The chief author of the 1994 wiretapping law, U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, criticized the court's decision, saying Congress had deliberately excluded the Internet when it wrote the wiretap law. "The court's expansion of (the wiretapping law) to cover the Internet is troubling, and it is not what Congress intended," Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said in a statement.
COURT BACKS GOVERNMENT BROADBAND WIRETAP ACCESS
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Peter Kaplan]
JUDGE MAY DECIDE IF EAVESDROPPING IS LEGAL
[SOURCE: Reuters, AUTHOR: Daniel Trotta]
NSA TRAIN WRECK
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
FINDING FAULT WITH LOGIC OF CONGRESS'S E-MAIL PLAN
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Jeffrey H. Birnbaum]
Phone companies could enter cable markets within 90 days under streamlined franchising rules and cable incumbents could opt in to the new licensing regime when existing agreements expire or when phone companies arrive in the market, according to new telecommunications draft legislation from Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). He altered his position some in response to concerns by local officials. His original bill would have allowed AT&T and Verizon Communications to begin offering video service within 30 days. Local governments won another change: Sen Stevens modified his bill so that a video provider using the new franchising process would have to pay franchise fees based on a definition of gross revenue that includes commissions paid by home shopping channels. Cities argued that the original bill would have cut franchise fees by up to 20%. While Sen Stevens would not impose video-buildout requirements on phone companies, he would expose them to penalties for denial of service based on a group's income, race or religion. But phone companies could cite commercial infeasibility to defend against red-lining charges. Under the Stevens bill, local governments would be required to use a simplified franchising procedure crafted by the FCC, in a concession to phone-company concerns that current local franchising system is long, tedious and a barrier to competition. On network neutrality, the new 151-page bill is no different from the original (S. 2686) released May 1. It would require the Federal Communications Commission to study the Internet market and file annual reports to Congress over a five-year period. Sen Stevens is holding a hearing Tuesday on his Communications, Consumer's Choice and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006. He hopes to vote it out of committee June 20 despite strong opposition by Sen. Daniel Inouye (Hawaii) -- the panel's top Democrat -- to the net-neutrality language.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6342816.html?display=Breaking+News
For more on the bill, see: http://www.benton.org/node/2173
Phone companies could enter cable markets within 90 days under streamlined franchising rules and cable incumbents could opt in to the new licensing regime when existing agreements expire or when phone companies arrive in the market, according to new telecommunications draft legislation from Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). He altered his position some in response to concerns by local officials. His original bill would have allowed AT&T and Verizon Communications to begin offering video service within 30 days. Local governments won another change: Sen Stevens modified his bill so that a video provider using the new franchising process would have to pay franchise fees based on a definition of gross revenue that includes commissions paid by home shopping channels. Cities argued that the original bill would have cut franchise fees by up to 20%. While Sen Stevens would not impose video-buildout requirements on phone companies, he would expose them to penalties for denial of service based on a group's income, race or religion. But phone companies could cite commercial infeasibility to defend against red-lining charges. Under the Stevens bill, local governments would be required to use a simplified franchising procedure crafted by the FCC, in a concession to phone-company concerns that current local franchising system is long, tedious and a barrier to competition. On network neutrality, the new 151-page bill is no different from the original (S. 2686) released May 1. It would require the Federal Communications Commission to study the Internet market and file annual reports to Congress over a five-year period. Sen Stevens is holding a hearing Tuesday on his Communications, Consumer's Choice and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006. He hopes to vote it out of committee June 20 despite strong opposition by Sen. Daniel Inouye (Hawaii) -- the panel's top Democrat -- to the net-neutrality language.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6342816.html?display=Breaking+News
For more on the bill, see: http://www.benton.org/node/2173
CONTROL OVER CABLE TV SHIFTING
[SOURCE: Associated Press, AUTHOR: Deborah Yao]
OMINOUS NEUTRALITY
[SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, AUTHOR: Steve Forbes]
THE INTERNET'S FUTURE
[SOURCE: Washington Post, AUTHOR: Editorial Staff]
© 1994-2024 Benton Institute for Broadband & Society. All Rights Reserved.
