The FCC will start a proceeding on foreign broadcast ownership, in the wake of Monday evening's OK of Pandora's request it be allowed to exceed a 25 percent threshold (see 1505040065). Amid Republican commissioners' concern about the almost two-year process that led up to the declaratory ruling, industry lawyers expect the agency to begin a rulemaking soon on the waiver process for radio and TV stations. It may be an NPRM, said Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council senior adviser David Honig.

The FCC, as promised at its April open meeting, sought comment on the future of LTE-unlicensed, a technology that carriers are looking to deploy in the 3.5 GHz and other unlicensed bands. When the FCC approved an order on the 3.5 GHz shared spectrum band, Chairman Tom Wheeler promised a public notice on LTE-U, also known as licensed assisted access (LAA), was also on its way (see 1504170055). The PN was released Tuesday by the Wireless Bureau and Office of Engineering and Technology. Comments are due June 11, replies June 26.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., wrote President Barack Obama asking whether the recent data breach on the White House information system compromised Americans’ personally identifiable information (PII), said a Thune news release Sunday. Thune, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, wrote in Thursday's letter that the “malicious cyber intrusion on the unclassified computer system of the White House, attributed to Russian hackers,” allowed access to a “great deal of sensitive information such as schedules, policy discussion, and e-mails you sent and received, including exchanges with ambassadors,” and Americans' PII. To enter the White House for an official business meeting, tour or social function, an individual “must submit his or her date of birth, social security number, gender, country of birth, citizenship and place of residence,” Thune said. Since the information is usually emailed, Thune said he was concerned “this recent incident may have exposed the personally identifiable information of many individuals and they may, as yet, be unaware of their vulnerability.” Just "like any entity that handles personally-identifiable information, the White House has a responsibility to notify Americans if the recent, or any future breach, results in a compromise,” said Thune. “If such information has been lost, the White House still has a responsibility to victims even if it believes the hack was perpetrated by foreign spies and not cyber thieves.” Reports of increased attacks on executive branch departments and agencies “raise serious questions” whether they're “adequately prepared to address vulnerabilities and protect sensitive information,” Thune said. He asked the White House to respond to questions by May 15: whether the cyber incident resulted in the access or loss of PII; if yes, whether the White House notified those affected in a manner consistent with Office of Management and Budget policy, the Privacy Act and Obama’s "recommended direction to business entities under [his] data breach notification legislative proposal”; steps the White House took protect against similar incidents; and what policies the White House has to ensure individuals are notified when PII is compromised. The White House had no immediate comment.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., wrote President Barack Obama asking whether the recent data breach on the White House information system compromised Americans’ personally identifiable information (PII), said a Thune news release Sunday. Thune, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, wrote in Thursday's letter that the “malicious cyber intrusion on the unclassified computer system of the White House, attributed to Russian hackers,” allowed access to a “great deal of sensitive information such as schedules, policy discussion, and e-mails you sent and received, including exchanges with ambassadors,” and Americans' PII. To enter the White House for an official business meeting, tour or social function, an individual “must submit his or her date of birth, social security number, gender, country of birth, citizenship and place of residence,” Thune said. Since the information is usually emailed, Thune said he was concerned “this recent incident may have exposed the personally identifiable information of many individuals and they may, as yet, be unaware of their vulnerability.” Just "like any entity that handles personally-identifiable information, the White House has a responsibility to notify Americans if the recent, or any future breach, results in a compromise,” said Thune. “If such information has been lost, the White House still has a responsibility to victims even if it believes the hack was perpetrated by foreign spies and not cyber thieves.” Reports of increased attacks on executive branch departments and agencies “raise serious questions” whether they're “adequately prepared to address vulnerabilities and protect sensitive information,” Thune said. He asked the White House to respond to questions by May 15: whether the cyber incident resulted in the access or loss of PII; if yes, whether the White House notified those affected in a manner consistent with Office of Management and Budget policy, the Privacy Act and Obama’s "recommended direction to business entities under [his] data breach notification legislative proposal”; steps the White House took protect against similar incidents; and what policies the White House has to ensure individuals are notified when PII is compromised. The White House had no immediate comment.

ISPs likely will follow many net neutrality rules, even if February's FCC order (see 1504100046) is overturned by a court or overridden by Congress, said two lawyers on different sides of the issue. The order's prohibition on blocking or throttling likely will be followed by broadband providers even absent rules, said Center for Democracy & Technology General Counsel Erik Stallman, who supports the order, and Convergence Law Institute Vice President Solveig Singleton, who calls herself skeptical of net neutrality. Speaking Thursday at a Reed College legal network event, they said experimentation with paid prioritization might happen without the order, which bans it unless a waiver allows certain content to receive higher priority. Real-time video could be subject to such experimentation if allowed, Singleton said. ISPs "view the Internet as essentially a two-sided market, and they would like the ability to charge both sides of the market" through paid prioritization, Stallman said.

ISPs likely will follow many net neutrality rules, even if February's FCC order (see 1504100046) is overturned by a court or overridden by Congress, said two lawyers on different sides of the issue. The order's prohibition on blocking or throttling likely will be followed by broadband providers even absent rules, said Center for Democracy & Technology General Counsel Erik Stallman, who supports the order, and Convergence Law Institute Vice President Solveig Singleton, who calls herself skeptical of net neutrality. Speaking Thursday at a Reed College legal network event, they said experimentation with paid prioritization might happen without the order, which bans it unless a waiver allows certain content to receive higher priority. Real-time video could be subject to such experimentation if allowed, Singleton said. ISPs "view the Internet as essentially a two-sided market, and they would like the ability to charge both sides of the market" through paid prioritization, Stallman said.

The European Union announced it is raising its retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods for noncompliance with a World Trade Organization ruling against the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (CDSOA, also known as the Byrd Amendment) (here). Effective May 1, the EU is upping the additional tariff from 0.35 percent to 1.5 percent on metal eyewear frames, trucks with cranes, frozen sweetcorn, and women’s denim trousers.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval attacking the FCC’s net neutrality order Wednesday. Paul posted the one-page resolution, which would dismantle the order and prevent the FCC from reinstating similar regulations, but it faces a likely White House veto and opposition from Hill Democrats. Paul is a presidential candidate, which some have said raises the stakes for net neutrality negotiations on Capitol Hill (see 1504160034).

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval attacking the FCC’s net neutrality order Wednesday. Paul posted the one-page resolution, which would dismantle the order and prevent the FCC from reinstating similar regulations, but it faces a likely White House veto and opposition from Hill Democrats. Paul is a presidential candidate, which some have said raises the stakes for net neutrality negotiations on Capitol Hill (see 1504160034).

A lawyer for NCTA said it and CableLabs want more testing of Globalstar's terrestrial low-power service for broadband before the FCC allows TLPS. The company's proposal to provide a terrestrial service that's co-channel with its mobile satellite service operations shows that an emissions mask at the top of the 2.4 GHz unlicensed band isn't needed, wrote NCTA lawyer Paul Margie of Harris Wiltshire. "Any action on Globalstar’s TLPS proposal should be accompanied by a relaxation or elimination of the strict unwanted emissions mask." The company hasn't provided "compelling evidence" to keep the mask, said the filing posted Tuesday to docket 13-213 on a conversation Margie and CableLabs and NCTA officials had with an aide to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. Globalstar has said CableLabs' demos, which that R&D group said raised TLPS concerns, were flawed and the service would be a "good neighbor" to Wi-Fi operations in the band (see 1504240035).