Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#20
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Todd Daugherty" wrote in message ... "Dave Heil" wrote in message ... Todd Daugherty wrote: "Phil Kane" wrote in message ganews.com... On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 18:45:19 -0600, Todd Daugherty wrote: (a) it's not an FCC rule and is open to court interpretation. What do you mean it's not an FCC rule?? I think you better look again try 47 USC 326 or Title 47 of the United States Code (Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs), Chapter 5 ( WIRE OR RADIO COMMUNICATION), Subchapter 3 (SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO RADIO), Part 1 (General Provisions), Subsection 326 (Censorship) You didn't quote an FCC Rule (which are codified in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations). You quoted a Federal statute (which is codified in the U.S. Code). THEY "AIN'T" THE SAME !! So that's means no one should have to abide by Section 301 sense it's not a FCC rule. right? and secondly where in any of my ****ing post did I state I'm a lawyer? NOWHERE! So my in my ****ing opinion don't put words in my mouth. Phil asked you the following: "Where do you practice Communications Law, Todd?" You replied: "As for your question I have been very active in the micro broadcasting movement and I'm very knowledgeable when it comes to radio law. I am current working with a member of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunication in regards to the FCC and the licensing processing including filing windows and waivers." And if you read my other post I stated "I don't play "lawyer" I'm someone from his district who has a compelling interest in radio." Just like everyone else who has concerns can write and petition the government. After all it is the "PUBLIC AIRWAVES" and the public has the right to be concerned about what's going on. You didn't really provide an answer to Phil's question. Now you've resorting to multiple occurrences of the "eff" word in defending the indefensible. You've done so in barely corherent sentences. Do you really want to argue communications law with an expert in the field? There is really a heuristic approach you could try, Todd. Go ahead an push the envelope on the free speech issue on the air and see if the ax falls on you. If it never does, your theory is right or the feds aren't paying any attention to you right now. As I stated the only speech on the radio the FCC is allowed to regulate is Obscene and indecent material. Todd N9OGL Hello, Todd I believe that 3rd party traffic is also restricted to most of the countries in the world. Depending upon what country you pass 3rd party traffic to, the FCC might be the least of your problems ![]() Best regards from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Rules changes/enforcement at Dayton Hamvention | Boatanchors | |||
RILEY SAYS K1MAN BROADCASTS ARE LEGAL | Policy | |||
RILEY SAYS K1MAN BROADCASTS ARE LEGAL | General | |||
FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Letters for the Period Ending May 1, 2004 | General | |||
There is no International Code Requirement and techs can operate HF according to FCC Rules | General |