The record so far shows that commenters “overwhelmingly” support “voluntary, industry-led collaborative efforts” aimed at developing a mechanism allowing texting to 911, CTIA said in reply comments filed at the FCC. Carriers offered similar comments. But the National Emergency Number Association advised the FCC to act quickly and warned that any interim solution is likely to be in place for some time. Several commenters said the best short-term solution would be IP Relay, as identified by the ATIS Interim Nonvoice Emergency Services Incubator.

Two draft FCC items move the agency closer to implementing legislation signed into law in January 2011 letting the agency license low-power FM stations closer on the dial to full-power radio. Agency and industry officials said a draft rulemaking asks about technical provisions for second-adjacent separation, which would require LPFM outlets to be two notches on the dial away from full-power stations versus the current third-adjacent limit. The rulemaking also asks about waivers for second-adjacent rules, the officials said.

EMI hasn’t shown that it will suffer irreparable harm if the U.S. District Court in New York denies its motion for a preliminary injunction against “used” digital music reseller ReDigi, Judge Richard Sullivan said at a hearing Monday, denying the motion, according to the court transcript (http://xrl.us/bmra2h). EMI had told Sullivan it wouldn’t have “even a fair chance” of understanding the damage to its business from ReDigi without an injunction (WID Jan 24 p8). Sullivan said he let the parties argue for nearly two hours before ruling: “I found it very interesting and very well argued, so maybe that’s why I kept you all as long as I did.” Under the Supreme Court’s standard for injunctions articulated in eBay v. MercExchange, Sullivan said he must deny EMI’s motion. “It seems to me that money damages should be able to take care of all of this” if EMI wins the case, Sullivan said: ReDigi has convincingly argued that it keeps “careful records” from which damages could be calculated. EMI can’t stop ReDigi from operating based on EMI’s fear of market confusion, the judge said: The digital reseller’s “legal theory” to justify its secondhand-sale business model, as espoused in its filings and in public pronouncements, doesn’t meet the controlling 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ standard for confusion. But Sullivan said EMI had “demonstrated that there are arguments that on their face look to be compelling or potentially persuasive arguments,” and that ReDigi’s motion for summary judgment was “premature” because “it’s not clear to me that there are wholly undisputed facts” to which the parties agree. Sullivan suggested he could rule soon: “With limited discovery we should be able to get this teed up for summary judgment or a trial perhaps even on stipulated facts.” According to ReDigi, Sullivan told the parties Monday that the questions prompted by the suit, such as the applicability of the first-sale doctrine to digital files that by nature must be copied to be transferred, were “fascinating,” and raise “a lot of technological and statutory issues.” That portion wasn’t in the transcript. Sullivan told the parties in a formal order to submit a proposed case management plan and scheduling by Feb. 20. The digital reseller trumpeted Sullivan’s rejection of EMI’s argument that it was suffering irreparable harm from ReDigi’s continued operation. “This is an exciting step forward for ReDigi’s and the purchasing public’s fight to keep consumers’ intrinsic and lawful ownership rights to their digital property intact at a time when [EMI’s] Capitol Records is fighting desperately to confiscate these rights,” ReDigi said in its first press release since the litigation commenced (http://xrl.us/bmrahs). It said EMI had “disregard” for ReDigi’s technology, “which clearly works within the parameters of the law” by uploading a user’s purchased music from iTunes into a cloud locker and deleting the original files from the user’s devices. ReDigi CEO John Ossenmacher said the company was “helping consumers unlock billions of dollars of previously unrealized wealth in their digital media collections.” ReDigi is the “bazaar of the future,” where ReDigi’s management of purchasing and selling files “ensures safety, legality and convenience,” said Chief Technology Officer Larry Rudolph. EMI had a different take on Sullivan’s comments at the hearing. The judge “clearly indicated that Capitol had established the likelihood of success on the merits of its copyright infringement claim, calling its legal case for infringement ‘compelling,'” EMI said in a press statement. Sullivan “accepted our legal arguments on the merits of the dispute,” said Alasdair McMullan, executive vice president of legal affairs for EMI Music North America: “We fully expect that ReDigi will ultimately have to answer for its clear acts of infringement."

A Missouri bill could walk the line between public safety and individual privacy rights, officials said. HB-1108 (http://xrl.us/bmqpxh) requires wireless carriers to provide a missing person’s cellphone location to law enforcement when that person is in “danger of death or serious physical injury.” Testimony was heard by the House Committee of Utilities for the bill, which is similar to other legislation presented in the state three previous times. Those bills passed in the house but did not make it through the senate.

Google has nothing relevant to add to EMI’s copyright infringement case against “used” digital music reseller ReDigi, U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan in New York said in an order denying Google’s request to file a friend-of-the-court brief. Google had told the judge EMI’s claims could blur or undermine the legal distinctions that make possible the cloud-computing industry, such as the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in favor of Cablevision’s remote-DVR service (WID Feb 2 p7), which added legal clarity to the right of cloud providers to store things at the direction of a user without incurring liability for potential infringement. In a two-sentence order, Sullivan said EMI and ReDigi are “fully capable of raising these issues themselves -- and have every incentive to do just that.” EMI made the same argument at greater length in a letter to Sullivan opposing Google’s request to file a brief, saying the search company gave a “nearly verbatim rehash” of one ReDigi claim, that the reseller is either not distributing “copies” under the Copyright Act or is protected by the first-sale doctrine. Google’s concerns “are not even at issue in this case,” EMI said: The label doesn’t challenge a user’s uploading a song to a cloud locker service and streaming it back to himself, or “space-shifting” the song to other devices for personal use. The case is all about ReDigi and its users “copying files for purposes of transfer and sale, for profit, to other users,” EMI said. The label said Google had “quite clearly” taken sides in the dispute, contrary to the search company’s claim, arguing that EMI’s preliminary injunction motion should be denied because damages owed the label by ReDigi could be “easily calculated” later.

U.S. and international privacy and data security rules could significantly affect Facebook’s business and profitability, the company said in its initial public offering documents. Facebook’s Form S-1 SEC registration said the company earned $1 billion in profit during 2011 and had $3.71 billion revenue. The company’s regulatory obligations will only increase as federal and international lawmakers continue to focus more attention on issues of online privacy, data protection, copyright protection, mobile applications and protection of minors online.

The government can’t stop people from choosing their preferred roommates -- or punish online services for helping them do so -- even if those choices are racist, homophobic or otherwise discriminatory, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday. It overturned a lower-court ruling against Roommate.com, and in the process clarified an earlier 9th Circuit ruling that found the roommate-search service didn’t qualify for protection under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act because it prompted users to disclose potentially discriminatory preferences (WID May 16/07 p1). The opinion by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski connects the freedom to choose a roommate to the freedom to choose a sexual partner upheld in the Supreme Court’s landmark Lawrence decision.

The House Cybersecurity Subcommittee unanimously approved in a one-hour markup Tuesday a cybersecurity bill authored by Chairman Dan Lungren, R-Calif. Members considered slight tweaks to the Promoting and Enhancing Cybersecurity and Information Sharing Effectiveness (PrECISE) Act and agreed to report the bill to the full Homeland Security Committee. Lungren told reporters afterward that the bill is in line with the recommendations of the House Republican Cyber Security Task Force and is “on the same track” as the House Intelligence Committee’s Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act.

The House Cybersecurity Subcommittee unanimously approved in a one-hour markup Tuesday a cybersecurity bill authored by Chairman Dan Lungren, R-Calif. Members considered slight tweaks to the Promoting and Enhancing Cybersecurity and Information Sharing Effectiveness (PrECISE) Act and agreed to report the bill to the full Homeland Security Committee. Lungren told reporters afterward that the bill is in line with the recommendations of the House Republican Cyber Security Task Force and is “on the same track” as the House Intelligence Committee’s Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act.

Most commenters agree the FCC should allow a 24-month transition period if the commission changes hearing aid compatibility (HAC) rules to incorporate the 2011 revision of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) technical standard C63.19, AT&T said in reply comments. “AT&T agrees with the Commission that adopting the 2011 ANSI Standard would serve the public interest by updating the Commission’s rules in a manner that brings those rules more in line with new technology and allows additional frequency bands and air interfaces to become HAC compliant,” the company said (http://xrl.us/bmp9mj). “The Commission has recognized that a two year transition period is consistent with the Commission’s approach in other complex rulemakings, such as the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, closed captioning for digital television, and the V-chip. It is also consistent with the transition period adopted by the Commission when it narrowed the application of the HAC de minimis rule.” In the initial comment round, the wireless industry, led by CTIA, pressed the agency for a two-year transition, while groups representing the hearing impaired questioned whether that amount of time is necessary (CD Jan 18 p9). AT&T also said the 2011 revisions do not include a “T” HAC rating for VoIP carried over the LTE interface, an issue previously raised by Samsung (http://xrl.us/bmp9od). “The Commission’s proposed rules should be modified to consider LTE capable devices to be HAC compliant if those devices otherwise meet the applicable technical standard for the frequency bands and air interfaces covered by the 2011 ANSI Standard,” AT&T said.