amends the Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA) [47 U.S.C. § 151, Pub. L. 105-277], which was passed into law in 1998 and provided for a ban on taxation of Internet access by state or local governments. The original ITFA banning Internet access taxes had a duration of three years, and it has been amended several times since then. This latest Act provides for a tax ban of seven years, among other things.

    Specifically, the “Internet Tax Freedom Amendments Act of 2007” does four things. First, it extends until November 1, 2014, the moratorium on state taxation of Internet access and electronic commerce. States with previously enacted Internet tax laws remain exempt from this moratorium through a grandfather clause. Second, the Act restricts the authority of certain states claiming an exemption from the moratorium under the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act of 2004 to impose Internet access taxes after November 1, 2007. Third, the new law expands the definition of "Internet access" to include related communication services (e.g., e-mails and instant messaging) and redefines "telecommunications" to include unregulated non-utility telecommunications (e.g., cable service). Finally, the Act provides a specific exception to the moratorium for certain state business taxes enacted between June 20, 2005, and November 1, 2007, that do not tax Internet access.

    The text of the new law is not yet available from the Government Printing Office. However, a copy of the latest bill may be viewed at [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:6:./temp/~c1101Z0Agf::] (HTML). [Source: Library of Congress]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Policy / Regulatory Activities

    Alleged Access Stimulation Investigated by FCC

    10.02.2007 – The FCC adopted and released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 07-176] and Memorandum Opinion and Order [FCC 07-175] in response to allegations that some local exchange carriers (LECs) have experienced significant increases in access demand, leading to unreasonable access rates. The FCC’s main concerns are the cost and tariffing issues that have resulted from such increases in demand. The Commission has found that chat lines, conference calls, and similar services can generate significant growth in access traffic to LECs from long distance providers, who pay access fees to LECs every time a call is delivered. The fees paid by long distance companies are set at levels designed to recover the costs of providing this access, and these costs, which are regulated by tariffs, or fee schedules, are supposed to be “just and reasonable over time as costs and demand change.” The current action by the FCC is based on a tentative finding that the Commission must change its rules to ensure that these rates remain “just and reasonable,” even if a carrier experiences increased access demand.

    In its NPRM, the FCC is exploring ways to address alleged access stimulation strategies, and it seeks comment on this issue. Some possible approaches include a proposal to require carriers to file revised tariffs if demand increases beyond a certain baseline level. The Commission seeks information about rate-of-return LECs, price-cap LECs, and competitive LECs. In its MO&O, the FCC ruled on a formal complaint filed by Qwest Communications, which alleged that a rural telephone company had violated the Communications Act. The FCC found that the LEC, Farmers and Merchants Mutual Telephone Company of Wayland, Iowa, had earned an excessive rate of return from access demand, but the Commission ruled that Qwest could not recover damages because the Farmers’ tariff at issue was “deemed lawful” under the Act.

    Comments on the NPRM are due within 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, and reply comments are due no later than 45 days after publication. For a copy of the NPRM please see [http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-176A1.txt] (MS Word and PDF versions also available). The MO&O may be found at [http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.txt] (MS Word and PDF versions also available). [Source: FCC]

    Consumer Advisory on DTV Closed Captioning and Converter Boxes

    10.16.2007 – The FCC released a Consumer Advisory regarding the details of closed captioning and digital-to-analog boxes for the viewing of over-the-air broadcasts following the digital television (DTV) transition, to be completed on February 17, 2009. After the transition takes place, consumers who do not have subscription television services will have two options for receiving free, over-the-air broadcast television: 1) they can purchase a digital television capable of receiving the signals, or 2) they may use a digital-to-analog converter box. In 2008, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) will make available $40 coupons, two per household, to help interested consumers pay for converter boxes as part of a national subsidy.

    The FCC’s Consumer Advisory discusses how the converter boxes will work and, more important, whether consumers will be able to receive closed captions after the DTV transition takes place. The Commission assures consumers that its rules require digital-to-analog converter boxes to pass through closed captions. The Advisory goes on to discuss in further detail how consumers can access closed captions through these converter boxes.

    For more information, please see the FCC’s Consumer Advisory at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277165A1.txt] (PDF and MS Word formats also available). [Source: FCC]

    Exclusive Deals for Apartment Video Services Banned by FCC

    10.31.2007 – The FCC adopted a Report and Order [FCC 07-189] that bans exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services to “multiple dwelling units” (MDUs) such as apartment buildings and condominiums. The FCC noted that 30 percent of Americans live in such arrangements, and this proportion is expected to increase in coming years. As a result, the Commission considers its action on this matter to be an attempt to increase competition in the market for the delivery of multichannel programming.

    In its Order, the FCC prohibited the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses, as well as the execution of new ones by multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs), subject to Section 628 of the Communications Act. This section addresses unfair methods of competition or practice to be regulated by the FCC. The Commission argued that such exclusivity clauses can “harm competition and broadband deployment and can insulate the incumbent MVPD from any need to improve its service.” These clauses are widespread in video programming contracts between MVPDs and MDU owners, and the FCC found that incumbent cable operators have increased their use of such exclusivity provisions with the entry of local exchange carriers (LECs) into the video marketplace.

    The FCC also adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which seeks comment on whether the Commission to take action to address exclusivity clauses entered into by DBS providers, private cable operators, and other MVPDs not covered by Section 628. The FCC is also interested in whether it should act to prohibit exclusive marketing and bulk billing arrangements. The Commission has adopted but not yet released its R&O and FNPRM. Comment filing deadlines will be made public once the rulemaking is published in the Federal Register. [Source: FCC]

    Franchising Process for Incumbent Video Providers Subject of FCC Rulemaking

    10.31.2007 – The FCC has adopted but not released a Second Report & Order [FCC 07-190] that extends the Commission’s rules for franchising of video services. The First Report and Order established rules and provided guidance to implement Section 621(a)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, which prohibits franchising authorities from unreasonably refusing to award competitive franchises for the provision of cable services. This Second Report and Order builds on those rules by extending to incumbents rules that were established for new entrants in the First Report and Order.

    Specifically, the FCC has ruled that certain costs, fees, and other compensation required by local franchising authorities must be counted by incumbents toward the statutory five percent cap on franchise fees. Also, many of the FCC’s determinations regarding public, educational, and governmental (PEG) and institutional networks should be extended to incumbents. However, the FCC did find that some policies applied to new entrants in the First Report and Order should not be applicable to incumbent video providers. Among these are the build-out and time limits applied to franchise negotiations. Furthermore, the Commission determined that it cannot preempt local or state cable customer service requirements, nor can it prevent local franchising authorities and cable operators from agreeing to more stringent standards.

    The FCC’s rulemaking on this matter will be applicable 30 days after it is published in the Federal Register, but take effect immediately. The current Order notes that franchise agreements involve contractual obligations; hence, the Order prohibits incumbents from breaching their existing contractual obligations. [Source: FCC]

    Number Portability Expanded by FCC to Include VoIP Services

    10.31.2007 – The FCC has adopted but not yet released a Report & Order, Declaratory Ruling, Order on Remand, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [FCC 07-188] that expands to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) customers the right to retain their phone numbers when changing service providers. The FCC’s rulemaking in this matter stems from numerous complaints the Commission has received from customers about their inability to port their numbers to or from interconnected VoIPs. In its Order, the FCC clarified that telephone companies may not impede number porting by demanding excessive information from the customer’s new provider. Furthermore, the FCC stated that validation for simple number ports should be based on no more than 4 criteria: 1) 10-digit telephone number; 2) customer account number; 3) 5-digit zip code; and 4) pass code, if applicable. In its Notice, the FCC also tentatively concluded that it should require the industry to complete simple ports in 48 hours. The FCC’s Order also ensures that customers of small wireline carriers can port their telephone numbers to wireless carriers. The decision responds to a stay of the Commission’s Intermodal Number Portability Order by the D.C. Circuit Court, which required the FCC to analyze the impact of its requirements on small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    The FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeks comment on additional VoIP numbering issues. Once the adopted NPRM is published in the Federal Register more details, including deadlines for comments and reply comments, will be forthcoming. [Source: FCC]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Judicial Activities

    Accessibility of Retailer Website at Issue in Federal Case

    10.2.2007 – The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has issued a Memorandum and Order in the case of National Federation of the Blind v. Target. This case involves a class action lawsuit brought by the plaintiff, who alleged that Target Corporation’s website violated state and federal laws, most notably the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), that prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities. On February 7, 2006, the NFB sued Target Corporation, claiming that its website violated the California Unruh Civil Rights Act, the California Disabled Persons Act, and the ADA. Target Corporation asked for this case to be dismissed, claiming that its brick and mortar stores are accessible to the blind, and that civil rights laws apply to the accessibility of its stores. However, on September 7, 2006, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ruled that a retailer may be sued if its website is inaccessible to the blind, finding that the ADA prohibits discrimination in the "enjoyment of goods, services, facilities or privileges." Until this ruling, commercial websites were not considered a place of accommodation and were assumed not to fall under the aegis of the ADA.

    In its ruling, the District Court certified the validity of the class action lawsuit brought against Target. In addition, the Court denied Target’s motion for a summary judgment of the charges brought against the retailer. Target contended the class plaintiff suffered no legally cognizable injury and that he failed to meet the nexus requirement for the purposes of his ADA claim. The Court ruled that the class plaintiff had not suffered a legally cognizable injury, but it allowed the substitution of another class plaintiff who did.

    The District Court’s ruling certifies the plaintiff class, and the case remains ongoing. For a copy of the current Memorandum and Order, please see [http://dralegal.org/downloads/cases/target/target-order.txt]. [Sources: U.S. District Court for District of Northern California, Computerworld, and DRA Legal.org]

    Court of Appeals Sides with FCC Regarding Wireline Broadband Order

    10.16.2007 – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit handed down its ruling in Time Warner Telecom v. FCC (Case Nos. 05-4769, 05-5153, 06-1466, and 06-1467), a set of cases seeking review of the FCC’s 2005 Wireline Broadband Order [20 F.C.C.R. 14853]. In its Order, the FCC classified wireline broadband Internet access service as an “information service” rather than “telecommunications.” In doing so, the Order relieved incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) of Title II (under the Communications Act) common carrier regulation of their wireline broadband services. Numerous independent Internet service providers, competing telecommunications providers, cable modem providers, and other groups challenged the authority of the FCC to designate DSL as an “information service.” These stakeholders were generally concerned with the regulatory changes that would occur as a result of the FCC’s Order.

    In this case, the Court of Appeals sided with the FCC by concluding that the Wireline Broadband Order is based on a “reasonable interpretation of the Communications Act of 1934. . .and a proper exercise of agency discretion.” The ruling by the Court of Appeals echoes a similar decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court in National Cable and Telecommunications Association v. Brand X in 2005. In that ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the FCC’s ruling of cable modem Internet service as an “information service.”

    For a copy of the Court of Appeals’ opinion in this case, please see [http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/054769p.pdf] (PDF format only). [Source: 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals]

    Interconnection Agreements and Reciprocal Compensation Addressed in Ruling

    10.17.2006 – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has issued its opinion in Global NAPs. Verizon and Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy (No. 06-2701). At issue was the interpretation of an interconnection agreement between two telecommunications providers, Global NAPs and Verizon New England. Also at stake was whether Verizon owed reciprocal compensation to Global NAPs for the delivery of ISP calls in Massachusetts during the period under consideration.

    Following a ruling of the FCC, the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy determined that the calls in dispute were not local calls that trigger a reciprocal compensation obligation. Unsatisfied within this ruling, Global NAPs took its case to U.S. District Court, but the Court upheld the original decision by the state agency. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision, essentially affirming the decision of the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy and finding in favor of Verizon.

    For a copy of the Court of Appeals’ ruling in this case, please see [http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-2701.01A]. [Source: 1st Circuit Court of Appeals]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Studies / Reports

    High-Speed Internet Access Report Released by FCC

    10.31.2007 – The FCC released its latest data regarding the number of high-speed Internet connections in the U.S. The Commission gathers this information twice a year from facilities-based broadband providers as part of the FCC’s local telephone competition and broadband data gathering program. The FCC’s data concerns two types of high-speed internet connections: “high-speed lines” are defined as connections that deliver services as speeds exceeding 200 kilobits per second (kbps) in at least one direction, while “advanced services lines” deliver services exceeding 200 kbps in both directions.

    According to the FCC’s latest report, high-speed lines increased by 27 percent, from 65.0 million to 82.5 million lines, during the second half of 2006. Of these 82.5 million high-speed lines, the FCC found that 58.2 million served primarily residential end users. Cable modem service provided 53.6 percent of the lines, while asymmetric DSL (ADSL) accounted for 39.1 percent of the lines. Of the remainder, 0.2 percent were symmetric DSL (SDSL), 1.3 percent were fiber connections to the end user premises (“fiber to the home”), and 5.8 percent used miscellaneous technologies such as satellite, terrestrial fixed or mobile wireless, and electric power line.

    Regarding advanced services lines, the FCC found that these connections increased by 17 percent, from 50 million to 59.5 million, during the second half of 2006. Of the 59.5 million advanced services lines, 53.5 million served primarily residential end users. Cable modem service represented 57.7% of these lines, while 35.3% were ADSL connections. Behind these two leaders were SDSL or traditional wireline connections at 0.2 percent, fiber connections to the end user premises at 1.4 percent, other types of technology (satellite, terrestrial fixed or mobile wireless, and electric power line) at 5.4 percent.

    A full copy of the FCC’s report on broadband access may be found at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277784A1.txt] (PDF and MS Word versions also available). [Source: FCC]

    Universal Service Fund Audit, Initial Analysis Released by FCC

    10.3.2007 – The FCC’s Office of Inspector General has released its initial analysis of the audits of the Universal Service Fund (USF), which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) on behalf of the FCC. All of the Commission’s USF programs were audited, including Contributors payments, Low Income, Schools and Libraries, High Cost, and Rural Health Care. The audits were undertaken to determine whether contributions to the USF, and distributions from the Fund, were being made in accordance with the Commission's rules. Another rationale for the audit was to produce data that would provide a basis for statistical estimates of erroneous payment rates as required by the Improper Payments Information Act.

    For the most part, the audits revealed that programs were in compliance with the FCC’s rules. However, erroneous payment rates exceeded nine percent in most USF program segments. An “erroneous payment” is defined by the Office of Management and Budget under to be “any payment that should not have been made or that was made in an incorrect amount under statutory, contractual, administrative, or other legally applicable requirements.” These can include overpayments and underpayments, as well as errors, such as payments made to the incorrect recipient. The audit of the USF programs revealed the following erroneous payments: Contributors payments: 5.5 percent; Low Income: 9.5 percent; Schools and Libraries: 12.9 percent; High Cost Fund: 16.6 percent; and Rural Health Care: 20.6 percent.

    The results of the USF audit may be found at the Office of Inspector General’s homepage [http://www.fcc.gov/oig/]. Separate reports are available for each program category studied. The reports contain statistical analyses of 459 separate audits of USF program participants. [Source: FCC]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Other Activities and Items of Interest

    Article Considers Future of 4G Wireless Standards

    10.29.2007 – An article in BusinessWeek discusses some of the issues for emerging fourth-generation (4G) mobile technologies. The authors of the article begin with the observation that decisions over which technology will run a company’s wireless network set the stage for the success or failure of that company. One such example is the case of Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel, whose predecessors’ decisions to utilize CDMA technologies placed those companies on the path to success in the current 3G era.

    As 3G networks begin to mature, the future of newer, faster 4G technologies is becoming a more prominent issue. Among the major stakeholders identified in the BusinessWeek article are Qualcomm and its investment in Ultra Mobile Broadband (UMB) and its European rivals, which have developed Long Term Evolution (LTE) as their preferred 4G platform. The article weighs the effects of Verizon’s possible decision to abandon its longtime partnership with Qualcomm, in favor of another company’s standard. Analysts contend that a move by Verizon Wireless to LTE or WiMAX could be a major setback for the CDMA family of products, a $43 billion market for handsets and infrastructure dominated by players including Qualcomm, Alcatel-Lucent, LG Electronics, Samsung, and Nortel Networks. Furthermore, Sprint Nextel's decision to use WiMAX and Verizon Wireless' interest in LTE “greatly weaken support for the CDMA road map and shift the focus of technological competition onto LTE and WiMAX,” one analyst contends.

    The article makes the conclusion that the cases of Verizon and other companies illustrate how much the telecom industry could change as a result of choices being made now about 4G wireless technology. For a copy of the BusinessWeek article, please see [http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/oct2007/tc20071027_900612.htm]. [Source: BusinessWeek]


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Upcoming Events

    FCC Hearing on Media Ownership in Seattle

    11.09.2007 – The FCC has announced its sixth and final public hearing on media ownership issues, to be held in Seattle, Washington, on Friday, November 9, 2007. The hearing will take place at the Town Hall Seattle, Great Hall, 1119 Eighth Avenue (at Seneca Street), from 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. (PST). The website for the hearing venue can be accessed at [http://www.townhallseattle.org/greatHall.cfm]. The FCC is conducting this hearing as a way of involving the public in the process of its 2006 Quadrennial Broadcast Media Ownership Review. This hearing is the sixth and final media ownership hearing the Commission intends to hold across the country. Previous FCC public hearings in the current review of media ownership issues were held in Los Angeles, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Chicago, and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. This event is open to the public, and seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. The hearing format will enable members of the public to participate via “open microphone.” In addition, the FCC will provide a live audiocast of the hearing on its website at [http://www.fcc.gov]. The public may also electronically file comments and other documents with the FCC.

    Sign language interpreters and open captioning will be provided for the Seattle hearing.  Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request.  Include a description of the accommodation needed, and include a way we can contact you if we need more information. Please make your request as early as possible. For more information on the hearing, including making requests for accommodations and details on how to file comments, please see the Public Notice at [http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277867A1.txt] (PDF and MS Word formats also available). [Source: FCC]

    IEEE Global Communications Conference 2007

    11.26.2007-11.30.2007 - The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) will be holding its 50th annual Global Communications Conference (IEEE GLOBECOM 2007) in Washington, D.C., on November 26-30, 2007. With the theme of "Innovate, Educate, Accelerate," this 5-day conference will incorporate an Expo and Communications Industry Forum featuring an Access Business Forum, Design and Developers Forum, Tutorials and Workshops, along with a technical program consisting of a General Symposium, 9 Technical Symposia, and other programs. IEEE GLOBECOM 2007 will cover a broad range of topics, including presentations on communication theory, Internet protocol, multimedia communications, software and services optical networks and systems, wireless communications, and wireless networking.

    For more details, including registration and hotel information, please visit the conference website at [http://www.ieee-globecom.org/2007/].


    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE
  • Newsletter Info

    Center for Advanced Communications Policy
    Telecom/IT Policy Highlights Volume 7.08
    October 2007
    Nathan W Moon, Editor

    Telecom/IT Policy Highlights presents legislative, regulatory, legal, and other items of interest pertinent to information, telecommunications, and related technology policy and research. For additional information regarding the information provided in this report, or if there are newsworthy items that should be included in future editions, please contact , Research Specialist , or , Director of Research and Editor in Chief.
    BACK TO TOP OF PAGE