Comments on: Markey’s Bark Worse Than His Bite http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:51:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Robert Cannon http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/comment-page-1/#comment-40622 Robert Cannon Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:53:53 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/#comment-40622 <p>"These policies would become part of the Communications Act, but as all lawyers know, Congressional declarations aren’t enforceable"</p> <p>What??? What about that favorite line from the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC 230 "It is the policy of the United States— (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation"</p> <p>47 USC 230 is entitled "Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material" but FCC Ch Powell morphed this into something somehow somewhere relevant to VoIP. This has become the lead line in almost half of any filings or court deliberations dealing with VoIP. Not sure what the work, "enforceable" means - it sure became policy.<p> B<br /> <a href="http://www.cybertelecom.org/" rel="nofollow">Cybertelecom</a></p></p> “These policies would become part of the Communications Act, but as all lawyers know, Congressional declarations aren’t enforceable”

What??? What about that favorite line from the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC 230 “It is the policy of the United States— (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation”

47 USC 230 is entitled “Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material” but FCC Ch Powell morphed this into something somehow somewhere relevant to VoIP. This has become the lead line in almost half of any filings or court deliberations dealing with VoIP. Not sure what the work, “enforceable” means – it sure became policy.

B
Cybertelecom

]]> By: Robert Cannon http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/comment-page-1/#comment-45142 Robert Cannon Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:53:53 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/#comment-45142 <p>"These policies would become part of the Communications Act, but as all lawyers know, Congressional declarations aren’t enforceable"</p> <p><br></p> <p>What??? What about that favorite line from the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC 230 "It is the policy of the United States— (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation"</p> <p><br></p> <p>47 USC 230 is entitled "Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material" but FCC Ch Powell morphed this into something somehow somewhere relevant to VoIP. This has become the lead line in almost half of any filings or court deliberations dealing with VoIP. Not sure what the work, "enforceable" means - it sure became policy.</p> <p><br><br>B<br><br><a href="http://www.cybertelecom.org/" rel="nofollow">Cybertelecom</a></br></p> “These policies would become part of the Communications Act, but as all lawyers know, Congressional declarations aren’t enforceable”


What??? What about that favorite line from the Communications Decency Act, 47 USC 230 “It is the policy of the United States— (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation”


47 USC 230 is entitled “Protection for private blocking and screening of offensive material” but FCC Ch Powell morphed this into something somehow somewhere relevant to VoIP. This has become the lead line in almost half of any filings or court deliberations dealing with VoIP. Not sure what the work, “enforceable” means – it sure became policy.



B

Cybertelecom

]]> By: Richard Bennett http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/comment-page-1/#comment-40621 Richard Bennett Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:39:52 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/#comment-40621 <p>I'm not a lawyer, so I don't necessarily understand what the bill does or doesn't do, but with that caveat I'd like to say that any attempt to amend Title I of the Communications Act scares me. The language that this bill adds to Title I in the present form isn't all that bad, but it could easily be amended along the way, and may emerge from conference with some real teeth.</p> <p>A lot of damage can be done by sleeper bills like this one.</p> I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t necessarily understand what the bill does or doesn’t do, but with that caveat I’d like to say that any attempt to amend Title I of the Communications Act scares me. The language that this bill adds to Title I in the present form isn’t all that bad, but it could easily be amended along the way, and may emerge from conference with some real teeth.

A lot of damage can be done by sleeper bills like this one.

]]> By: Richard Bennett http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/comment-page-1/#comment-45141 Richard Bennett Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:39:52 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2008/02/15/markeys-bark-worse-than-his-bite/#comment-45141 <p>I'm not a lawyer, so I don't necessarily understand what the bill does or doesn't do, but with that caveat I'd like to say that any attempt to amend Title I of the Communications Act scares me. The language that this bill adds to Title I in the present form isn't all that bad, but it could easily be amended along the way, and may emerge from conference with some real teeth.<br><br>A lot of damage can be done by sleeper bills like this one.</p> I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t necessarily understand what the bill does or doesn’t do, but with that caveat I’d like to say that any attempt to amend Title I of the Communications Act scares me. The language that this bill adds to Title I in the present form isn’t all that bad, but it could easily be amended along the way, and may emerge from conference with some real teeth.

A lot of damage can be done by sleeper bills like this one.

]]>