NY State Piracy bill introduced

[paganwoof]

A anti-pirate bill has been introduced in both the New York state assembly and senate. It makes a pirate radio station in New York a class D penalty punishable by imprisonment and a fine of not less than $10,000.

Assembly bill A326 and Senate S2737.

New York State Broadcasters are getting behind it and local broadcasters are involved.

NY State Broadcasters (518) 456-8888.

 

[ansky212]

The question is, does the gov't have the resources to enforce this?

 

[kn3ick]

I thought the FCC could enforce things like that and not local or state governments?

 

[MattParker]

NY State Broadcasters are getting behind it? How much you want to bet their lobbyists are those ones who pushed this? I'd also bet the sponsors of this bill get heft campaign contributions from the broadcasters and individual stations.

Local broadcasters are involved? That's the understatement of the week.

S 190.72 UNAUTHORIZED RADIO TRANSMISSION.
4 A PERSON IS GUILTY OF UNAUTHORIZED RADIO TRANSMISSION WHEN SUCH
5 PERSON:
6 1. KNOWINGLY MAKES OR CAUSES TO BE MADE A RADIO TRANSMISSION IN THIS
7 STATE WITHOUT FIRST HAVING OBTAINED A LICENSE OR AN EXEMPTION FROM
8 LICENSURE FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OR OTHER APPLICABLE
9 FEDERAL LAW OR REGULATION; OR
10 2. ACTS, WHETHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO CAUSE AN UNAUTHORIZED
11 RADIO TRANSMISSION TO, OR INTERFERENCE WITH, A PUBLIC OR COMMERCIAL
12 RADIO STATION LICENSED BY THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION OR TO
13 ENABLE THE RADIO TRANSMISSION OR INTERFERENCE TO OCCUR.
14 A PERSON CONVICTED OF UNAUTHORIZED RADIO TRANSMISSION SHALL BE GUILTY
15 OF A CLASS D FELONY.

 

[reelyreal]

Hey, if the FCC isn't going to actively enforce their rules against pirate broadcasters (they don't) I say support the guys with the big guns and the resources. I work for a very small broadcasting company and our signal was affected by a first adjacent pirate a couple of years back. What does the FCC do? They send a letter saying "please stop! or else!" Or else what? They'll send another letter? Make it a felony then the staties can go in, shut it down, and I can go back to doing business legally.

 

[mikerock]

Sounds like another bill that helps corporations and the expenses of the taxpayers that will have to foot the bill for their incarceration. So we will release hardened criminals due to over crowding to lockup some kid with a microphone.

There might however be more to this story since why after all these years do they decide to take action now. If the economy takes a turn for the worse we could have sizable policy opposition protests in NY cities. Historically NY radio stations ignore any kind of government protest. Therefore the first place the opposition will turn to is pirate radio. This is the last thing the government wants is to allow anti-government freedom of speech on the airwaves. I therefore hope this bill fails in case the need arises for the people to have a voice since it is pretty clear corporate radio will not allow it.

 

[TheBigA]

Sounds like another bill that helps corporations and the expenses of the taxpayers that will have to foot the bill for their incarceration.

On the other hand, those frequencies belong to the government. The spectrum is a public natural resource. You burn a natural forest and it's a felony. Same with piracy. A side benefit is the licensees, who include small businesses, colleges, and churches, are ensured their facility is protected.

I therefore hope this bill fails in case the need arises for the people to have a voice since it is pretty clear corporate radio will not allow it.

Anti-government protest will always have a friend at WBAI. And this bill protects that station too.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

On the other hand, those frequencies belong to the government. The spectrum is a public natural resource.

The airwaves (and any other interstate natural resource) belong to the people. We cede management over them to the government in order to keep them orderly. You may not think there's a difference, but there is. A HUGE difference.

 

[TheBigA]

On the other hand, those frequencies belong to the government. The spectrum is a public natural resource.

The airwaves (and any other interstate natural resource) belong to the people. We cede management over them to the government in order to keep them orderly. You may not think there's a difference, but there is. A HUGE difference.

The point, however, is that the government is charged with protecting that resource. A license ain't worth crap if anyone can use the airwaves without one.

And "we" didn't "cede management." Our elected representatives established management over them. Big difference. They never asked the people. They simply did it.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

And "we" didn't "cede management." Our elected representatives established management over them. Big difference. They never asked the people. They simply did it.

Every bit of authority government has is derived from the consent of the governed. I don't think anyone here has a problem with them managing the public commodity of airwaves. Anyone who understands how radio and television work wouldn't have a problem with it.

I'm not sure throwing radio pirates in prison will stop anything, but it's better than doing nothing I suppose. It's not like they'd be hard to find. I foresee special interest groups that represent the minorities that these pirates "serve" throwing a fit over this law, however.

 

[TheBigA]

Every bit of authority government has is derived from the consent of the governed. I don't think anyone here has a problem with them managing the public commodity of airwaves. Anyone who understands how radio and television work wouldn't have a problem with it.

Had you been an amateur radio operator in the 1920s, you would have felt differently. This was a battle between the big corporate interests (Westinghouse, GE, RCA, and AT&T) vs. individuals. Guess who won?

 

[DonTheTrucker]

Had you been an amateur radio operator in the 1920s, you would have felt differently. This was a battle between the big corporate interests (Westinghouse, GE, RCA, and AT&T) vs. individuals. Guess who won?

I'm sure you've figured out by now that I'm no fan of big government. However, airwaves aren't subject to lines on a map, so it's the proper role of the federal government to manage the spectrum. Some of the things they do are boneheaded, but in general it's not a bad concept. Without the FCC, every Clear Channel station would be 500,000 watts and nothing would be listenable. On the flip side, money would be the only thing stopping you or me from building a 1,000,000 watt station on the same frequency as the local media conglomerate. In that respect, the FCC protects everyone's interest.

Having said that, since they're not doing their job to clean up airwaves in New York, I don't blame the state for doing something. It's analogous to the immigration problem in Arizona. Someone has to pick up the slack.

 

[TheBigA]

However, airwaves aren't subject to lines on a map, so it's the proper role of the federal government to manage the spectrum.

I'm not disagreeing with that.

But "we" didn't "cede" them that authority. They took it. The government does that a lot. It sees a need for authority and steps in. But in 1927, a lot of people felt it was overstepping its authority.

 

[MattParker]

Every bit of authority government has is derived from the consent of the governed.

That is naive. But it's what the powers that be want you to believe. If it's true, how come some many people are so angry at the government?

Besides, this is not about the FCC and pirates. It's about the state of New York and pirates.

 

[w9wi]

But "we" didn't "cede" them that authority. They took it. The government does that a lot. It sees a need for authority and steps in. But in 1927, a lot of people felt it was overstepping

If you're referring to the formation of the FRC (Federal Radio Commission, predecessor to the FCC) I think "a lot" of people is a significant exaggeration.

The need to regulate radio was an accepted fact at the time. The first radio act had passed in 1912, and broadcasting had been regulated by the Commerce Department since it came into being.

The breakdown that led to the creation of the FRC didn't dismiss the need for licensing. It merely argued that the Commerce Department had no power to assign frequencies and powers, and that they were required to issue a license to any qualified applicant. (whether there was a channel available for that applicant or not) No significant unlicensed pirate stations arose out of that regulatory vacuum. (and yes, they would have been pirates -- as the Supreme Court had NOT overturned the requirement to have a license.)

Essentially the entire industry believed there needed to be radio legislation to provide the power to assign frequencies & powers. Listeners, vexed by interference from the few stations that chose to use their new liberty, agreed. I suppose the handful of stations that had jumped to better frequencies were opposed, and there was some controversy involving other provisions of the proposed regulations. (there was concern over the concentration of stations in larger cities - the "fair distribution of service" thing - at the time Chicago had 32 radio stations, but Milwaukee only four and Indianapolis only two..)

But the vast majority of the population felt wavelengths/powers/locations should be regulated. And just about *nobody* felt radio regulation should be abolished altogether.

 

[TheBigA]

But the vast majority of the population felt wavelengths/powers/locations should be regulated. And just about *nobody* felt radio regulation should be abolished altogether.

Do you have polls to substantiate that? From my studies of the period, the "vast majority" had no idea what you're talking about regarding wavelengths and all the technical jargon.

What they DID know what that under this new law, the government had the power to decide who could operate these stations. That was the problem, and there were numerous articles at the time saying that this caused a First Amendment issue. Because here was Congress passing a law that had something to do with access to the public airwaves. This issue continues to be debated today, with discussions over concentration of media and diversity of ownership.

Religious radio operators saw no need for federal regulation of the airwaves. There's the famous telegram Amiee Semple McPherson sent Herbert Hoover: "Tell your minions of satan to leave my radio station alone."

The practicality of it notwithstanding, this was seen by some as an expansion of federal power. Practicality won out. But it didn't change the fact that it was a political and Constitutional issue.

 

[max88]

florida has a similar law and guess what the pirates still abound in the major cities..... so NY this is just political show biz

 

[DonTheTrucker]

That is naive. But it's what the powers that be want you to believe.

You really need to read the document that founded this country. A government without the consent of the governed is illegitimate.

In the case of this law, the federal government isn't doing its job well enough, so local governments have picked up the reigns.

 

[TheBigA]

You really need to read the document that founded this country. A government without the consent of the governed is illegitimate.

Interesting that they put it in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. So they weren't talking about the American government.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

Interesting that they put it in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. So they weren't talking about the American government.

The Declaration established the nation. The Articles of Confederation, then the Constitution set the particulars of how that nation would be run. Both are equally important. I know this is a bit off topic, but it's always disturbing when people don't understand the basics of what the country is all about. Without that understanding, discussions of particulars like how the FCC regulates media ownership are tough to make.