
December 4th 04, 07:46 PM
|
|
"Landshark" wrote in message
. com...
"Leland C. Scott" wrote in message
...
"Landshark" wrote in message
news
"Leland C. Scott" wrote in message
...
"Landshark" wrote in message
news
"Leland C. Scott" wrote in message
...
You guys need to read this before going any further.
Sample court motion below.
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_158.pdf
Ummm, Lee, that's cool, but that was a song writer, Radio
Station, their Lawyers filing a civil case. That's why it's Sarah
Jones
vs.
The FCC................. Do you have that option to pay their fine ,
then
take them to court?
That wasn't a Ham or a cb'er. Not many people can have a lawyer, let
alone
multiple lawyers go to court for a Nal.
Offical FCC legal process. The link below should be all on one
line
to
work.
http://frwebgate5.access.gpo.gov/cgi...i on=retrieve
This should settle the argument permently if you understand legal
terms.
Dead link. No argument settled
Then try this one.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/w...47cfr1_03.html
Plenty of stuff to read. The details are all spelled out there. You will
have to do some jumping around from subsection to subsection. When
you're
done I think you'll have a better feel for how the FCC goes about it's
business. It's not as Macavelian as Frank and the others would have you
believe. There is legal recourse, in front of an Administrate Law Judge.
And
If you don't like the results then you can go to an Appeals Court. The
FCC
does have Congressional oversight. In fact many Federal agencies have a
Congressional oversight committee that directs their actions. We the
public
may not hear about it much, but then again how may people really have
that
much interest in how their government works to go and find out? Most
people
don't even know who their state's congressional members are by name.
Some may complain that the court hearings are done under the FCC. This
gets
back to what I mentioned in another post about what is "a court of law".
I
didn't make that statement lightly. It was meant to get one thinking
about
the subject. Twist provided a quickie definition. The proceedings may
not
fit everybody's stereotype of "a court of law" but it is one never the
less. You can also play all the word games you want too, by calling the
FCC
regulations "rules", but they are officially "administrate law", which
any
attorney can tell you.
Let me know what you think after you had time to read the material. I'm
not
going to debate it any further since it's all there for anybody to read.
I
will admit some of the explanations are a bit confusing. I suppose it
would
help to have a legal background to fully comprehend the details.
--
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO
Well, I've seen that before Leland, it proves Frank's
& mine statement that the FCC rules are just that, rule's
not laws. As such no real way to get out of a NAL fine
without taking the FCC to civil court and a lawyer.......
Lots of bucks to get that lawyer working for you.
(f) Notice of apparent liability. Before imposing a forfeiture
penalty under the provisions of this paragraph, the Commission or its
designee will issue a written notice of apparent liability.
(1) Content of notice. The notice of apparent liability will:
(i) Identify each specific provision, term, or condition of any act,
rule, regulation, order, treaty, convention, or other agreement,
license, permit, certificate, or instrument of authorizationwhich the
respondent has apparently violated or with which he has failed to
comply,
(ii) Set forth the nature of the act or omission charged against the
respondent and the facts upon which such charge is based,
(iii) State the date(s) on which such conduct occurred, and
(iv) Specify the amount of the apparent forfeiture penalty.
(2) Delivery. The notice of apparent liability will be sent to the
respondent, by certified mail, at his last known address (see Sec. 1.5).
(3) Response. The respondent will be afforded a reasonable period of
time (usually 30 days from the date of the notice) to show, in writing,
why a forfeiture penalty should not be imposed or should be reduced, or
to pay the forfeiture. Any showing as to why the forfeiture should not
be imposed or should be reduced shall include a detailed factual
statement and such documentation and affidavits as may be pertinent.
(4) Forfeiture order. If the proposed forfeiture penalty is not paid
in full in response to the notice of apparent liability, the Commission,
upon considering all relevant information available to it, will issue an
order canceling or reducing the proposed forfeiture or requiring that it
be paid in full and stating the date by which the forfeiture must be
paid.
(5) Judicial enforcement of forfeiture order. If the forfeiture is
not paid, the case will be referred to the Department of Justice for
collection under section 504(a) of the Communications Act.
You and Frank need to do some more reading. The appeal court process is
there too, but both of you like to conveniently ignore it. As far as the
regulations go, that they are only "rules", go tell that to an attorney
and watch him laugh at you. Better yet get a NAL yourself and tell that
wopper to the judge.
--
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO
Wireless Network
Mobile computing
on the go brought
to you by Micro$oft
|