• news
  • WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 23 2005 10:40 AM

US to FCC: "Quit Being Dicks!"

Submitted by Shal

Edited by Shal

A few years ago, the Federal Communications Commission tried to force use of the "broadcast flag" on the manufacturers of any device that could theoretically play copywrite-protected media. The broadcast flag is a bit of code that could block recording, copying, uploading, file-sharing of certain media, such as music and television shows by devices like a Tivo or PC.

The FCC claimed they had the ancillary right to force this content-protection standard on manufacturers because -- get this -- lawmakers had never told them they didn't have this power, so they could basically do whatever the hell they wanted.

Groups such as the American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical Library Association, Public Knowledge and the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that the FCC could not, in fact, do whatever the hell they wanted.

Today, a US Federal Appeals Court told the FCC to eat a dick.

"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world," [U.S. Circuit Judge Harry] Edwards said. He said the FCC "crossed the line" beyond its authority approved by Congress. "You've gone too far," he said. "Are washing machines next?"

Another circuit judge, David Sentelle, agreed. Sentelle acknowledged entertainment companies could be reluctant to broadcast high-quality movies or TV shows that can't be protected against copyright violators but said that wasn't the FCC's problem.

"It's going to have less content if it's not protected, but Congress didn't direct that you have to maximize content," Sentelle said. "You can't regulate washing machines.

"You can't rule the world."

Of course, the FCC is going to appeal the ruling, but for now consumer devices are safe from the restriction.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

Comments
Lotusmonger

Lotusmonger

Chicago, IL
May 2004

FEB 23, 2005 10:50 AM

is it seditionist to want to destroy the FCC?

dem_z

dem_z

United Kingdom
June 2004

FEB 23, 2005 10:51 AM

Another hare brained anti-copying scheme. The entertainment industry must be on drugs to think stuff like this would work.


Wait...

luckyride

luckyride

Portland, OR
May 2003

FEB 23, 2005 10:53 AM

fuck the fcc.


i think need to buy a shirt that says that.

mariothemonkey

mariothemonkey

Avon, OH
June 2004

FEB 23, 2005 10:55 AM

luckyride said:
fuck the fcc.


i think need to buy a shirt that says that.



Me too. I am really tired of the FCC.
ooo aaa

dAHMER

dahmer

South Vienna, OH
OLD SKOOL

FEB 23, 2005 11:00 AM

Thank god!

I could go for one of those 'Fuck the FCC' shirts, too, by the way.

MisterSatan

MisterSatan

Portland, OR
August 2002

FEB 23, 2005 11:10 AM

Lotusmonger said:
is it seditionist to want to destroy the FCC?


Hell no, I didn't vote for 'em.

Keith

Keith

Hooker, OK
August 2002

FEB 23, 2005 11:12 AM

Enfant_Terrible said:

luckyride said:
fuck the fcc.




*chants over and over and over*



You ever heard that Steve Earle song? "F the CC"?

TheG

TheG

Somerville, MA
February 2004

FEB 23, 2005 11:39 AM

But wait! If there was no FCC, we might all be subjected to another soul-charring vision like an almost-uncovered Janet Jackson breast! Oh, the humanity!

TheG

TheG

Somerville, MA
February 2004

FEB 23, 2005 11:42 AM

Also, I really, really, REALLY want to hear a federal appeals court judge tell the FCC specifically to "eat a dick". I can't tell you all how this thought makes me chuckle! (chuckle, chuckle chuckle...) biggrin

daversion

daversion

I'm lost
July 2004

FEB 23, 2005 11:51 AM

michael powell for president in 2008!

clintron

clintron

Portsmouth, NH
September 2003

FEB 23, 2005 12:07 PM

MisterSatan said:

Lotusmonger said:
is it seditionist to want to destroy the FCC?


Hell no, I didn't vote for 'em.



You don't vote for kings...

HenryTMensch

HenryTMensch

New York, NY
December 2004

FEB 23, 2005 12:20 PM

1. It's the Federal Communications COMMISSION.

2. It's a duly authorized part of the executive branch of the US government, so it's a little strange to say US to FCC, since the FCC is part of the US government.

3.

The FCC claimed they had the ancillary right to force this content-protection standard on manufacturers because -- get this -- lawmakers had never told them they didn't have this power, so they could basically do whatever the hell they wanted.



This argument actually isn't as far fetched as it might seem to be, as the legal arguments of executive agencies go.

4. The court in question is the DC Circuit Court of Appeals not the "US Federal Appeals Court." "US Federal Appeals Court" could be the description of a dozen or so courts in the US but is the proper title of none.

It wouldn't surprise me if Congress specifically authorizes such a requirement anyway so I wouldn't count this as a resounding victory just yet.

Admiral_Pants

Admiral_Pants

Austin, TX
May 2004

FEB 23, 2005 12:23 PM

AceTracer

acetracer

Hollywood, FL
January 2004

FEB 23, 2005 12:29 PM

Today, the US Federal Appeals Court told the FCC to eat a dick.


Once again, I ♥ Shalome.

Shal

Shal

Los Angeles, CA
October 2002

FEB 23, 2005 12:39 PM

HenryTMensch said:
1. It's the Federal Communications COMMISSION.

4. The court in question is the DC Circuit Court of Appeals not the "US Federal Appeals Court." "US Federal Appeals Court" could be the description of a dozen or so courts in the US but is the proper title of none.


Errors made due to posting before coffee corrected.

However:

WASHINGTON--A federal appeals court on Tuesday sharply questioned whether the Federal Communications Commission has the authority to ban certain types of digital TV receivers, including peripheral cards, starting in July.

Two of the three judges on the District of Columbia Circuit panel said the FCC never received permission from Congress to undertake such a sweeping regulation, which is intended to encourage the purchase of digital TV receivers that curb Internet distribution of over-the-air broadcasts of programming such as movies and sports.



HenryTMensch said:
2. It's a duly authorized part of the executive branch of the US government, so it's a little strange to say US to FCC, since the FCC is part of the US government.



Semantics. Bite me. "A US Federal Appeals Court to the FCC: "Quit Being Dicks!" " is a shitty headline.

HenryTMensch said:3.

The FCC claimed they had the ancillary right to force this content-protection standard on manufacturers because -- get this -- lawmakers had never told them they didn't have this power, so they could basically do whatever the hell they wanted.



This argument actually isn't as far fetched as it might seem to be, as the legal arguments of executive agencies go.



Funny, the judges -- you know, those people who interpret law and governmental powers -- disagree with you.



HenryTMensch said:It wouldn't surprise me if Congress specifically authorizes such a requirement anyway so I wouldn't count this as a resounding victory just yet.



Um.. I didn't count it as a resounding victory. I counted it as a court decision that prolongs the discussion while preventing this rule from being put in place right now.

[Edited on Feb 23, 2005 by Shalome]

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

featured interviews