[BC] FCC commissioner says "we may have gone too far" on indecency

[Mike McCarthy]

The Constitution also exempts the public from even voluntarily "accepting a 
waiver as a condition" because the action is not truly voluntary.  It's 
like giving up your right to free speech to receive a telephone line.

I would not expect the FCC enact such a rule as it would most certainly be 
challenged.

MM

At 11:59 AM 8/26/2006 -0400, Phil Alexander wrote:
>On 25 Aug 2006 at 19:23, Rich Wood wrote:
>
>
> > I'm sure his comments will be used in the first First Amendment test
> > of the vagueness of the FCC's rules on indecency. I'll bet most of
> > the attorneys who'll have to fight to retain the Commission's hold on
> > indecency regulation rushed out to stock up on Pepto Bismol.
>
>Not necessarily. It is possible that it may be inserted in renewals
>as other things such as file and RF compliance have been. IOW the
>licensee does agree that it will not violate the rules on indecency
>as a part of its application for renewal. It may be an end run around
>the US Constitution, but how is that unique for the FCC?
>
>
>---------------------------------------------
>Phil Alexander, CSRE, AMD
>Broadcast Engineering Services and Technology
>(a Div. of Advanced Parts Corporation)
>Ph. (317) 335-2065   FAX (317) 335-9037