The Senate Judiciary Committee announced a March 26 hearing to scrutinize the recently announced Comcast/Time Warner Cable acquisition. “The merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable touches on important policy questions about how Americans access these valuable services,” Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a statement Monday. “It also presents a critical moment to discuss net neutrality principles that have allowed the Internet to remain an open marketplace for ideas.” Previously, the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee had said it would hold a hearing, but Leahy said the full committee should hold the hearing “because these are issues of national importance.” Subcommittee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., expects the hearing to examine “the details of the proposed merger and how it will impact competition in the cable and broadband markets,” she said. “Consumers deserve fair prices and high quality service for their TV and internet access.” The hearing will be at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen. Witnesses weren’t announced.

The Songwriter Equity Act, which will “level the playing field for songwriters, composers, and publishers to receive fair compensation,” will be introduced by House Judiciary Committee sponsor Doug Collins, R-Ga., and co-sponsor Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., Tuesday, said a Collins news release. Jeffries and Collins plan a press conference Tuesday at 10 a.m. at Capitol Hill’s House Triangle to introduce the legislation, it said. They will be joined by Paul Williams, American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers president; David Israelite, National Music Publishers’ Association president; Mike O'Neill, Broadcast Music Inc. CEO; and Daryl Friedman, the Recording Academy’s chief advocacy and industry relations officer, said the release.

House Commerce Committee Vice Chairwoman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., is wrong to compare net neutrality to the Fairness Doctrine, Computer & Communications Industry Association Vice President-Government Relations Cathy Sloan told us over the weekend. On Friday, Blackburn introduced HR-4070, the Internet Freedom Act, which would prevent the FCC from reinstating any net neutrality rules (CD Feb 24 p20) -- an idea which is widely expected to face an uphill battle in Congress. At the time, Blackburn called net neutrality “the Fairness Doctrine of the Internet.” House Republicans have been up in arms over the idea of the Fairness Doctrine recently amid fears over the FCC’s now-suspended Critical Information Needs study design and the possibility, as Republicans said, that the FCC might revive the doctrine. But that doctrine “involved the FCC in determinations about whether broadcasters were presenting balanced points of view in their programming over the public airwaves,” Sloan countered, and what Sloan would call open Internet regulation, “by sharp contrast, seeks to ensure that neither Internet access network operators OR the government have ANY editorial or gatekeeper role with respect to the nature of content available to end users on the Internet,” she said in an email. The Internet Freedom Act had five Republican co-sponsors upon introduction -- Reps. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Jeff Duncan of South Carolina, Steve Scalise of Louisiana, John Shimkus of Illinois and House Communications Subcommittee Vice Chairman Bob Latta of Ohio. It has been referred to House Commerce.

Two House Democrats want their colleagues to vote against a cellphone unlocking bill (http://1.usa.gov/1dbtwH2) slated for a House floor vote Tuesday (CD Feb 24 p19). Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Anna Eshoo, both of California, circulated a Dear Colleague letter Monday criticizing HR-1123 introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. “After this bill was marked up and reported out of committee, a new section was added to the bill without notice to or consultation with us,” they said, saying Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation had both withdrawn support. “The new provision could have negative effects on consumer choice and could undercut an important court decision that protects consumer choice and prevents monopolistic practices. We cannot in good conscience support a bill that risks giving up so much for so little gain.” Lofgren is listed as a co-sponsor for the bill. In response to a press question about Public Knowledge’s concerns, a Republican Hill aide told us Friday that the bill was never meant to address bulk unlocking, as Public Knowledge wanted. That would be addressed in a broader copyright review, the aide had said. “The new addition to the bill puts the effort to stand up for the property rights of the owners of technology devices at risk,” Eshoo and Lofgren said in their letter. “It is sad that the bipartisan consensus reached during mark-up in the Judiciary committee to improve the law has been destroyed by a secret decision of the majority after the bill was reported out.”

The House will likely have a floor vote this week on HR-1123, the Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, which House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., introduced last year. It’s scheduled for a vote this week (http://1.usa.gov/1jRD6DM), and a House Judiciary spokeswoman said it will likely be Tuesday. But Public Knowledge revoked its support, citing a perceived failure in the latest version of the five-page bill (http://1.usa.gov/1dbtwH2) unveiled last week. “The amended version fails to address the flawed law at the root of the unlocking problem: the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,” said Public Knowledge Vice President-Legal Affairs Sherwin Siy in a statement (http://bit.ly/1jlhlwr). “The new language specifically excluding bulk unlocking could indicate that the drafters believe that phone unlocking has something to do with copyright law.” Public Knowledge does not see this as a copyright problem and now favors the Unlocking Technology Act (HR-1892), from Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. Goodlatte’s bill lists 10 co-sponsors, including Lofgren. Responding to a press question about Public Knowledge’s concerns, a Republican committee aide told us the Goodlatte legislation was never intended to tackle the broader issues Public Knowledge wants. “Our focus has really been on individual cellphone unlocking,” the aide said. The bill’s new language doesn’t say that bulk unlocking is bad or add penalties for that -- the bill simply doesn’t address the question, the aide said. Those issues will likely be addressed in the broader copyright review House Judiciary has embarked on, he said. No other members’ offices or other stakeholders have objected to the latest bill text so far, the aide said, although he pointed out Congress is out on recess.

Questions for journalists and news directors that had been part of the research design for the FCC’s critical information needs (CIN) studies have been removed at the direction of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, and the study has been on hold while being reviewed and redesigned, the FCC said Friday. The portion of the study questioning what news stories broadcasters cover had drawn ire in the form of a December letter from Republicans (CD Dec 11 p11), including subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden of Oregon and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton of Michigan and a Wall Street Journal op-ed from Commissioner Ajit Pai (CD Feb 13 p1). Wheeler “agreed that survey questions in the study directed toward media outlet managers, news directors, and reporters overstepped the bounds of what is required,” said a statement from the FCC. In a reply letter sent to lawmakers (http://bit.ly/1fi15gi) Wheeler said the FCC “has no intention of regulating political or other speech of journalists or broadcasters.” The Columbia, S.C., pilot of the draft study “will not be undertaken until a new study design is final,” the FCC release said. “Any subsequent market studies conducted by the FCC, if determined necessary, will not seek participation from or include questions for media owners, news directors or reporters.” In a statement, Pai said he welcomed the study’s suspension. “This study would have thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country, somewhere it just doesn’t belong,” he said. The FCC “has now recognized that no study by the federal government, now or in the future, should involve asking questions to media owners, news directors, or reporters about their practice,” Pai said.

House Commerce Committee Vice Chairwoman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., introduced a bill Friday to stop the FCC from reinstating net neutrality rules, as expected (CD Feb 21 p6). The legislation is HR-4070, the Internet Freedom Act, named after a bill Blackburn previously had introduced on IP-enabled services (http://1.usa.gov/1dbrV4f). “Net Neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine of the Internet,” Blackburn said in a statement. “Once the FCC has a foothold into managing how internet service providers run their networks they will essentially be deciding which content goes first, second, third, or not at all. It’s time for Congress to slam the FCC’s regulatory back-door shut, lock it, and return the keys to the free market. My legislation will put the brakes on net neutrality and protect our innovators from these job-killing regulations.” The two-page bill would render powerless the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet Order and prevent the agency from issuing “such regulations in substantially the same form, or [issuing] new regulations that are substantially the same as such regulations, unless the reissued or new regulations are specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the enactment of this Act,” with exceptions for national security, public safety and law enforcement. Lobbyists and observers told us Thursday that such net neutrality legislation is generally unlikely to advance out of Congress. But a Democratic aide said the tensions surrounding such a polarizing issue may put a hitch in any Communications Act overhaul discussions. The offices of Communications Subcommittee Vice Chairman Bob Latta, R-Ohio, and Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., told us Thursday they had an interest in co-sponsorship. Blackburn’s spokesman said the bill has five co-sponsors but declined to name them.

Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood will also testify before Congress on wireless competition issues. The Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee scheduled a hearing Wednesday at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen, initially naming Verizon Communications Executive Vice President-Public Policy Randal Milch, Mobile Future Chairman Jonathan Spalter, T-Mobile Senior Vice President-Government Relations Tom Sugrue and C Spire Wireless Senior Vice President-Strategic Relations Eric Graham as witnesses. The Senate Judiciary website shows Wood has been added to the list (http://1.usa.gov/1hCksm0).

The Comcast-Time Warner Cable deal has become a campaign issue in Democratic Sen. Al Franken’s fight to win reelection in Minnesota this November. He highlighted media consolidation concerns on his campaign website and launched an informal poll asking people about their cable service and how satisfied they are (http://bit.ly/1nTJVFl). “Are you concerned that the Comcast-Time-Warner deal would result in higher prices and/or worse service for you?” the poll asks, giving an option for people to tell Franken what they think about the proposed deal. His campaign Facebook page urged people to share the poll “if you're concerned about skyrocketing cable rates.” The campaign website also included a press release highlighting how Franken recently told CNN the proposed acquisition would be “going exactly in the wrong direction” and that consumers would face “even worse service and less choice” if it’s approved (http://bit.ly/1gRWyjF). His campaign issues page said Franken “has taken a leadership role in opposing the recent trend towards media consolidation -- fighting against mergers that would lead to less choice and higher prices for Minnesota consumers carefully watching their cable, Internet, and cell phone bills” (http://bit.ly/1fFDfGo). Franken is a member of the Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee, which has said it plans a hearing on the deal. A spokeswoman for Franken’s Senate campaign told us Franken is “very concerned” about consumer impact and “will continue to ask tough question about what it will mean for cable bills and customer service.”

Academics will testify Feb. 28 about their opinions of the FTC’s jurisdiction before the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade, said a Friday release. It’s part of the subcommittee’s ongoing hearings about the FTC during its 100th anniversary. The series started in December when all four FTC commissioners testified (CD Dec 4 p5). A witness list wasn’t announced.