Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Private Eyes Are Watching You: With The Implementation Of The E-911 Mandate, Who Will Watch Every Move You Make?, Geoffrey D. Smith
Private Eyes Are Watching You: With The Implementation Of The E-911 Mandate, Who Will Watch Every Move You Make?, Geoffrey D. Smith
Federal Communications Law Journal
The FCC's E-911 mandate, which will ensure that emergency operators automatically receive a caller's location information, should help save lives. However, privacy advocates have expressed concern over the potential for wireless carriers, the government, and third parties to collect and store personal information. Congress has addressed these concerns with legislation, but privacy advocates still worry that consumers are not adequately protected. This Note addresses this concern and argues that in order to ensure consumer protection, additions are needed to section 222 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Note discusses the importance of individual privacy and balances it against the …
Telric Vs. Universal Service: A Takings Violation?, Stuart Buck
Telric Vs. Universal Service: A Takings Violation?, Stuart Buck
Federal Communications Law Journal
While the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has had a profound positive impact on many sectors of the communications industry in the United States, local phone companies have recently faced a serious dilemma under a provision of the Act known as TELRIC. In this article, Stuart Buck presents a current analysis of the position of the telephone company and its struggle to meet costs under the TELRIC structure. The author argues that by forcing regional phone operators to grant wholesale pricing to competitors under TELRIC, while simultaneously maintaining Universal Service requirements of reduced-rate phone access to remote customers, the local phone …
Who’S Taking Whom: Some Comments And Evidence On The Constitutionality Of Telric, David Gabel, David I. Rosenbaum
Who’S Taking Whom: Some Comments And Evidence On The Constitutionality Of Telric, David Gabel, David I. Rosenbaum
Federal Communications Law Journal
The FCC requires that the price of unbundled network elements be equal to the total element long-run incremental cost of production plus a reasonable contribution to common and joint costs. This pricing standard has the potential of making the telecommunications market more competitive. TELRIC prices, however, are set independently of historic costs and therefore may not compensate investors for incurred costs. Hence, incumbent local exchange carriers have been fighting its implementation. In all probability, the U.S. Supreme Court will become involved in the debate over its adoption. The Supreme Court has looked at changes in valuation methods in the past. …
Section 253 Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: A Permanent Physical Appropriation Of Private Property That Must Be Justly Compensated, Jennifer L. Worstell
Section 253 Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: A Permanent Physical Appropriation Of Private Property That Must Be Justly Compensated, Jennifer L. Worstell
Federal Communications Law Journal
Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was promulgated in an effort to remove unnecessary regulation by local governments and open up competition among local phone companies, cable providers, and other telecommunications concerns. However, this provision effectively prohibits local governments from managing their rights-of-way. Furthermore, it violates modern Fifth Amendment takings jurisprudence, Section 253 and the first three FCC and court decisions examining it not only have jeopardized effective municipal management and resource allocation discretion, but also have usurped local governments' property rights without just compensation in explicit violation of the United States Constitution.
Section 254 Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: A Hidden Tax?, Nichole L. Millard
Section 254 Of The Telecommunications Act Of 1996: A Hidden Tax?, Nichole L. Millard
Federal Communications Law Journal
Congress has the sole power to levy and collect taxes. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress may delegate this authority to administrative agencies so long as the will of Congress is clearly defined in the legislation. However, section 254 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 operates as an unconstitutional delegation of Congress' authority to tax. This legislation provides the FCC with unfettered discretion in defining the boundaries of universal service and the authority to mandate that all consumers of telecommunications services subsidize the cost for low-income and rural consumers, as well as schools, libraries, and health care providers.
Antitrust And Communications: Changes After The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Douglas B. Mcfadden
Antitrust And Communications: Changes After The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Douglas B. Mcfadden
Federal Communications Law Journal
The 1996 Telecommunications Act is a return to competition in telephony which existed at the beginning of the century. The enactment of the '96 Act will significantly change the application of the antitrust laws to communications activities. Prior to the enactment of the '96 Act, telecommunications companies were somewhat immunized from full application of the antitrust laws regarding mergers and acquisitions because of regulation by the Federal Communications Commission and the state public utility commissions. Now, telephone companies will be fully subject to antitrust scrutiny under three schemes: the Clayton Act, the Hart-Scott- Rodino Act, and the FCC public interest …