Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons^™

The First Amendment And Fcc Rule Making Under The 1992 Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the First Amendment implications of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) regulations issued under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 19921 (1992 Cable Act). The 1992 Cable Act imposes numerous requirements that are beyond the scope of this Article. This Article analyzes only the FCC's exercise of rule making discretion under the 1992 Cable Act.

Additionally, it must be remembered that an under-staffed FCC was given an enormous amount of work to do within fixed time limits. Therefore, it must be expected that the rulemaking would be vulnerable to second-guessing. Nonetheless, whenever a governmental entity …

Myths And Misunderstandings, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article explores the utility of the Holmsean marketplace of ideas when considering the regulation of different forms of communication technology.

Impending Legal Issues For Integrated Broadband Networks, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

Given human nature, computer networks are prone to many of the same legal problems that have affected earlier forms of communication. The insatiable human appetite for mischief, information, pornography, and anti-competitive activity guarantees that the many legal conflicts that afflict computers, telephones, cable television, and broadcasting will be visited upon IBNs. This article focuses on several of these legal problems. By examining the history of controversies involving the electronic media and breaches of security, protection of privacy, regulation of sexual material and refusals to deal, this article attempts to outline some ways to think about applying the lessons from the …

Amending The Oversight: Legislative Drafting And The Cable Act, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

The Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 ("Cable Act") represented the first comprehensive federal law governing the no-longer new communications technology of cable television. After years of confronting a "patchwork" of federal, state, and local regulation, the cable industry, government regulators, and the public were told that the Cable Act would create a "national policy concerning cable communications," and firmly "establish guidelines for the exercise of Federal, State, and local authority."

Unfortunately, the Cable Act failed to fulfill its numerous objectives. Advertised as a careful balance, the Cable Act was administratively and judicially converted to a lopsided grant of victory …

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.

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 …

The Pursuit Of Pluralism: The Lessons From The New French Audiovisual Communications Law, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

Electronic mass communications, which have become increasingly influential over the past quarter century, have also undergone rapid and profound technological change. Constitutional governments around the world have struggled to apply their fundamental legal principals to the electronic media through sensible and balanced regulation. Perhaps the central problem in such regulation is to protect truth in the media, mainly by encouraging diversity, without allowing the regulators themselves to exert undue influence over what is disseminated over the airwaves and cables of a country's communications infrastructure. The following article traces the history of France's attempts to solve this problem in its electronic …

The Cable Communications Policy Act Of 1984: A Balancing Act On The Coaxial Wires, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

After three decades of what Chief Justice Burger termed ‘the almost explosive development’ of cable television, Congress updated the Communications Act of 1934 with the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. The Act represents the culmination of a ‘decade long effort to update the Communications Act of 1934 . . . and bring our outdated communications laws into the information age.’ The 1984 Cable Act was a complicated piece of legislation, the result of countless compromises and political deals. This Article explains how Congress attempted to balance the competing, and sometimes mutually exclusive, interests of the cable operators, cities, video …

The First Amendment And The Cable Television Operator: An Unprotective Shield Against Public Access Requirements, Michael I. Meyerson

All Faculty Scholarship

This article focuses on the question of whether state-imposed public access requirements violate the First Amendment rights of the cable television operator. The author suggests that the appropriate analysis asks whether the law abridges expression the First Amendment was meant to protect. In other words, do cable access requirements abridge speech safeguarded by the First Amendment? The article demonstrates that such requirements do not hinder, but in fact further, fundamental First Amendment interests. Finally, the article shows that access requirements fulfill the standards of the constitutional tests for each classification into which they could be placed.