American Libraries |
||
Site Navigation
Left Sidebar ItemsOnline Features
Follow American Libraries news stories, videos, and blog posts on Twitter.
|
||
Court Questions FCC over Digital-TV Copy RestrictionsA U.S. appeals panel voiced skepticism February 22 about new federal rules requiring some digital video devices to incorporate copy-protection technology designed to prevent redistribution of programming. The hearing was held to address a challenge to a November 2003 Federal Communications Commission regulation filed by a coalition of library organizations and consumer groups, including the American Library Association, the Association of Research Libraries, and the Medical Library Association. The FCC regulation called for many televisions, personal computers, and video recorders to recognize a “broadcast flag” embedded in the signal that would restrict copies from being played on other machines or being shared over the internet.Two of the judges on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said the FCC never received permission from Congress to adopt such a sweeping regulation, the Associated Press reported February 23. FCC attorney Jacob M. Lewis contended it was permissible since Congress didn’t explicitly forbid it. Judge Harry Edwards said the FCC had “crossed the line,” asking, “Are washing machines next?” Judge David B. Sentelle observed that while entertainment companies could be reluctant to broadcast high-quality programming that can’t be protected against copyright violators, that wasn’t the FCC’s problem. “It’s going to have less content if it’s less protected, but Congress didn’t direct that you have to maximize content,” he said. Sentelle also questioned whether the groups can lawfully contest the agency, the online CNet News reported February 22. “You have to have a harm that distinguishes you from the public at large,” he said. “If there is not a particularized harm, you do not have standing.” If the panel decides that coalition lacks standing, it would dismiss the case regardless of its merits. A decision is expected within months. Posted February 25, 2005. |
Right Sidebar
|
|
