[BC] RE: Vague FCC Rules

[Tom Taggart]

Rich:

To quote, once again, Dick the Butcher, "first we kill all the lawyers." 

Note how quickly the FCC wanted their obscenity case sent back to them "for review" when someone with money & lots of Washington lawyers took it to the next level (Court of Appeals).  It's Newton Minnow and government by "raised eyebrows" all over again.

On IBOC interference, I have a nice case I found from the Ohio court of appeals that would be interesting precedent to get an IBOC interference case at least into court. In that case the trial court wouldn't let a neighbor sue a cell tower owner with dead tower lights because the issue was "premepted" by the Feds, that is, the FAA.  Court of appeals said no, the neighbor could try to at least make his case (though they were clearly skeptical that he had any case).

For IBOC I would argue on a theory of trespass (by the IBOC station on the harmed station's licensed coverage) or nuisance, or a malicious interference with business. In the local court of the interferred-with station.  Suspect the GM of the IBOC station would turn the system off before paying his high-priced counsel to go down argue this issue before a local judge. (We elect judges out here...heh, heh, heh.)
--