The Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Is the FCC getting desperate?

Re: Is the FCC getting desperate?

James Gattuso — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 09:45:20 -0000

It's jargon. Like saying "section 214" or "271 approvals". It's meant to keep outsiders out of telecommunications. There's a secret handshake too, but I'm not allowed to show it to you.

Re: Is the FCC getting desperate?

jerrybrito — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:29:35 -0000

James, Thanks for pointing this out. From reading the NPRM, however, it's impossible to tell that's what they meant. In the sentence before they mention Ã?ÃÂ§ 706 they refer to Ã?ÃÂ§ 621(a)(1) of the 1934 Act. In fact, every mention of a statutory section before Ã?ÃÂ§ 706 is in reference to the 1934 Act. So, it's disconcerting that they suddenly say 'Do we have Authority under Ã?ÃÂ§ 706?" and don't bother to say they mean to reference the 1996 Act and not the 34 Act generally. I guess it's just jargon and they expect everyone to know what 706 means. -Jerry

Re: Is the FCC getting desperate?

precision blogger — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:22:45 -0000

The FCC has hit on a great idea, not a typo. The current "war" (on terrorism) obviously will never end, so war powers will be permanent. It's really worth grabbing any power you can get that might be permanent, isn't it?
- precision blogger,
http://precision-blogging.blogspot.com

Re: Is the FCC getting desperate?

James Gattuso — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 11:26:39 -0000

The sec. 706 the Commission was is using here has nothing to do with war powers. They were referring to section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which directs the FCC to encourage advanced services, NOT section 706 of the Communications Act of 1934 (war powers). It's an entirely appropriate provision for the FCC to consider using in this proceeding.