Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Chilling" The Internet? Lessons From Fcc Regulation Of Radio Broadcasting , Thomas W. Hazlett, David W. Sosa
"Chilling" The Internet? Lessons From Fcc Regulation Of Radio Broadcasting , Thomas W. Hazlett, David W. Sosa
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Congress included the Communications Decency Act (CDA) in the Telecommunications Act signed into law on February 8, 1996. The bill seeks to outlaw the use of computers and phone lines to transmit "indecent" material with provisions of jail terms and heavy fines for violators. Proponents of the bill argue it is necessary to protect minors from undesirable speech on the Internet. The CDA was immediately challenged in court by the American Civil Liberties Union, and the special 3-judge federal panel established to hear the case recently declared the Act unconstitutional. Yet, its ultimate adjudication remains in doubt. Ominously, the federal …
Communications Policy Leadership For The Next Century, Michael K. Powell
Communications Policy Leadership For The Next Century, Michael K. Powell
Federal Communications Law Journal
Those of us involved in the communications field realize the dramatic changes and challenges posed by the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In particular, those in charge of implementing the Act's provisions face serious challenges. There are three ways that those in leadership positions may prevail in this "communications revolution" so as to facilitate development. First, it is essential to be familiar with the fields of economics and competitive analysis, and to understand that competition and markets will prove superior devices for managing change. Second, the importance of technology must be emphasized. Finally, emotion or special interest politics …
The "Public Interest" Standard: The Search For The Holy Grail, Erwin G. Krasnow, Jack N. Goodman
The "Public Interest" Standard: The Search For The Holy Grail, Erwin G. Krasnow, Jack N. Goodman
Federal Communications Law Journal
During the last eighty years, there is likely no single area of communications policy that has generated as much scholarly discourse, judicial analysis, and political debate as has the simple directive to regulate in the "public interest." While remaining at the heart of current communications regulatory policy debate, the public interest standard has been subject to evolving, and often elusive definitions that reflect the change in American culture from generation to generation. As broadcasters begin the transition to a more flexible digital technology, there have been calls for a reexamination of the public interest standard. But the genius of the …
The Fcc And Aids Education: Helping Broadcasters Serve The Public Interest, Jason B. Acton
The Fcc And Aids Education: Helping Broadcasters Serve The Public Interest, Jason B. Acton
Federal Communications Law Journal
Despite recent advances in medical technology, AIDS remains a very serious international health threat. Even with the presence of new drug therapies that have helped to prolong the lives of those who suffer from the disease, scientists have been unable to develop a cure. Consequently education remains the primary weapon available in the war against AIDS. Unfortunately, AIDS education initiatives have found little support in the broadcast community. To renew their licenses, broadcasters are required to act in the public interest— requirement that has traditionally required very little. However, given the threat AIDS presents to society, the FCC should require …
Section 332 Of The Communications Act Of 1934: A Federal Regulatory Framework That Is "Hog Tight, Horse High, And Bull Strong", Leonard J. Kennedy, Heather A. Purcell
Section 332 Of The Communications Act Of 1934: A Federal Regulatory Framework That Is "Hog Tight, Horse High, And Bull Strong", Leonard J. Kennedy, Heather A. Purcell
Federal Communications Law Journal
In 1993, recognizing that state and local regulatory practices were harmful to the development of widespread low-cost commercial and personal mobile radio services, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, legislation that freed wireless carriers from a dual federal-state regulatory structure. As a result, sections 332 and 2(b) of the Communications Act were revised to endow the FCC with exclusive jurisdiction over wireless regulation. Unfortunately, some courts and regulators have concluded that Congress did not intend to grant the FCC exclusive authority over wireless communications. Such rulings could be attributed to a misguided focus on traditional preemption analysis rather …