Media Law Exam 3

Wireless Ship Act of 1910

Required all commercial vessels with 50 or more passengers to have a wireless telegraphy (tapping) on board.

Radio Act of 1912

Established government control under the Secretary of Commerce to issue licenses to radio transmitters.

Hoover v. Intercity Radio (1923)

A federal court determined that the Secretary of Commerce had to give a broadcast license to any person who applied.

U.S. v. Zenith Radio (1926)

A federal court ruled that the Commerce Department lacked the authority to regulate frequency, power or hours the radio station could operate.

Radio Act of 1927

This legislation established the Federal Radio Commission as a separate agency which only oversaw the radio industry.

Communication Act of 1934

This legislation established the Federal Communication Commission which oversees the telephone, radio, TV, cable, etc. industries.

Section 326 of the Communication Act of 1934

Forbids FCC to "censor" broadcasters.

NBC v. U.S. (1943)

The USSC held that the FCC can regulate the electronic media and the rules it makes must be obeyed.

FCC Commissioner appointment requirements

Five commissioners are appointed by the President with the approval of the Senate; no more than 3 from the same political party; no financial interests in company FCC oversees; must be U.S. citizens.

Enforcement Powers of the FCC

A simple letter, a cease-and-desist order, forfeitures (fines), short-term renewals, and renewal denials and revocation.

In re Mayflower Broadcasting (1941)

Stations could not use their stations to express opinions or editorialize.

In re United Broadcasting Co. (1945)

Stations could not refuse to sell time for discussion of controversial issues.

Report on Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees (1949)

Devote a reasonable percentage of time to the coverage of controversial public issues and provide a reasonable opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints.

American Security Council educational Foundation v. CBS (1979)

When a complaining party and a broadcaster disagree in the characterization of a controversial issue or its public importance the FCC must accept the broadcaster's reasonable characterization.

In re Cullman Broadcasting Co. (1963)

A station must not wait for a spokesperson to appear.

Banzhaf v. FCC (1968)

Applied fairness doctrine to cigarette smoking, later dropped against commercial ads.

Syracuse Peace Council v. FCC

A federal court ruled that the FCC had the right to eliminate the fairness doctrine because it thwarted the discussion of public issues.

Personal Attack Rule (PAR)

Attack on honesty, integrity, and character of a person or group; must notify as to time, date, and ID of broadcast within one week; a script or tape or accurate summary must be supplied; an offer of a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Red lion broadcasting v. FCC (1969)

The USSC upheld the FCC's PAR as constitutional.

RTNDA v. FCC (2000)

The Court ruled the rules were vague and entangled the government in the day-to-day operation of the broadcasters and led to the government second guessing the judgement of professional broadcast journalist.

Zapple Doctrine

Applies Section 315 to spokesperson or support of a candidate and not just to the candidate.

Section 315 requirements

Applies to state / local candidates; must be a legally qualified candidate; rate change 45 days before a primary and 60 days prior to general election at lowest unit cost; requires equal opportunity and equal time.

Section 315 station obligations

Station can't censor program content but can reject based on technical consideration; station has option not to run ad - as long as it is not running any political ads at all.

Section 312

Applies to Federal Candidates; must be legally qualified candidate; rates change 45 days before a primary and 60 days prior to general election and must be at lowest unit cost; must run ad when submitted.

In re:

In the matter of / concerning / with regard to.

Section 312 and 315 exemptions

Bona fide newscast, Bona fide news interview, Bona fide documentary, On-the-spot news coverage

Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Tornillo (1974)

USSC held that newspapers have different First Amendment rights than electronic media.

FCC v. WNCN Listeners guild (1981)

A radio station is free to change its format without considering the impact on the public.

FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978)

USSC ruled that the FCC could regulate indecent programming.

In re WGBH Educational Foundation (1978)

The FCC found a public TV station airing programs which contained nudity and "adult" themes. It was not indecent because it was not repetitive use of questionable material.

Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2006

Increased the fines that the FCC can charge broadcasters - $325,000 for one profane or indecent word or image - up to a max of $3 million for one program.

ACT v. FCC (1988) Importance

The DC Circuit ruled that the FCC should regulate a broad range of offensive descriptions or depictions of sexual or excretory activity.

ACT v. FCC (1992) Importance

The US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit declared a 24 hour ban unconstitutional.

In re Infinity Broadcasting Corp. (1987) Importance

The FCC stated it would look at the "serious merit" of a program as a factor in determining "indecency"; the reasonable rick of children in the audience; and a warning should precede the program.

Sable Communications v. FCC (1989) Importance

A total ban on dial-a-porn is unconstitutional. Indecent phone messages have some constitutional protection.

US v. Edge Broadcasting (1993)

USSC held that a state can regulate commercial speech broadcast such as lottery results.

Core Programming requirements

30+ mins long, Regularly scheduled, Broadcast from 6:00am - 10pm local time

US v. Southwestern Cable co. (1968)

USSC held that FCC has a rights to apply broadcasting rules and regulations to cable television.

Fortnightly Corp. v. Unites Artists TV, Inc. (1968) Importance

USSC held that retransmission of a TV signal wasn't a copyright infringement because it wasn't a performance.

Teleprompter Corp. v. CBS (1974) Importance

USSC held that retransmission by a microwave facility (MDS) wasn't a copyright infringement.

Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984

Allowed "leased access" channels, Obscene programming not allowed, Local and state governments and the federal government have shared authority over cable, PEG left up to local governments.

Quincy Cable TV, Inc. v. FCC (1985) Importance

USSC held that "must carry" rules were unconstitutional.

City of Los Angelas v. Preferred Comm. (1986) Importance

USSC held that lower courts should determine if cable companies should be allowed to compete.

Turner Broadcasting Systems v. FCC (1997) Significance

The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment test it will use for cable will be the print model.

ABC v. Aereo, Inc. (2014) Holding

The USSC ruled against Aereo. Aereo was in violation of the Copyright Act because the material that was rebroadcast was determined to be a public performance.

Cable TV Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992

Regulated rates cable systems charged subscribers, Required cable system to carry local broadcast television stations, Barred local governments from allowing one cable system to monopolize service.

National Association for Better Broadcasting v. FCC (1988) Importance

A federal court determined that DBS is a non-broadcast service.

Satellite Home Viewer Act of 1988 Importance

Satellite viewers can receive signals from networks, so long as they are not in the broadcast area of that network.

Carry One, Carry All Rule

If you carry one local station, you must carry them all.

Telecommunication Act of 1996 TV ownership limit

Originally 35%, now 39%.

Reconsideration Order (2017) ownership limit

39% ownership

TV and Cable cross-ownership rule

Eliminated

License renewal period

8 years

Reno v. ACLU (1996)

Communication Decency Act was declared unconstitutional

Section 230 immunity

ISPs will not be treated as publishers/speakers of user-generated content

Instances where Section 230 immunity may not apply

Federal criminal law, Intellectual property law, Sex trafficking

Net Neutrality

ISPs cannot charge content providers to speed up the delivery of their content

Restoring Internet Freedom Order (2018)

Rolled back net neutrality rules against blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization

Statute of Anne 1710

14-year term with a second 14-year term possible

1909 Copyright Act term

28-year term with a second 28-year term possible

1976 Copyright Act term

Life plus 50 years

Sonny Bono Amendment (1998)

Life plus 70 years

Copyright Act of 1976 duration for anonymous/pseudonymous/work for hire

75 years from publication or 100 years from creation (whichever is less)

Copyright eligibility requirements

Work must be original, possess minimal degree of creativity, and be fixed in a tangible medium

Donaldson v. Beckett (1710)

Court ruled that a term for copy right ownership is legal

White Smith Music Pub. V. Apollo (1908)

Can not copyright player piano rolls

Mazer v. Stein (1954)

The court declared that encouragement of individual effort by personal gain is the best way to advance the public welfare through the talents of authors and inventors

Scene a faire

Expected components of a story that cannot be copy protected, e.g., shootout in a Western

Apple v. Franklin (1983) significance

Clarified that binary code, the machine-readable form of software and firmware, was copyrightable

Baker v. Selden (1879) significance

Sharpened the idea-expression dichotomy and refined the merger doctrine

Merger doctrine

If an idea can only be expressed in one or a small number of ways, copyright law will not protect the expression because it has merged with the idea

Advantages of copyright registration

Ability to file a lawsuit, statutory damages, lawyer's fees, and injunction

Work Made for Hire (Section 101)

A work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment, then employer is the author

Community for Creative Non-violence v. Reid

USSC established criteria for independent contractors regarding work for hire

Feist Pub. V. Telephone Service Co. (1991) importance

USSC rejected the sweat of the brow argument; copyright protects originality, not effort

Droit de suite

The right to follow a work so owners will continue to receive royalties from all works sold

Droit moral (Moral Rights)

a person can protect alterations of a painting, drawing, and photography; but not motion pictures, posters, charts, books, magazines, or newspapers

Visual Artists Right Act in 1990

Congress passed this act; colorization won't occur with films under this act. Can't change or modify original film works under this list.

Extrinsic test

comparison of things like plot, dialog, etc.

Intrinsic test

whether a reasonable person would judge the two works similar

Fair Use Section 107

Codifies the fair use defense in a copyright case. You can use someone else's copyrighted work in a very small portion protected under the fair use criteria.

Four factors of fair use

Purpose and character of the use, Nature of the copyright work, Effect upon the potential market, Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the work as a whole.

Williams and Wilkins v. US (1973)

The court ruled that preventing noncommercial copying would hamper medical research. Also, there was insufficient evidence that the multiple copies hurt the journal publishers financially.

Wainwright Securities Inc. v. Wall Street Transcripts (1978)

The US Court of Appeals held that summaries of commercial reports infringed on Wainwright's copyright because the summaries made it unnecessary to purchase the original

Harper and Row v. Nation (1985)

The USSC held that Nation had captured the "heart" of the book (why Ford pardoned Nixon). This action by Nation was determined not to be fair use.

Google v. Oracle (2021)

The Court ruled that Google's new smartphone platform was not a market substitute for Java SE. because all four factors support a finding of fair use, Google's limited copying constituted fair use.

Salinger v. Random House (1987)

The Court of Appeals ruled that unpublished letters are assumed to have a copyright on them.

New Era Pub. Int'l v. henry Holt & Co. (1990)

A Federal Appeals Court declared a person's unpublished material is deemed to have a copyright and a court must issue an injunction against any book or magazine violating such copyrights.

Congressional Action on unpublished materials

Congress reacting to pressure from researchers has declared that all unpublished materials are covered by the Copyright Law until 2003.

Sony v. Universal Studios (1984)

The USSC held that technology wasn't in violation of the fair use standard because people used the technology to "time shift".

Basic Books v. Kinko's graphics (1991)

The court declared course packets as commercial ventures in violation of fair use.

Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Service (1996)

US appellate courts found that fair use did not protect commercial services that profited from developing course packets.

Acuff-Rose Music Inc. v. Campbell (1993)

USSC ruled that the music parody was not a copyright infringement. It was a transformative use of the original.

Burnett v. twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. 2007

Court ruled this was a classic protected parody, "The 18-second clip of the animated figure resembling the 'Charwomen' mopping the floor next to 'blow up dolls', a rack of 'XXX' movies, and 'video booths' in a porn shop is clearly designed to imitate [Mrs. Burnett's] classic style.

2015 FCC Open Internet Order

Banned throttling, paid prioritization, and blocking.

FCC commissioners

Serve 5-year terms.