IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Thursday, December 8, 2005

CRS Report on Applying Indecency Regs to Cable
(previous | next)

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), which is basically a small, non-partisan think tank within Congress, just released a new report on the "Constitutionality of Applying the FCC's Indecency Restriction to Cable Television." While trying his best to avoid any controversial statements on the matter, the report's author Henry Cohen, a legislative attorney at CRS, concludes that "It appears likely that a court would find that to apply the FCC's indecency restriction to cable television would be unconstitutional." Cohen addresses the many different ways the courts might approach the issue, but points out that the government's case will be weak in almost every respect.

This is an issue we have invested a lot of intellectual energy in at Progress & Freedom Foundation. If you are interested in our take on the constitutionality of the many ways in which Congress might seek to expand content controls to cable and satellite television, you might want to read the following 3 reports:

* "Can Broadcast Indecency Regulations Be Extended to Cable Television and Satellite Radio?" by Robert Corn-Revere, PFF Progress on Point 12.8, May 2005.

* "Thinking Seriously about Cable & Satellite Censorship: An Informal Analysis of S-616, The Rockefeller-Hutchison Bill," by Adam D. Thierer, PFF Progress on Point 12.6, April 2005.

* "'Kid-Friendly' Tiering Mandates: More Government Nannyism for Cable TV," by Adam D. Thierer, PFF Progress Snapshot 1.2, May 2005.

posted by Adam Thierer @ 3:43 PM | Free Speech

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly

Post a Comment:

Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation