
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 3: The Majority Decision)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/</link>
	<description>Keeping politicians&#039; hands off the Net &#38; everything else related to technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 22:43:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blawg Review #210 &#124; China Law Blog</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-75436</link>
		<dc:creator>Blawg Review #210 &#124; China Law Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2012 19:56:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/?p=17970#comment-75436</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] discussed by several legal bloggers, including ScotusBlog Lyle Denniston, Ken at the Popehat blog, The Technology Liberation Front, Jon Siegel, and Sasha [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] discussed by several legal bloggers, including ScotusBlog Lyle Denniston, Ken at the Popehat blog, The Technology Liberation Front, Jon Siegel, and Sasha [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blawg Review #210 &#124;</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-59238</link>
		<dc:creator>Blawg Review #210 &#124;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 17:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/?p=17970#comment-59238</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] discussed by several legal bloggers, including ScotusBlog Lyle Denniston, Ken at the Popehat blog, The Technology Liberation Front, Jon Siegel, and Sasha [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] discussed by several legal bloggers, including ScotusBlog Lyle Denniston, Ken at the Popehat blog, The Technology Liberation Front, Jon Siegel, and Sasha [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: La regulación de la (in)decencia, a propósito del caso FCC v. Fox</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-59234</link>
		<dc:creator>La regulación de la (in)decencia, a propósito del caso FCC v. Fox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 21:29:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/?p=17970#comment-59234</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] de la convergencia tecnológica. Tal como señala Adam Thierer (The Thechnology Liberation Front: Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 3: The Majority Decision)) los niños que la Corte Suprema cree que la FCC [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] de la convergencia tecnológica. Tal como señala Adam Thierer (The Thechnology Liberation Front: Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 3: The Majority Decision)) los niños que la Corte Suprema cree que la FCC [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 5: The Dissents) &#124; The Technology Liberation Front</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-59215</link>
		<dc:creator>Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 5: The Dissents) &#124; The Technology Liberation Front</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 02:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/?p=17970#comment-59215</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] decision the case, which was driven solely by procedural / admin law considerations. [See Part 3.]  I also discussed Justice Thomas&#8217;s very interesting concurring opinion, which took a [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] decision the case, which was driven solely by procedural / admin law considerations. [See Part 3.]  I also discussed Justice Thomas&#8217;s very interesting concurring opinion, which took a [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 4: The Thomas Concurrence) &#124; The Technology Liberation Front</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2009/04/28/supreme-court-decision-in-fcc-v-fox-part-3-the-majority-decision/comment-page-1/#comment-59195</link>
		<dc:creator>Supreme Court Decision in FCC v. Fox (Part 4: The Thomas Concurrence) &#124; The Technology Liberation Front</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/?p=17970#comment-59195</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;[...] Court decision in FCC v. Fox, I have been commenting on the logic and implications of the decision. Part 3 dealt with the majority&#8217;s decision in the case, which was driven solely by procedural / admin [...]&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Court decision in FCC v. Fox, I have been commenting on the logic and implications of the decision. Part 3 dealt with the majority&#8217;s decision in the case, which was driven solely by procedural / admin [...]</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

