Comm. Law, media law

[commlaw] 3/15 Sex and Violence: Regulating “Improper” Content

Required Reading:

  • Christopher M. Fairman, Institutionalized Word Taboo: The Continuing Saga of FCC Indecency Regulation, 2013 Mich. St. L. Rev. 567 (2013). (Read at least Part II – IV.)
  • EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive. (Read parts related to Protection of Minors.)
  • FCC consumer guide on “Obscene, Indecent, and Profane Broadcasts“.

Important Cases:

  • FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 567 US __, 132 S. Ct. 2307 (2012).
  • FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009).
  • Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844 (1997).
  • FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978).
  • Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
  • Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 26 (1970).

Additional Reading:

  • Lili Levi, “Smut and Nothing but”: The FCC, Indecency, and Regulatory Transformations in the Shadows, 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 1 (2013).
  • Kristin L. Rakowski, Branding as an Antidote to Indecency Regulation, 16 UCLA Ent. L. Rev. 1 (2009).
  • John C. Quale & Malcolm J. Tuesley, Space, the Final Frontier–Expanding FCC Regulation of Indecent Content onto Direct Broadcast Satellite, 60 Fed. Comm. L.J. 37 (2007).
  • Adam Thierer, Why Regulate Broadcasting? Toward a Consistent First Amendment Standard for the Information Age, 15 CommLaw Conspectus 431 (2007).

Homework:

  • What is your opinion about our current Internet content regulation?

 

Advertisements