Customs Duty

A little-noticed antipretexting bill was among consumer bills that House Commerce Committee Chmn. Dingell (D-Mich.) unveiled last week. The bill focuses on carriers’ duty to guard data, rather than sanctions against violators. Last Congress a similar effort stalled over legal implications for a National Security Agency warrantless surveillance program.

The U.S. is “concerned” that some World Trade Organization members no longer guarantee duty-free treatment of some products covered by the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), it said in a paper filed Fri. at an ITA Committee meeting. The U.S. understands that duties as high as 14% could be applied to imports of these ITA products, commonly used by millions, and many produced in and exported from developing countries, it said. Exports were valued as high as $154 billion in 2005, the U.S. said. Duties on such products should continue to be removed from WTO member customs schedules, the U.S. said. The products include set- top boxes with a communication function, flat-panel displays, digital still image video cameras, and automatic data processing machines that “traditionally include input/output devices such as printers and optical scanners,” the U.S. said. The U.S. filed the paper at an informal meeting of the WTO Information Technology Agreement Committee meeting.

Bills filed in the 2007 state legislatures are taking on video franchising reform, state commission regulatory authority, broadband service and the perennial topic of wireless phone use while driving.

The DoJ, DHS and FBI support NTT DoCoMo’s $72 million buy of Guam Cellular & Paging, now that the companies have agreed to address national security and public safety issues, they said. In June, the agencies asked the FCC to delay approval of the merger until their concerns could be addressed. The agreement defines DoCoMo’s responsibility to guard customer records, bar illegal surveillance of customer calls and other duties, they said in an FCC filing.

The FCC should use its biennial review to eliminate rules that “jeopardize the development… of next generation IP-enabled ‘all distance’ services,” Verizon said in comments filed with the agency. The FCC asked for views on rules to be eliminated in a review that the Telecom Act requires every 2 years. The Act requires the agency to see which regulations no longer serve a purpose, particularly in light of competition.

Clear rules on reimbursements for telecom surveillance activities should apply to law enforcement, the German Assn. for Information Technology, Telecom & New Media (BITKOM) said. In the 2004 German telecom law, the German parliament approved reimbursement of surveillance costs. Despite an ever-rising number of intercepted communications of fixed network and mobile phone calls, as well as e-mail and Internet traffic, reimbursement rules aren’t done. Telecom companies come under the general compensation accorded witnesses -- 17 per hour - which doesn’t cover costs, BITKOM said. German companies have to buy surveillance technology, a disadvantage in competing with telcos in nations like Austria, where a court ruled the govt. has to buy the snooping gear. Against BITKOM’s campaign for better reimbursement is arrayed the Federal Council of Germany, representing Germany’s provinces and urging telcos to “exercise their duties as citizens in testifying.” BITKOM wants the state to pay 250 to set up, change or renew an interception; 30 a day for protocols; 130 to hand over a day of simple data traffic analysis and 10 each additional day; 500 to analyze who contacted a suspect; 200 per case for location data; and 300 the first 5 min. and 30 every 5 min. after to analyze traffic in a special radio cell. A set of customer data would cost public authorities 25. BITKOM wants its price list to apply to all interception orders no matter what their legal basis. Not paying would violate the German constitution, warned BITKOM, since public safety and law enforcement are govt.’s duty. Industry helps govt., but the costs of this public task must to be borne by the govt., BITKOM said: “Nobody would tell the automobile industry to deliver police cars for free as part of their citizen’s duty.”

COO Len Lauer’s departure at Sprint was spurred by the company’s lagging performance, according to industry analysts, and skepticism is high about a short-term turnaround now that CEO Gary Forsee is pulling double duty.

The National Security Agency is violating the U.S. Constitution by monitoring phone calls and e-mails without warrants, and must stop, a federal judge in Detroit ruled Thurs. in what the ACLU called “a sharp rebuke to the Bush administration.” U.S. Dist. Judge Anna Taylor said NSA’s program “violates the APA [Administrative Procedures Act], the Separation of Powers doctrine, the First and Fourth Amendments of the United States Constitution and the statutory law,” including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

The ACLU asked the Mich. PSC to investigate allegations that AT&T, Verizon and other phone companies were illegally sharing customers’ private call records with the National Security Agency (NSA) as part of national antiterror surveillance. The ACLU said it acted on behalf of 7 Mich. phone customers who were concerned that their lawful private dealings were being exposed to govt. scrutiny. The ACLU said the PSC has a duty to ensure that privacy rules have been obeyed, to protect Mich. telephone customers from unlawful govt. intrusions on their privacy. Verizon repeatedly has denied sharing information with the NSA, but its formal response to complaints like this has been that it’s not free to discuss the matter. AT&T has consistently refused to confirm or deny any involvement with the NSA or other intelligence agencies, citing national security secrets. The U.S. govt. in other states has intervened to block state action on this type of complaint, citing danger to national security.

Substantive reactions to NTIA proposals for running the $1.5 billion DTV converter box subsidy program (CED July 25 p1) likely will have to await a Sept. 25 deadline for comments in the rulemaking, published Tues. in the Federal Register. The clue is the scant reaction so far among industry watchers, who say they've pored over the report, finding few surprises.