Law Commons^™

The Right To Speak, The Right To Hear, And The Right Not To Hear: The Technological Resolution To The Cable/Pornography Debate, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The advent of cable television presented a new opportunity to consider the competing interests on each side of the free speech/pornography debate. This Article attempts to construct an analysis that will be consistent with Supreme Court teaching on how government, under the first amendment, may constitutionally regulate legal obscenity, particularly in the name of protecting those who wish to avoid exposure to such material.

The Article shows how, unlike earlier battles over technology and pornography, cable television presented the novel opportunity to have a technological rather than a censorial solution to this difficult problem.

Below Market Loans: From Abuse To Misuses – A Sports Illustration, Phillip J. Closius, Douglas K. Chapman

All Faculty Scholarship

Below market loans have been traditionally used as substitutes for gifts, salaries, and dividends for the primary purpose of tax avoidance in the transfer of wealth. The Supreme Court's opinion in Dickman v. Commissioner subjected both demand and term loans in an intrafamilial setting to the federal gift tax. Congress, while subjecting all below market loans to either income or gift tax, applied different valuation formulas to term and demand loans and, in so doing, favored the use of demand loans as a salary substitute. This Article analyzes the current status of below market loans by examining their use in …

Cable Television's New Legal Universe: Early Judicial Response To The Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

On October 29, 1984, a new era began in the relationship between law and cable television. On that day, the first major law regulation cable television, the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984,was signed into law.

Early judicial attempts to interpret the Cable Act revealed the difficulties judges had with understanding the new legal regimen. A common thread running through these varied cases, if any, was the courts' apparent lack of appreciation of the Act's complexity. Many, though not all, decisions appear to misread congressional language and misinterpret congressional intent. The first part of this Article will discuss this problem …