Consumer Protection Law Commons^™

How Close Is Close Enough: A Step-By-Step Analysis To Resolve The Circuit Split Created By Misunderstanding The Spokeo Ruling, Cason Shipp

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

“Hello…It’S Me. [Please Don’T Sue Me!]” Examining The Fcc’S Overbroad Calling Regulations Under The Tcpa, Marissa A. Potts

Brooklyn Law Review

Americans have received unwanted telemarketing calls for decades. In response to a rapid increase in pre-recorded calls made using autodialer devices, Congress enacted the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in 1992. The TCPA imposes restrictions on calls made to consumers’ residences and wireless phones using autodialer devices, even if they are not telemarketing calls. Congress appointed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to prescribe rules and regulations to enforce the TCPA. In 2015, the FCC released an order that defined autodialer more broadly under the statute. Consequently, devices that have the potential to become autodialers in the future, even if they …

Unlocking The Wireless Safe: Opening Up The Wireless World For Consumers, Adam Clay

Federal Communications Law Journal

Facing resistance to the use of its Voice-over-Internet Protocol application on mobile phones, in February 2007, Skype Communications filed a petition with the FCC asking for application of the Carterfone standards to the wireless phone industry. This Note discusses Carterfone and the merits of Skype's petition in light of the recent auction of the C Block, which carries open network requirements, and developments in wireless technology. This Note argues that the FCC should require carriers to provide technical standards for access to their networks, whereby individuals will be able to connect any approved device and application of their choosing.

Carl Ramey's Mass Media Unleashed, Henry Geller

Federal Communications Law Journal

Book Review: Carl R. Ramey, Mass Media Unleashed: How Washington Policy Makers Shortchanged the American Public (2007).

This superb book treats an important issue: the proper regulatory policy for broadcasting in the twenty-first century. In it, Carl Ramey critiques the Federal Communications Commission's public trustee and deregulatory market policies and suggests that to meet the dynamic market and technological changes of this new century we should, among other things, free commercial broadcasters completely from public trustee requirements and eliminate FCC enforcement of its ownership and related rules. Based on the long experience of a communications lawyer who knows so well …

Reassessing Turner And Litigating The Must-Carry Law Beyond A Facial Challenge, R. Matthew Warner

Federal Communications Law Journal

In recent decades, the must-carry rules have had a troubled constitutional history. After two sets of rules were struck down by the D.C. Circuit for violating the First Amendment rights of both cable programmers and operators, Congress revised the must-carry rules in the 1992 Cable Act. In 1997, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, determined that the congressional must-carry law was facially constitutional. However, does the Turner II decision preclude further First Amendment challenges to the must-carry law? This Note argues that the answer is no and that the time is drawing near for new challenges.

In The Dark: A Consumer Perspective On Fcc Broadcast Indecency Denials, Genelle I. Belmas, Gail D. Love, Brian C. Foy

Federal Communications Law Journal

Indecency regulation has been a hot political and social topic since Janet Jackson revealed her breast during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. The number of indecency complaints the FCC receives each year continues to rise. Moreover, to further complicate matters, in 2007 the Second Circuit overturned the FCC policy that so-called "fleeting expletives" would be considered indecent. However, there has been no systematic review of the complaints from the perspective of the complainant. How has the FCC managed its increasing indecency complaint load, and what does it tell consumers who have taken the time to write formal complaints about …

The Information Quality Act: The Little Statute That Could (Or Couldn't?) Applying The Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments Of 1996 To The Federal Communications Commission, Kellen Ressmeyer

Federal Communications Law Journal

In December 2000, Congress passed the Information Quality Act - a two sentence rider to a 712-page Appropriations Bill. The Information Quality Act, which seeks to ensure the quality of government-disseminated information, places the White House Office of Management and Budget in a supervisory role. The Office of Management and Budget subsequently finalized a set of mandatory Guidelines applicable to all federal agencies. Among other things, the Guidelines require adherence to the scientific standard articulated in the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act where such agencies engage in risk analysis to human health, safety, and the environment. As …

Virginia Cellular And Highland Cellular: The Fcc Establishes A Framework For Eligible Telecommunications Carrier Designation In Rural Study Areas, Mark C. Bannister

Federal Communications Law Journal

In 1996, Congress passed the first substantial rework of the Communications Act of 1934. This Act was intended to benefit consumers by encouraging competition and establishing a series of explicit mechanisms for assuring universal service. One of the outcomes is the creation of significant controversy over the federal, and in some cases, state universal service subsidy for the class of telecommunications providers typically known as wireless or cellular and defined by federal statute as "commercial mobile radio service" ("CMRS"). Incumbent local exchange carriers ("ILECs") characterize these subsidies as a windfall and as unnecessary to provide wireless phone service. They argue …

The Public Interest Standard: Is It Too Indeterminate To Be Constitutional?, Randolph J. May

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article argues that the congressional delegation of public interest authority to the FCC likely violates the nondelegation doctrine that inheres in the constitutional separation of powers scheme and that, even if the courts do not hold the public interest delegation unconstitutional, Congress should revise the Communications Act to set forth more specific guidance for the FCC. In today’s environment of “convergence,” in which competition is flourishing across communications sectors, Congress should not shirk its responsibility to establish fundamental policy for an industry that contributes so much to the overall health of our economy. This Article argues that Congress should …

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 …

Using Market-Based Spectrum Policy To Promote The Public Interest, Gregory L. Rosston, Jeffrey S. Steinberg

Federal Communications Law Journal

With the increasing demand for spectrum to accommodate emerging technologies, and the discovery that higher frequencies are usable, the FCC has replaced its reliance on administrative mechanisms for allocating spectrum with a more flexible, market-based approach. The FCC can best accomplish its mission of promoting the public interest by continuing to rely on competitive market forces and by establishing a clear and consistent paradigm for approaching allocation, assignment, usage, and other policies. Such a paradigm envisions an FCC that would actively monitor spectrum to remedy situations in which it is not used to its full value; establish mechanisms to reduce …

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.