Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first major rewrite of the Telecommunications Act of 1934. Before the new act, the nation had seen the birth of television (both black and color); the increase of network, cable, and satellite broadcasting; advances in phone service; the birth and growth of cellular phone service; and the rapid increase in the use of computers and the Internet. The need for a major overhaul was long overdue. The previous act basically had to worry about what was going on with wire and radio. The 1934 act thought of communications as a natural monopoly. Communications were clearer cut back then and it was easier to think of just one organization regulating the use of that technology whether it was radio or wire. Telecommunication now is more diverse and affects the society more directly. We have products that combine technologies like cable and cellular phone systems that provide Internet access.The 1996 act was devised with certain purposes for today's telecommunication technologies. The former Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Reed Hundt said in a speech soon after the passing of the act, "The new law assumes that all parts of the communications marketplace can be made competiti
The speed of development and the direct impact of telecommunications technology on society will be an important factor in the effectiveness of the act. The government is trying to deregulate the industry and allow it to be more self-governed. Accomplishing that and making it successful would be serving the public interest more and providing telecommunication companies more First Amendment rights. The technology can change though and take on different dimensions and combine its uses. The problem with that is the act defines each telecommunications sector as something that is a set thing. This places limitations on that definition that could change with technology. This concept is better explained with examples. Pressler's first statements about the glory days of the phone companies are definitely not here. Competing local and long-distance companies looking to enter the local markets are suing the BOCs for allegedly failing to open up access to their lines. The BOCs, which believe that the long distance companies are stalling to keep them out of the long distance market, are taking state regulatory commissions to court over compliance rulings. Thirty-one states were collectively suing the FCC for using its long distance authority to indirectly control the BOC's rates and won. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC had dramatically overstepped its boundaries in trying to set local rates, which belonged to the states (Schwartz, 1998). Giving the FCC the power to set local rates would definitely not serve public interest. By giving that power back to the states, the courts showed their desire to get some aspect of public interest out of the troubled act. So, this act is not for the direct impact of the public, but is legislation that affects telecommunications business in a way that will have a secondary effect on the public. There is a lot of controversy weather there will be any real impact on society at all or if the act will merely reflect the times enough to keep telecommunications in check. The act's supporters believe that it will have a large impact. Hundt said, "The goal of the Telecommunications Act is to let anyone enter any communications business-to let any communications business compete in any market against any other. The goal is to remove the legal and economic obstacles that have frustrated competition for too long" (Pike, 1997). As the act aged, the true benefits of the system didn't seem to match its hype. McFadden, D. (February, 1997). Antitrust and Communications: changes after the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Federal Communications Law Journal, v49, n2, pp. 457. Schwartz, S. (January, 1998). Failed Expectations. The Daily Record, pp. 2 Hundt, R. (1996). Speech Implementing the Telecommunications Law of 1996: The Real Work Begins. www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Hundt/spreh608.txt Knauer, L., Lynch, T., and Machtley, R. (1996). Telecommunications Act Handbook A Complete Reference for Business. Rockville: Government Institutes, Inc. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 wasn't all about business. Included in the act initially was the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which would have placed increased civil and criminal liability on on-line access providers for transmitting "obscene" or "indecent" messages with the intent to annoy or harass (Caden and Lucas, 1996). This section of the act, although stated for the good of society, seemed to point to the need of the government to just try and accomplish some form of regulation concerning the Internet. This would help them to get the issue of regulating the Internet started, although it seemed that they knew it probably wouldn't hold up in court. Section 502 of the act states that a person is liable "whoever--by means of telecommunications device knowingly-- (II) initiates the transmission of, any comment, request, suggestion, proposal,
Some common words found in the essay are:
Telecommunications Act, Giving FCC, Congress Mills, Supreme Court, Caden Lucas, Commerce Web, Reed Hundt, Companies BOC, Internet Internet, Family Foundation, telecommunications act, telecommunications act 1996, act 1996, serve public, 1996 act, cellular phone, people online, phone service, growth cellular, 1996 telecommunications, lower prices, cellular phone service, calls competition lower, 1996 telecommunications act, set local rates,
Approximate Word count = 2889
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
