Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Anti-blocking (1)
- Anti-discrimination (1)
- Broadband (1)
- Broadband Policy Statement (1)
- Broadcasting (1)
-
- Complaints (1)
- Content restrictions (1)
- Deep packet inspection (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Federal agencies (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Gatekeepers (1)
- Inc. v. FCC (1)
- Indecency (1)
- Internet service providers (1)
- Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo (1)
- Obscenity (1)
- Open Internet Order (1)
- Open architecture (1)
- Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1)
- Reno v. ACLU (1)
- Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1)
- Turner Broadcasting System (1)
- Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in First Amendment
Network Neutrality And The First Amendment, Andrew Patrick, Eric Scharphorn
Network Neutrality And The First Amendment, Andrew Patrick, Eric Scharphorn
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The First Amendment reflects the conviction that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to public welfare. Like the printing press, the Internet has dramatically transformed the marketplace of ideas by providing unprecedented opportunities for individuals to communicate. Though its growth continues to be phenomenal, broadband service providers— acting as Internet gatekeepers—have developed the ability to discriminate against specific content and applications. First, these gatekeepers intercept and inspect data transferred over public networks, then selectively block or slow it. This practice has the potential to stifle the Internet’s value as a speech platform by …
The Fcc Complaint Process And Increasing Public Unease: Toward An Apolitical Broadcast Indecency Regime, Kurt Hunt
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
[...]I propose depoliticizing the broadcast indecency regime by utilizing polling to determine the average broadcast viewer's opinion, divorced from all the pressures inherent in relying on the complaint process as a proxy. In section II, I will discuss the background and development of the broadcast indecency doctrine from the days of the Federal Radio Commission in the 1920s through the present day. I will also explain why the apparent increasing public unease is misleading, and why valid First Amendment concerns are steamrolled by the fiery nature of the debate. In section III, I will explain why the FCC's reliance on …