Law Commons^™

Electronic Oases Take Root In Mr. Minow's Vast Wasteland, Edward J. Markey

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

I Want My C-Span, Bruce W. Sanford

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Manhattan, Cass R. Sunstein

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Measuring Quality Television, Russ Taylor

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Screen-Agers . . . And The Decline Of The “Wasteland”, Elizabeth Thoman

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Public Television Law Réduit, Herbert A. Terry

Federal Communications Law Journal

Book Review: The Public Television Legal Survival Guide, 2d ed., Association of Public Television Stations, 2001, 254 pages.

A review of The Public Television Legal Survival Guide, 2nd ed., Association of Public Television Stations, 2001. According to its preface, the book is intended for "station personnel who do not have legal training" but who need to know some of the basics for their daily work and, through footnotes, to assist "in-house station counsel and outside legal consultants." For the most part, this book fulfills that promise. Privately published by the Association of Public Television Stations (APTS) in Washington, D.C. and …

Tax Incentives: A Means Of Encouraging Research And Development For Homeland Security?, Jennifer L. Venghaus

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword: "Just Do It!": Title Ix As A Threat To University Autonomy, Richard A. Epstein

Michigan Law Review

For a short time I was stymied to identify a suitable theme for the Foreword to the 2003 Survey of Books in the Michigan Law Review. The task is surely a daunting one, because it is never possible to write a Foreword that offers the reader a Cook's Tour of the many distinguished offerings reviewed in its pages. Therefore I hope to link one broad theme to one narrow topic, knowing that at first it may look as though they have little in common. In taking this approach, I prefer dangerous shoals to well-marked channels. I shall therefore begin with …

The New Privacy, Paul M. Schwartz, William M. Treanor

Michigan Law Review

In 1964, as the welfare state emerged in full force in the United States, Charles Reich published The New Property, one of the most influential articles ever to appear in a law review. Reich argued that in order to protect individual autonomy in an "age of governmental largess," a new property right in governmental benefits had to be recognized. He called this form of property the "new property." In retrospect, Reich, rather than anticipating trends, was swimming against the tide of history. In the past forty years, formal claims to government benefits have become more tenuous rather than more secure. …

Judging Federal Regulations That Preempt State Law: The Role Of The Presumption Against Preemption, Charles G. Cole

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

The “Vast Wasteland” In Retrospect, Joel Rosenbloom

Federal Communications Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Adjusting The Horizontal And Vertical In Telecommunications Regulation: A Comparison Of The Traditional And A New Layered Approach, Rob Frieden

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Article assesses the viability of different vertical regulatory regimes in an increasingly convergent environment. It reviews several FCC proceedings that have generated opportunities for stakeholders to avoid regulatory parity by qualifying for reduced regulation based on service definitions. It also considers whether a horizontal regulatory approach can reduce the number of regulatory asymmetries and inconsistencies. The Author concludes that although a horizontal regulatory structure may not secure sufficient political support because of the risk of extending new burdens on previously unregulated activities, that type of structure makes better sense in a convergent, increasingly Internet-dominated marketplace and provides a more …

Access To Local Rights-Of-Way: A Rebuttal, William Malone

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Author rebuts the proposals and analysis regarding the impact of local rights-of-way access on competitive local exchange carriers put forth in a May 2002 FCLJ Article by Christopher Day. He argues that Day's Article lacks persuasive evidence that CLECs are harmed by lack of rights-of-way access. He states, first, that Day has misconceived the intent of the rights-of-way requirements in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and, second, that the FCC does not have the authority to make substantive adjucative decisions that Day called for. He concludes that neither of the proposals made by Day-an amendment to the Telecommunications Act …

The Legacy Of The Federal Communications Commission’S Computer Inquiries, Robert Cannon

Federal Communications Law Journal

The FCC and the computer industry have learned much in the 35 years since the agency first began to regulate computer networks. Safeguards were imposed on common carriers for the benefit of the networks. This Article examines the so-called Computer Inquiries and how they have repeatedly re-examined and redefined the nature of the regulatory treatment of computer networks over communications networks. The Author reviews Computer I, in which the FCC first attempted to divide the world technologically between computers that ran communications networks ("pure communications") and computers at the end of telephone lines with which people interacted ("pure data processing"). …

Avoiding Slim Reasoning And Shady Results: A Proposal For Indecency And Obscenity Regulation In Radio And Broadcast Television, Jacob T. Rigney

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Note explores the relevant law regarding the issue of indecency and obscenity in broadcast, with particular focus on a 2001 Policy Statement released by the FCC. The Author examines the major problems with the regulatory scheme as it now exists, and offers an alternative. The Author concludes by arguing that leaving the subjective decisions regarding indecency to market forces, leaving parents to determine what should or should not be indecent, and leaving the FCC free to pursue obscenity with greater zeal is the most appropriate course of action for the future.

Encryption Regulation In The Wake Of September 11, 2001: Must We Protect National Security At The Expense Of The Economy?, Matthew Parker Voors

Federal Communications Law Journal

This Note argues that although privacy and economic concerns have ruled the encryption debate during the past decade, the move toward increased privacy on the Internet and relaxed encryption regulation, designed to promote electronic commerce, comes at the expense of national security and the protection of Americans' safety. The Article begins with historical information about encryption and an examination of how businesses use encryption to secure their communications and financial transactions on the Internet. This Section also observes that this technology is employed by terrorist organizations to accomplish the same goal: to send private communications. The Author next details the …

From Diversity To Duplication: Mega-Mergers And The Failure Of The Marketplace Model Under The Telecommunications Act Of 1996, Anastasia Bednarski

Federal Communications Law Journal

"Mega-owners" in the radio regime became possible with the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which radically deregulated national and local radio station ownership limits that had been in existence for almost sixty years. The Act reflected Congress's firm belief that a deregulated marketplace would best serve the public interest. This Note argues that the 1996 Act is an example of excessive adherence to the marketplace model, particularly for regulating the radio industry. The Author argues that although a less extreme marketplace model has guided the FCC's regulation of radio since the early 1980s, the current incarnation of the marketplace model is …

Drug Regulations And The Constitution After Western States, Margaret Gilhooley

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Remarks On Genetically Modified Foods And International Regulation, Jean Halloran

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

I will try and be brief since everybody has heard from me already. I’m just going to talk about something which probably none of you have heard of. Ten or twenty years ago, people had really not heard of it but after GATT, the general arrangements for tariffs and trade, it acquired special status, which was that if you are using a food safety standard in which you can develop byproducts, then it is assumed that your standard is a legitimate one and you cannot be challenged by the World Trade Organization on that standard.

Regulating Genetically Modified Foods: Is Mandatory Labeling The Right Answer?, Gregory Conko

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Thank you. It’s a very common mistake to believe that consumers could only have a choice if the government requires mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food. My question back to you, Jean, is, exactly what kind of information do consumers get if all you do is label the product as “Genetically Engineered?” We can take this up later in the debate part of our panel discussion. I think the one thing that we can all agree on, however, is that the food label is a very important source of information to consumers.

Regulating Genetically Modified Foods: Is Mandatory Labeling The Right Answer?, Jonathan Adler

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here, and I appreciate the invitation. What I want to talk about are some legal issues relating to labeling and, in particular, constitutional issues relating to mandatory labeling for genetically modified foods or food products that may contain genetically modified components. This is a separate issue from whether or not the FDA, or some other agency, has sufficient statutory authority at present to mandate labeling, and that is something worth discussing. Even if they do have such authority, or even if Congress tomorrow were to give the FDA such authority or were to …

Panel Remarks On Regulating Genetically Modified Foods: Is Mandatory Labeling The Right Answer?, Michael Rodemeyer, Jonathan Adler, Greg Conko, Jean Halloran

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Thank you to all of our speakers. I can assure everybody in the audience that you will not be specialists on this topic after today, since we can easily spend a whole afternoon on this topic. Let me ask Jean first of all, do you want to respond to anything you’ve heard from the speakers after you?

The Freedom Of Information Act Post-9/11: Balancing The Public's Right To Know, Critical Infrastructure Protection, And Homeland Security, Kristen Elizabeth Uhl

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Globalization, Democracy, And The Need For A New Administrative Law, Alfred C. Aman

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Globalization and Governance: The Prospects for Democracy, Symposium

Remarks On Genetically Modified Foods And International Regulation, Mark Mansour

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

First of all, I want to thank you all for having us here for a wonderful program. To start out, I had intended to address some issues that Jean Halloran has raised. The first point regarding the Committee on Food Labeling, why the United States is opposed to regimes and the considerations of the past couple of years, is very simple. It’s not a matter at looking at trade cases rather because the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as Dr. Hoover stated before, does not provide a consumer’s right to know.

It’s not to say the consumer’s right to know …

Remarks On Genetically Modified Foods And International Regulation, Tony Van Der Haegen

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

Thank you. I certainly don’t want to interfere in the American debate about labeling, since I have already enough problems with European consumers, but what I would like to do today is not only to talk about our legislation a bit, because it’s so detailed and complex, but also to talk about the European/ American trade relations, in particular as it relates to biotechnology. First of all, I would like to say there is a strong trans-Atlantic relationship as far as trade is concerned between the EU and the U.S. We have to realize that we have a trade level …

Remarks On Genetically Modified Foods And International Regulation, Thomas N. Sleight

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

I’m going to speak on a slightly different perspective here. I guess the first question I have is how many farmers do we have in the audience? Val, I marked you down as an organic farmer here today, as I learned that today. I don’t think we have many, and I’m going to take a fantastic leap of judgment saying that the students that are here at the University of Richmond School of Law are not preparing for careers in agriculture. So, I’m going to come from a farmer’s point of view. I will jump back and forth between my …

Regulating Genetically Modified Foods: Is Mandatory Labeling The Right Answer?, Jean Halloran

Richmond Journal of Law & Technology

hank you. Consumer Union, which is the organization that I work for, favors labeling genetically engineered food. At the base of our view on this issue is the view that genetically engineered food is different than regular food. I know some of our previous speakers have spoken about how this is all just one big continuum from conventional crops, but when you look at spider- silk goats, which are goats genetically engineered to produce spider silk in their milk that do in fact exist already on a test farm, the ordinary persons sees something different. To the ordinary person, a …

Back To Basics: A Call To Reevalute The Unemployment Insurance Disqualification For Misconduct, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 27 (2003), Lisa Lawler Graditor

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Executive Certification Requirements In The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002: A Case For Criminalizing Executive Recklessness, Christopher Wyant

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment focuses on sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Section 302 requires Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs), or their equivalents, to personally certify the accuracy of financial disclosure filings required by the SEC and to vouch for the reliability of the internal corporate controls that produce that information.'4 Section 906 contains an additional certification requirement and provides specific criminal penalties for willful or knowing violations of that requirement.'" An efficiency-based analysis of these two sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act suggests that including a recklessness standard of intent would be more likely to increase …