From nlgcdc-admin Sun Nov 5 12:38:24 2000 Received: from mailout1-1.nyroc.rr.com (mailout1-1.nyroc.rr.com [24.92.226.146]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eA5KcNf05523 for ; Sun, 5 Nov 2000 12:38:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from emma.rochester.rr.com (roc-204-210-131-164.rochester.rr.com [204.210.131.164]) by mailout1-1.nyroc.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05412; Sun, 5 Nov 2000 15:34:32 -0500 (EST) From: "Lyn Gerry" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 15:38:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT CC: microradio@lists.tao.ca Message-ID: <3A057EE3.7684.1415C2D5@localhost> Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Subject: [nlgcdc] Calling Amanda Huron!!!! Hey, Amanda I need to speak with ASAP (Sunday Afternoon) can you e-mail me new phone number? Or, can someone who has a current number for Amanda please get in touch with me off list? Thanks, Lyn @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ The A-Infos Radio Project http://www.radio4all.net Information was meant to be free From nlgcdc-admin Fri Nov 17 15:33:11 2000 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail01.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.7]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eAHNXBr46535 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:33:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from tecra ([216.178.255.48]) by mail01.phoenixdsl.com (InterMail vK.4.02.00.05.01 201-232-116-105-101 license da4da6e5fc829a7858725236bede8deb) with ESMTP id <20001117233258.ZDGR23184.mail01@tecra>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:32:58 -0600 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001117152102.00968a00@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 15:27:43 -0800 To: microradio@tao.ca From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] November LPFM filing window As people know, the filing window for the third group of states to apply for LPFM (micro) licenses was to have been at the end of November. The specific five day window dates have to be announced by the FCC at least thirty days before the window opens. This has not happened, undoubtedly because of the uncertainty of what is going on in Congress (now add to that the uncertainty about the White House). It is very unlikely that a window will be announced which would fall during the Xmas holidays (which it would be if they announced it any time in the next couple of weeks). So, assuming that LPFM survives the congressional threat, it looks like the third group filing window will happen some time in January. This gives every one a bit more time, but potential applicants should be working on their applications now. For more information on the application process see the CDC's web page www.nlgcdc.org as well as links there. ********************************************************* Peter Franck, Attorney @ Law Intellectual Property, Cultural and Constitutional Rights voice:415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963; email:pfranck@culturelaw.com ********************************************************* From nlgcdc-admin Mon Nov 27 13:09:19 2000 Received: from maynard.mail.mindspring.net (maynard.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.243]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eARL9IK84054 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:09:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from Secstation.igc.org (user-33qthid.dialup.mindspring.com [199.174.198.77]) by maynard.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA20294 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 16:09:03 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20001127130835.00a8ed80@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:09:00 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: LPFM help Hi Boog: Would you be willing to help these folks out, w/our assistance? Alan >X-Originating-IP: [24.179.134.217] >From: "Des Moines Community Radio" >To: aakorn@igc.org >Subject: LPFM help >Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:38:12 -0600 >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Nov 2000 20:38:12.0965 (UTC) >FILETIME=[F6375150:01C058B1] > >Hello, > I am with a group of folks from Des Moines, Iowa who are hoping > to apply for a LPFM license this coming February. I found your name at > the CDC web site and was hoping you might be able to point us towards a > lawyer who could help us in this area, as we have not been able to find > one ourselves. We would appreciate any help you could give us. Thanks for > your time, > >Sincerely, > >Chris Rottler > >_____________________________________________________________________________________ >Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com From nlgcdc-admin Tue Nov 28 13:47:28 2000 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail01.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.7]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eASLlRK91251 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:47:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from tecra ([216.178.255.48]) by mail01.phoenixdsl.com (InterMail vK.4.02.00.05.01 201-232-116-105-101 license da4da6e5fc829a7858725236bede8deb) with ESMTP id <20001128214721.QTUM1752.mail01@tecra>; Tue, 28 Nov 2000 15:47:21 -0600 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001128134616.009f4dc0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:47:04 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_13885421==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] U.S. Appeals Court To Hear LPFM Case Today/stay tuned --=====================_13885421==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > > From R&R Online, 11/28/00: > >U.S. Appeals Court To Hear LPFM Case Today > >In February the NAB had filed a two-page lawsuit against the FCC to stop >low-power FM on the grounds that "it is arbitrary and capricious, and >otherwise contrary to law." Today the judges will hear NAB lawyer Don >Verrilli tell the court why the FCC, as NAB President/CEO Eddie Fritts >says, "has violated its most sacred trust to the American consumer [by >turning] its back on spectrum integrity." FCC General Counsel C. Grey Pash >Jr. will argue in favor of LPFM licensing. ********************************************************* Peter Franck, Attorney @ Law Intellectual Property, Cultural and Constitutional Rights voice:415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963; email:pfranck@culturelaw.com ********************************************************* --=====================_13885421==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

From R&R Online, 11/28/00:

U.S. Appeals Court To Hear LPFM Case Today

In February the NAB had filed a two-page lawsuit against the FCC to stop low-power FM on the grounds that "it is arbitrary and capricious, and otherwise contrary to law." Today the judges will hear NAB lawyer Don Verrilli tell the court why the FCC, as NAB President/CEO Eddie Fritts says, "has violated its most sacred trust to the American consumer [by turning] its back on spectrum integrity." FCC General Counsel C. Grey Pash Jr. will argue in favor of LPFM licensing.

*********************************************************
Peter Franck, Attorney @ Law
Intellectual Property, Cultural and Constitutional Rights
voice:415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963; email:pfranck@culturelaw.com
********************************************************* --=====================_13885421==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Sun Dec 3 21:15:04 2000 Received: from smtp6.mindspring.com (smtp6.mindspring.com [207.69.200.110]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB45F4K75535 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 21:15:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from smui03.slb.mindspring.net (smui03.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.22]) by smtp6.mindspring.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA04404 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 00:14:51 -0500 (EST) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui03.slb.mindspring.net id AAA0000023628; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 00:15:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 00:15:40 -0500 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 205.188.200.181 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: KTRU in Houston, Texas needs help! This is an email to NLG CDC seeking our assistance. Seems to me the Fed. District Court decision in the KCMU case in Seattle is relevant to the dispute referenced below. Does anyone recall the case cite? Alan vivek mittal wrote: > To Whomever it May Concern, I am an undergraduate student at Rice University, which is in Houston, Texas and also very concerned about what is happening on our campus right now. I am emailing you because you were linked to the Center for Democratic Communications at the National Lawyers Guild website and think this is an issue of much relevance to your organization. KTRU, a student-run and student-funded station (through blanket-tax), was shut down by the Rice administration last Thursday, November 28 in response to a student protest on Tuesday that simulcast the Rice Women's Basketball game with music. This protest was in response to an agreement between KTRU and the administration to air more Rice sports broadcasts on the station, which is, I think, 3-4 games per week or something like that. The administration decided to kick out the student DJ and shut down the station (which is on campus) at 8a.m. CST on Thursday. They not only shut it down, but they also ripped off the many stickers on the door, which according to Dr. John Hutchinson, Assistant to the Vice President for Student Affairs, was done to ensure that DJs who came for their shift that day would know that the station was shut down. The Rice board of governors owns the FCC license and has every right (according to them) to shut it down. This is questionable because this is a student-run radio station. No one was properly notified before the shutdown. Of course, I am simplifying this complex issue, but I think this is an issue that should be of concern for the CDC-NLG because of its implications for free speech on our campus. We really need all the legal help and advice we can get. We are only students, and with this drastic action, we realize how powerless we can really be. If you want to help, please talk to Meg Smith at msmith@alumni.rice.edu. If you cannot get in touch with her, please email me and I will forward the message to the appropriate parties. In the meanwhile, there are two sources for information on the issue: http://www.savektru.org http://www.ricethresher.org Sincerely, Vivek Mittal Concerned Student From nlgcdc-admin Sun Dec 3 22:53:31 2000 Received: from marine.sonic.net (marine.sonic.net [208.201.224.37]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eB46rVK80716 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 22:53:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 116 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2000 06:53:25 -0000 Received: from sub.sonic.net (208.201.224.8) by marine.sonic.net with SMTP; 4 Dec 2000 06:53:25 -0000 Received: from d144.nas2.seb.sonic.net (d144.nas2.seb.sonic.net [209.204.150.144]) by sub.sonic.net (8.11.0/8.8.5) with SMTP id eB46rLj01665 for ; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 22:53:22 -0800 Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 22:53:22 -0800 Message-Id: <200012040653.eB46rLj01665@sub.sonic.net> X-envelope-info: X-Sender: phltymon@pop.sonic.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Philip Tymon Subject: [nlgcdc] KTRU in Houston, Texas needs help! Alan and all, I am not aware of the KCMU case, and I must admit I have not kept up with this little legal byway for some time. However, unless there is some unique law that I do not know of, I doubt these students have a chance. As far as I know the university regents (as the official licensee) always win these sorts of cases. In fact, the only time the regents ever get in trouble is when they DON'T assert control over a student station "run wild". But, if there is some quixotic Texas attorney who wants to give it a go, more power to them. I remember that, some years back at least, there was an organization specifically dedicated to defending free speech rights of students on campus, thought I don't recall its name. Phil At 12:15 AM 12/4/00 -0500, aakorn@igc.org wrote: >This is an email to NLG CDC seeking our assistance. > >Seems to me the Fed. District Court decision in the KCMU case in Seattle is relevant to the dispute referenced below. Does anyone recall the case cite? > >Alan > > >vivek mittal wrote: >> To Whomever it May Concern, >I am an undergraduate student at Rice University, which is in Houston, >Texas and also very concerned about what is happening on our campus >right now. I am emailing you because you were linked to the Center for >Democratic Communications at the National Lawyers Guild website and >think this is an issue of much relevance to your organization. > >KTRU, a student-run and student-funded station (through blanket-tax), >was shut down by the Rice administration last Thursday, November 28 in >response to a student protest on Tuesday that simulcast the Rice Women's >Basketball game with music. This protest was in response to an >agreement between KTRU and the administration to air more Rice sports >broadcasts on the station, which is, I think, 3-4 games per week or >something like that. > >The administration decided to kick out the student DJ and shut down the >station (which is on campus) at 8a.m. CST on Thursday. They not only >shut it down, but they also ripped off the many stickers on the door, >which according to Dr. John Hutchinson, Assistant to the Vice President >for Student Affairs, was done to ensure that DJs who came for their >shift that day would know that the station was shut down. > >The Rice board of governors owns the FCC license and has every right >(according to them) to shut it down. This is questionable because this >is a student-run radio station. No one was properly notified before the >shutdown. > >Of course, I am simplifying this complex issue, but I think this is an >issue that should be of concern for the CDC-NLG because of its >implications for free speech on our campus. > >We really need all the legal help and advice we can get. We are only >students, and with this drastic action, we realize how powerless we can >really be. If you want to help, please talk to Meg Smith at >msmith@alumni.rice.edu. If you cannot get in touch with her, please >email me and I will forward the message to the appropriate parties. > >In the meanwhile, there are two sources for information on the issue: > >http://www.savektru.org >http://www.ricethresher.org > >Sincerely, >Vivek Mittal >Concerned Student > > > >_______________________________________________ >nlgcdc mailing list >nlgcdc@rdrop.com >http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/nlgcdc > > From nlgcdc-admin Mon Dec 4 08:23:11 2000 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail01.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.7]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB4GNAK09909 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 08:23:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from tecra ([216.178.255.48]) by mail01.phoenixdsl.com (InterMail vK.4.02.00.05.01 201-232-116-105-101 license da4da6e5fc829a7858725236bede8deb) with ESMTP id <20001204162303.KYMS1752.mail01@tecra>; Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:23:03 -0600 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001204081936.00b9b810@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 08:21:08 -0800 To: aakorn@igc.org, nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Subject: Re: [nlgcdc] Fwd: KTRU in Houston, Texas needs help! In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed I am pretty sure that the case referred to is on decided about 5 years ago in which the federal court ruled that a gag rule, such as the one Pacifica tries to impose on its staff, is unconstitutional in a state owned station. I'll look at the rest of his email a bit later today. At 09:15 PM 12/3/00 , aakorn@igc.org wrote: >This is an email to NLG CDC seeking our assistance. > >Seems to me the Fed. District Court decision in the KCMU case in Seattle >is relevant to the dispute referenced below. Does anyone recall the case cite? > >Alan > > >vivek mittal wrote: > > To Whomever it May Concern, >I am an undergraduate student at Rice University, which is in Houston, >Texas and also very concerned about what is happening on our campus >right now. I am emailing you because you were linked to the Center for >Democratic Communications at the National Lawyers Guild website and >think this is an issue of much relevance to your organization. > >KTRU, a student-run and student-funded station (through blanket-tax), >was shut down by the Rice administration last Thursday, November 28 in >response to a student protest on Tuesday that simulcast the Rice Women's >Basketball game with music. This protest was in response to an >agreement between KTRU and the administration to air more Rice sports >broadcasts on the station, which is, I think, 3-4 games per week or >something like that. > >The administration decided to kick out the student DJ and shut down the >station (which is on campus) at 8a.m. CST on Thursday. They not only >shut it down, but they also ripped off the many stickers on the door, >which according to Dr. John Hutchinson, Assistant to the Vice President >for Student Affairs, was done to ensure that DJs who came for their >shift that day would know that the station was shut down. > >The Rice board of governors owns the FCC license and has every right >(according to them) to shut it down. This is questionable because this >is a student-run radio station. No one was properly notified before the >shutdown. > >Of course, I am simplifying this complex issue, but I think this is an >issue that should be of concern for the CDC-NLG because of its >implications for free speech on our campus. > >We really need all the legal help and advice we can get. We are only >students, and with this drastic action, we realize how powerless we can >really be. If you want to help, please talk to Meg Smith at >msmith@alumni.rice.edu. If you cannot get in touch with her, please >email me and I will forward the message to the appropriate parties. > >In the meanwhile, there are two sources for information on the issue: > >http://www.savektru.org >http://www.ricethresher.org > >Sincerely, >Vivek Mittal >Concerned Student > > > >_______________________________________________ >nlgcdc mailing list >nlgcdc@rdrop.com >http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/nlgcdc From nlgcdc-admin Fri Dec 15 19:37:05 2000 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.24]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBG3b4K10982 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:37:04 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 62445 invoked by uid 89); 16 Dec 2000 03:36:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra) (216.178.255.48) by mail.phoenixdsl.com with SMTP; 16 Dec 2000 03:36:48 -0000 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20001215193313.00aada70@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 19:33:54 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_5293619==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] president about to sign bill with lpfm killer; NLG CDC statement --=====================_5293619==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed TRAGICALLY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS (NAB) AND PUBLIC RADIO (NPR) HAVE SUCCEEDED IN KILLING LEGALIZED LOW POWER RADIO The National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications ("CDC") has just learned that Congress intends to pass an Omnibus Budget Act containing a rider which will gut the FCC's new Low Power FM (LPFM) service. It now appears that President Clinton will sign this bill. This is the culmination of a year long intensive lobbying campaign by the NAB, which unfortunately has been given liberal cover by NPR's campaign against LPFM. For more than ten years CDC has been involved with the defense of micro broadcasters who went on the air at a time when the FCC refused to license low power stations. We argued that those rules were unconstitutional, and the risk of losing in court was one factor in the FCC changing its position and authorizing LPFM. More than a year ago, in meetings with the NAB we pointed out that they would hurt established broadcasters if they killed LPFM (also known as microradio). The NAB claimed they were worried about interference from unlicensed broadcasters. We pointed out that they would be much better off accepting some competition for audience from these small stations but knowing where the stations were, and knowing that the FCC had assigned them to available frequencies. We pointed out that if LPFM was killed they would be faced with many stations going on the air in an unpredictable way at unknown frequencies and locations. Because the technology is cheap and readily available LPFM will not disappear, no matter how much Congress, NPR and the NAB try to kill it. For many, LPFM remains the only means for local communities to have a voice. Disappointed as we are by this congressional refusal to allow a small experiment in media democracy, CDC will look at possible legal challenges to Congress' unprecedented attack on community radio. Peter Franck, a member of CDC speculated that this new law may well be unconstitutional. Franck added "Laws passed by congress are easier to challenge in the courts than regulations promulgated by agencies such as the FCC. This is not over." Since 1990, the CDC has worked with pioneering microbroadcasters such as Mbanna Kantako and Stephen Dunifer, who took to the airwaves to challenge the FCC's ban on low power community radio. In response to growing public support, the FCC under Chairman Bill Kennard adopted a Low Power FM service to promote public access to the airwaves. This modest service would have create up to one-thousand new 100 watt and 10 watt community stations. (The bill being passed by congress is a phony "compromise" because it may allow 60 or 70 LPFM stations in the most rural and unpopulated parts of the country.) National Public Radio and the National Association of Broadcasters failed to stop the FCC from implementing its modest Low Power FM service. But after months of intensive lobbying, NPR and the NAB convinced Congress to quietly kill the service, and prevent schools, libraries, community groups and local government from operating low watt stations. The extent of Congressional meddling into the technical affairs of the FCC is unprecedented, and proves that the public has indeed lost all control over the "public" airwaves. CDC is committed to doing everything it can to help recover them for the public --=====================_5293619==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
TRAGICALLY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS (NAB) AND PUBLIC RADIO (NPR) HAVE SUCCEEDED IN KILLING LEGALIZED LOW POWER RADIO

The National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications ("CDC") has just learned that Congress intends to pass an Omnibus Budget Act containing a rider which will gut the FCC's new Low Power FM (LPFM) service. It now appears that President Clinton will sign this bill.

This is the culmination of a year long intensive lobbying campaign by the NAB, which unfortunately has been given liberal cover by NPR’s campaign against LPFM.  

For more than ten years CDC has been involved with the defense of micro broadcasters who went on the air at a time when the FCC refused to license low power stations.  We argued that those rules were unconstitutional, and the risk of losing in court was one factor in the FCC changing its position and authorizing LPFM. 

More than a year ago, in meetings with the NAB we pointed out that they would hurt established broadcasters if they killed LPFM (also known as microradio).  The NAB claimed they were worried about interference from unlicensed broadcasters.  We pointed out that they would be much better off accepting some competition for audience from these small stations but knowing where the stations were, and knowing that the FCC had assigned them to available frequencies. 

We pointed out that if LPFM was killed they would be faced with many stations going on the air in an unpredictable way at unknown frequencies and locations.  Because the technology is cheap and readily available LPFM will not disappear, no matter how much Congress, NPR and the NAB try to kill it. For many, LPFM remains the only means for local communities to have a voice.

Disappointed as we are by this congressional refusal to allow a small experiment in media democracy,  CDC will look at possible legal challenges to Congress' unprecedented attack on community radio.  Peter Franck, a member of CDC speculated  that this new law may well be unconstitutional. Franck added “Laws passed by congress are easier to challenge in the courts than regulations promulgated by agencies such as the FCC.  This is not over.”

Since 1990, the CDC has worked with pioneering microbroadcasters such as Mbanna Kantako and Stephen Dunifer, who took to the airwaves to challenge the FCC's ban on low power community radio. In response to growing public support, the FCC under Chairman Bill Kennard adopted a Low Power FM service to promote public access to the airwaves. This modest service would have create up to one-thousand new 100 watt and 10 watt community stations.  (The bill being passed by congress is a phony “compromise” because it may allow 60 or 70 LPFM stations in the most rural and unpopulated parts of the country.)

National Public Radio and the National Association of Broadcasters failed to stop the FCC from implementing its modest Low Power FM service. But after months of intensive lobbying, NPR and the NAB convinced Congress to quietly kill the service, and prevent schools, libraries, community groups and local government from operating low watt stations. The extent of Congressional meddling into the technical affairs of the FCC is unprecedented, and proves that the public has indeed lost all control over the "public" airwaves.  CDC is committed to doing everything it can to help recover them for the public



 --=====================_5293619==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue Dec 19 14:41:27 2000 Received: from johnson.mail.mindspring.net (johnson.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.177]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBJMfRK02052 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:41:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smui00.slb.mindspring.net (smui00.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.20]) by johnson.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA24529 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:41:09 -0500 (EST) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui00.slb.mindspring.net id RAA0000004735; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:40:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:40:15 -0500 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 216.103.90.232 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Summer Internship Paul Brenzel wrote: > To Center for Democratic Communications: I am a student at Boston University School of Law and I am interested in the possibility of a summer internship at your organization for the summer of 2001. Please e-mail me back with any information regarding a legal internship for next summer. Thank you, Paul Brenzel From nlgcdc-admin Wed Dec 20 09:55:34 2000 Received: from mail01a.rapidsite.net (mail01a.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.230]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id eBKHtXK64304 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:55:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail01a.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.58s) with SMTP id 09143573 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 12:54:54 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20001220095448.00a672f0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 09:54:55 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Jim Paluzzi's victory speech >From: petri@critpath.org >Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 12:24:30 -0500 >To: Recipient List Suppressed:; >Subject: Jim Paluzzi's victory speech > >Below is the text of a message from Jim Paluzzi, a cief architect of NPR's >anti-LPFM stance. > >I do not want this day to end before I take a moment to thank >everyone on this PRRO (Public Radio Regional Organizations - >ed.) list for your tremendous efforts in helping to achieve >passage of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 (HR >3439/S. 3020). > >Passage came last week, just as we feared it would when we >discussed the process at our first meeting in Seattle in March >1999: at the very last moment, as a rider attached to a >spending bill. As you may recall, we concluded that a rider is >a serious thing, and that we should only proceed in that >direction if and when every other option was exhausted. > >We pursued our options. Every option. When those efforts were >ignored, we created more options to pursue. In the end, we did >have some success in influencing the FCC's final report and >order; however, despite our best efforts, the FCC refused to >provide accommodation on two critical issues: (1) meaningful >protection of third adjacent channels for stations carrying >radio reader services, and (2) realistic protection to >translator input frequencies. > >As we know all too well, many political contests had to go down >to the wire this year. Clearly, the Radio Broadcasting >Preservation Act was a cliff-hanger to the end. In a year >where every vote counted (or should have been counted, if you >prefer), I do know that every effort you made was significant >in creating the critical mass necessary to push this >legislation to passage. > >At the risk of allowing many other important contributions to >go unsung, I would like to single out three individuals, whose >contributions to this cause have been extraordinary. > >MPR's Will Haddeland scared the heck out of us early in the >game, telling us the truth about how the cards were stacked >against us -- and how much effort we would ave to put into >achieving our goals. His work with regional presidents was >tremendous, coaching us on our best tactical approaches, while >providing behind the scenes reconnaissance. I lost track of >the number of times Will has called me with updates, but I know >I speak for many regional heads in saying that his energy >launched us from the starting line. > >I understand that NPR's Kathy Dole is under consideration for >canonization as the Patron Saint of Spectrum Integrity. Her >FCC background provided us with an insider's perspective so >crucial to interpreting FCC actions. In our frequent huddles >with the regional heads, we crossed several junctions where our >paths could have gone in different directions. Kathy's >guidance -- combined with her tenacious, no nonsense, and >downright gutsy commitment to the cause -- made her our secret >weapon in the battle for rational policy making. > >Finally, words are really quite inadequate in describing the >role that Kevin Klose played on this team. In the 20 years >that I've been in public radio, I have never seen anything like >it: a President who was committed to listening to his >constituents; a President who was committed to public radio >(and not solely to National Public Radio); a President who >could see the potential of our medium; and a President who >could sense the dangers of marginal engineering. > >I don't think the rest of us will ever be able to fully >comprehend the pressure Kevin was subjected to throughout this >period. NPR's courageous stand, despite constant labeling as >politically incorrect, redefined my theories of leadership and >integrity. (Imagine how you might react to the FCC Chairman's >constant intense pressure, both in person and in public, for >NPR to buy-off on the FCC plan.) NPR took the heat for us on >this issue; Kevin held up the heat shields; the shields held; >and the American public is the better for it. Thank you, Kevin! > >Even with the passage of this legislation, the LPFM issue is >not yet resolved. The legislation calls for tesing LPFM's >effects with reduced channel separations in nine markets. If >the FCC chooses to pursue this process, the test results must >be scrutinized thoroughly. We will need to remain vigilant in >pushing for honest protocols, accurate measurements, and >unbiased interpretations of test results. > >Each day, I become more convinced that partnership in public >radio is paramount. Our success in protecting sound >engineering standards for the FM band could not have been >achieved without the cooperation of public radio's regional >organizations -- and their LPFM Counsel: Meg Miller and Todd >Gray, the International Association of Audio Information >Services (Radio Reading Services organization - ed.), CPB (for >assisting with funds for independent technical studies), MPR, >many NPR staff and board members, and the individual station >managers throughout the country who took the time to get >involved -- to make the process work. > >While it might be considered unseemly to bask in this victory, >we owe it to ourselves to savor this moment as a testament to >the power of partnership. > >Jim Paluzzi, President >West Coast Public Radio From nlgcdc-admin Sun Dec 24 10:49:39 2000 Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBOInaK73716 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2000 10:49:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from oemcomputer (pool0117.cvx24-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.210.117]) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA26996 for ; Sun, 24 Dec 2000 13:49:10 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200012241849.NAA26996@mclean.mail.mindspring.net> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 11:56:58 +0000 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: LPFM >X-Sender: jstein@midcoast.com (Unverified) >Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 17:41:42 -0500 >To: aakorn@igc.org >From: joe@interhuman.org (Joe Steinberger) >Subject: LPFM > >We are among the lucky few who have been notified that our LPFM application >has been accepted. We hope that we can be an example of the value of low >power community radio, and we would love to have your help. If you are >willing to correspond as we go through this process, I would be grateful. > >We are a "unique non-profit center of language learning and international >exchange" in a small city (pop 8,000) on the coast of Maine. Our plan is to >use the station in part to broadcast our foreign language and cultural >programs, but even more importantly to open the station to all kinds of >community programming: opinion and discussion, news, local and visiting >musicians, etc. This is a super-low budget operation, but we have a nice >place for a studio and lots of potential volunteers. Despite the advice on >your pages, we have no technical or legal counsel. > >Hoping to hear from you, >Joe Steinberger >Penobscot School >Rockland, Maine 04841 >tel: 207 596-0731 > From nlgcdc-admin Thu Dec 28 20:23:41 2000 Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.0.213]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBT4New84426 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 20:23:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from panix3.panix.com (panix3.panix.com [166.84.0.228]) by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C507111F35 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 22:45:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by panix3.panix.com (8.8.8/8.7.1/PanixN1.0) id WAA25703; Thu, 28 Dec 2000 22:45:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 22:45:10 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200012290345.WAA25703@panix3.panix.com> To: "NLGCDC.agora.rdrop.com" From: RTMark Reporting Sender: announce0061-proxy@rtmark.com Subject: [nlgcdc] 2000 Annual Report (for nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com): eToys is dead! Long live chocolates! This message is not commercial. Get off our list by writing mailto:remove@rtmark.com?subject=nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com. December 29, 2000 (first anniversary of victory over eToys) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE IMPOSTURE, PREDATION MARK 2000 TONE The WTO becomes honest, children get "tough love" from corporate predators, and the elections really were auctioned off after all At RTMark, the rough-and-tumble Year 2000 was dominated by significant cultural payoffs, as well as one obvious failure. And preparing the way for the year's funniest moment was RTMark's first- quarter transfer of Gatt.org (http://rtmark.com/gatt.html) to a group of impostors known as The Yes Men (http://www.theyesmen.org/wto/), who have maintained the site ever since. IMPOSTORS MAKE THE WTO HONEST The transfer paid off in May, when an organizer of a conference for lawyers specializing in international trade matters visited Gatt.org and, without reading the text very closely, clicked "Contact" to invite WTO Director-General Mike Moore to speak. "Moore" declined but offered to send a substitute. In late October, one Dr. Andreas Bichlbauer (actually Veshengo Phuridili, a Yes Man) spoke at the conference. His lecture described the WTO's ideas and ultimate aims in terms that were horrifyingly stark--suggesting, for example, the replacement of inefficient democratic institutions like elections with private-sector solutions like Voteauction.com, an Internet startup selling votes to the highest corporate bidder. None of the lawyers in attendance expressed dismay at Dr. Bichlbauer's proposals, which The Yes Men have posted, along with all correspondence, at http://www.theyesmen.org/wto/. They are currently preparing video documentation of the lecture, questions, staged pieing, and lunch. A DOWNTURN FOR A DEMOCRACY Voteauction.com (http://rtmark.com/voteauction.html), the "private-sector solution" of which Dr. Bichlbauer spoke, itself formed the largest dividend of 2000 for the RTMark investor. Newspaper and TV journalists who covered the story often found ways to mention that corporations already buy votes--exactly the point founder James Baumgartner had hoped would be made. (Baumgartner is currently planning a spring lecture tour to help defray legal costs he incurred fighting lawsuits before the ACLU came to his rescue. He can be reached at mailto:voteauction@mail.com.) But 2000 was certainly not all free speech and good luck. And the year's biggest disappointment began with 1999's biggest triumph. ETOYS IS DEAD (NEARLY)! LONG LIVE FERRERO! One year ago today, eToys capitulated to activist pressure--which some say had helped drive down its stock price, recently sighted at $0.03--and officially gave up its attempt to steal an art group's domain name (http://rtmark.com/etoy.html). Many activists hailed this triumph--lately punctuated by the announcement of eToys' looming bankruptcy--as a lesson to other corporations that might consider taking what is not rightfully theirs. When Autodesk suddenly relented from a similar attack, many felt the lesson had been well learned (http://rtmark.com/autodesk.html). But unfortunately, corporations do not learn lessons that are not written in law. Many of the entities that were fighting for their lives last December 29 have been forced out of existence by their predators, even before eToys; a few others are still fighting, at ever growing expense (Healthnet.org, Leonardo Magazine, etc.); and dozens of new cases have been brought to RTMark's attention. In these days of privatized education, it should perhaps come as no surprise that some of the new attacks are against children: Warner Brothers, for example, is going after a fifteen-year-old girl for her Harry Potter fan site, and Ferrero, which makes "Kinder Surprise" chocolate eggs, is attempting to hijack the domain of an Austrian children's charity ("Kinder" means "children" in German). "Public outrage without legal backup isn't enough," said Rita Mae Rakoczi, lawyer and RTMark spokesperson. "eToys was beaten outside the courtroom, but as a result nothing was written in stone, and companies know they can still get away with this sort of behavior--not to mention much worse. The only solution is to pass laws protecting people from corporate assault, and to rescind laws doing the opposite." See http://rtmark.com/netabuse.html for more on these cases and others. ON THE HORIZON To recover from these indications of colossal failure--which would portend doom for less well-anchored startups--an exciting array of cultural treats is in store for 2001. * One German project (http://www.deportation-alliance.com/lh/english.html) has already forced a major airline into reconsidering its lucrative but horrible transportation practices; this project is being adapted to the U.S. market with RTMark's help, and public participation will be requested at some point within the first quarter. * Given the different impacts of corporate abuse in different parts of the world, RTMark will be developing its first full-fledged regional mutual funds in 2001. The first will focus on France, whose population has resisted the push of globalization in unique ways--including by not learning English. The fund will be accompanied by a nearly complete translation of RTMark.com into French, and will be unveiled within the first quarter by its celebrity manager. * RTMark's communication infrastructure will be overhauled in the first and second quarters. Subscribers will be able to choose from a menu of regular updates--on project additions, new investments in particular projects or funds, developments in specific areas of interest, etc. Also, an online payment system will be made available to facilitate small investments in projects and funds. Of course, in the cultural-profit as in the financial-profit sector, there is no predicting what new actions may prove necessary in order to push the bottom line in 2001. CORPORATE POETRY BREAKTHROUGHS Last but not least, Andrei Codrescu has announced the co-winners of this year's Corporate Poetry Contest (http://rtmark.com/corpoetry.html): Amazon.com in correspondence with Daniel Arp, and three managers overheard by temp worker Missy Chimovitz. An excerpt from one of the latter: You can play it two sides to the middle... I really want to know your thoughts-- I'm game to making some internal adjustments, Because I really want to wrap my arms around this thing. Suggestions for prizes to be sent to the hapless winners are currently being solicited. RTMark's primary goal is to publicize corporate subversion of the democratic process. To this end it acts as a clearinghouse for anti- corporate projects. # 30 # This message is not commercial. Get off our list by writing mailto:remove@rtmark.com?subject=nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com. If you are receiving multiple copies of this release and would prefer to receive only one, remove as above all address versions but one. From nlgcdc-admin Sat Jan 6 11:48:04 2001 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.24]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f06Jm3w04024 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 11:48:04 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 72885 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jan 2001 19:47:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra) (216.178.255.48) by 0 with SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 19:47:33 -0000 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010106114603.009dd470@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 11:46:44 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_9767890==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Agenda for Monday Jan 8 CDC meeting --=====================_9767890==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed JANUARY 2001 CDC MEETING: 7.30 PM, 3450 Geary Boulevard, Suite 208 SUGGESTED AGENDA: 1. Review of recent LPFM developments; such information from the FCC and map as we have. 2. Advice to give applicants, esp. re amended filings 3. Preparation for dealing with Petitions to Deny (It would be good to review Maps legal and applicants' memos in advance.) 4. Potential test case involving Radio Watson; other legal research needed 5. Review of budget and billing rates for Law Offices of PF, Law Offices of AK, Phil Tymon (others?) 6. NLG/CCR Amicus Brief in Pacifica Cases (being drafted by the SF Chapter's KPFA committee); proposal for CDC sponsorship. 7. New Business 8. Meeting Schedule --=====================_9767890==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" JANUARY 2001 CDC MEETING:
7.30 PM, 3450 Geary Boulevard, Suite 208

SUGGESTED AGENDA:


1.      Review of recent LPFM developments; such information from the FCC and map as we have.
2.      Advice to give applicants, esp. re amended filings

3.      Preparation for dealing with Petitions to Deny
(It would be good to review Maps legal and applicants’ memos in advance.)

4.      Potential test case involving Radio Watson; other legal research needed
5.      Review of budget and billing rates for Law Offices of PF, Law Offices of AK,  Phil Tymon (others?)

6.      NLG/CCR Amicus Brief in Pacifica Cases (being drafted by the SF Chapter’s KPFA committee); proposal for CDC sponsorship.

7.      New Business

8.      Meeting Schedule


 --=====================_9767890==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Mon Jan 8 14:22:47 2001 Received: from mail01.phoenixdsl.com (mail.phoenixdsl.com [216.178.151.24]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f08MMkw56720 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 14:22:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 66372 invoked by uid 89); 8 Jan 2001 22:22:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra) (216.178.255.48) by 0 with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 22:22:14 -0000 Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20010108133552.00a086c0@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 14:21:14 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_5488464==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] January CDC Meeting (much happening) --=====================_5488464==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed JANUARY 2001 CDC MEETING: Thursday Jan 18 7.00 PM, 3450 Geary Boulevard, Suite 208, SF (If the door is locked call 415.806.1269 for admission) SUGGESTED AGENDA: 1. Review of recent LPFM developments; such information from the FCC and map as we have. 2. Advice to give applicants, esp. re amended filings 3. Preparation for dealing with Petitions to Deny (It would be good to review Maps legal and applicants' memos in advance.) 4. Potential test case involving Radio Watson; other legal research needed 5. Review of budget and billing rates for Law Offices of PF, Law Offices of AK, Phil Tymon (others?) 6. NLG/CCR Amicus Brief in Pacifica Cases (being drafted by the SF Chapter's KPFA committee); proposal for CDC sponsorship. 7. New Business 8. Meeting Schedule ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC) 3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963 pfranck@culturelaw.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_5488464==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" JANUARY 2001 CDC MEETING:

Thursday Jan 18 7.00 PM, 3450 Geary Boulevard, Suite 208, SF (If the door is locked call 415.806.1269 for admission)

SUGGESTED AGENDA:


1.      Review of recent LPFM developments; such information from the FCC and map as we have.

2.      Advice to give applicants, esp. re amended filings

3.      Preparation for dealing with Petitions to Deny
        (It would be good to review Maps legal and applicants’ memos in advance.)

4.      Potential test case involving Radio Watson; other legal research needed

5.      Review of budget and billing rates for Law Offices of PF, Law Offices of AK,  Phil      Tymon (others?)

6.      NLG/CCR Amicus Brief in Pacifica Cases (being drafted by the SF Chapter’s KPFA committee); proposal for CDC sponsorship.

7.      New Business

8.      Meeting Schedule




^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC)
3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org
CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963
pfranck@culturelaw.com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_5488464==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Sun Nov 12 18:41:16 2000 Received: from california.com (global.california.com [209.3.224.15]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eAD2fGr80764 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:41:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [209.3.225.87] (HELO [209.3.225.87]) by california.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.2.4) with SMTP id 9463781; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:38:15 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 18:39:43 -0800 To: ampb@california.com From: ampb@global.california.com (Paul Griffin) X-Sender: ampb@global.california.com (Unverified) Message-ID: Subject: [nlgcdc] ampb report #39 Dear Readers, We live in interesting times! Human Rights Radio in Springfield, Illinois was raided by the FCC and various cops and thugs. Mbanna Kantako is back on the air and fighting for free speech. Free Radio Austim was shut down, came back on the air, and was raided again. See the story from V-Man in this newsletter. Radio One in Austin was also shut down by the authorities. Meanwhile, the NAB is still trying to lobby low power fm broadcasting out of existence. For those among us who would like to get a LPFM license and go on the air legally, the prospects are not very good. For those of us who don't care about a license, we still face the threat of $10,000 fines and possible prison time for practicing our first amendment rights. As I write this, it looks like George "Shrub" Bush may be our next president, which may help to "radicalize" the sleeping citizens. If Bush does win, William Kennard will probably be replaced as chairman of the FCC and LPFM will get swept under the carpet. Whatever happens, you'll read about it in future editions of the AMPB REPORT! -Paul Griffin From: MichaelTownsend, Townsend.Michael@uis.edu Greetings! Mbanna Kantako has asked me to express his thanks to all who have supported him since the FCC raid on Sept.29. The good news is he's already back on the air thanks to equipment that was donated by supporters around the country. He's been on a week now and so far the raiders haven't been back.How long that will last is anybody's guess. He is in violation of a federal court order now and when the raiders come back,they just might put Mbanna behind bars.He' fully prepared to deal with that possibility and feels it will only serve to escalate the struggle for Human Rights. Next Mon. he heads into the cable access TV studio at the Univ. of Il. to begin taping some of the more than 200 socially conscious rap songs he has written to teach people about Human Rights. They'll be performed by some of the 30 children he works with in his Marcus Garvey School of Human Rights. The man just doesn't know the word "quit". He still needs 2 pieces of equipment for his work with the children; a CD recorder and a mixer board. If anyone out there can help with those,call Mbanna at 217-789-0038 and leave a message (used stuff is fine). For more background info on Mbanna check out indymedia.org and put kantako in the SEARCH box. Don't be thrown into doubt when you see a couple of e-mail messages there accusing Mbanna of being a racist. These were generated by a vicious campaign of character assination led by a local right-wing call-in show hosted by a Rush Limbaugh wannabe. I've worked with Mbanna for 15 years,I'm white and scores of my white students have worked with the Marcus Garvey School,with most of them feeling that it was one of the most rewarding and educational experiences of their lives. Well,thats about it for now. This is the 1st message we've sent out to a distribution list of supporters we thought would be interested in following developments here in Springfield. We'd love to hear from you and may need more help and advice if Mbanna becomes a political prisoner. If you don't want to be on the list,just let me know. If you know of others who would like to be added to the list,get their e-mail address to me. Thanks. Mike Townsend for Mbanna Kantako. From: San Francisco Liberation Radio From: pirateradio.guide@ABOUT.COM THE SOUND OF KANTAKO There's a homemade CD of some of Human Rights Radio's greatest hits being passed around - I've been lucky enough to score a copy and have three choice tracks for you to download. Mp3 delight - that now also includes pictures!: http://pirateradio.about.com/library/mp3feature/blmp3mbanna.htm AMPB RECORD CHART FOR 11/11/00 # TITLE - ARTIST - LABEL 1 CHANCHULLO - RUBEN GONZALES - WORLD CIRCUIT 2 THE LOST DUB PLATES - DJ SUSHI - HIP HOP SLAM 3 MAY YOUR FOOD BASKET NEVER EMPTY - DENNIS BROWN - RAS 4 GIANT ROBOT - BUCKETHEAD - CYBEROCTAVE 5 MARDI GRAS MAMBO - CUBANISMO! - HANNIBAL 6 ABSOLUTELY THE BEST OF BLUES VOL. 2 - FUEL 2000 7 LAST ROUND - HOLY MODAL ROUNDERS - ADELPHI 8 KORONG - KORNOG - GREEN LINNET 9 DUB VOYAGE - TWILIGHT CIRCUS DUB SOUND SYSTEM 10 KING OF THE HIGHWAY - NORTON BUFFALO - BLIND PIG 11 PHAT GLOBAL #1 - VARIOUS ARTISTS - PALM PICTURES 12 THE ROUGH GUIDE TO GLOBAL DANCE - WORLD MUSIC NETWORK 13 MUSIC FROM AND INSPIRED BY SHAFT - VARIOUS - LAFACE 14 A CHILD'S CELEBRATION OF SOUL - VARIOUS - M.F.L.P. 15 A JEWISH ODYSSEY - VARIOUS ARTISTS - PUTUMAYO 16 WARNING: - GREEN DAY - REPRISE 17 MASTER REC. VOLUME 2 - ADRIAN SHERWOOD - ON-U SOUND 18 WOMAN ON TOP - SOUNDTRACK - SONY 19 SOCA GOLD 2000 - VARIOUS ARTISTS - VP RECORDS 20 MUSIC FROM THE TEA LANDS - VARIOUS ARTISTS - PUTUMAYO 21 THE THIRD PLANET - THE THIRD PLANET - WORLD CLASS 22 MDMA 3 - ANTHONY ACID - WARLOCK 23 OPEN YOUR MIND - EDDIE DEF - HIP HOP SLAM 24 MASTER MUSICIANS OF JAJOUKA - POINT MUSIC 25 GENGHIS BLUES SOUNDTRACK - SIX DEGREES 26 DUB CHAMBER 3 - BILL LASWELL - ROIR 27 MAROON - BARENAKED LADIES - REPRISE 28 POWER OF THE TRINITY - ISRAEL VIBRATION - RAS 29 DOWN TO THE PROMISED LAND - VARIOUS - BLOODSHOT 30 CUBA WITHOUT BORDERS - VARIOUS ARTISTS - SIX DEGREES 31 ELECTRIC WACO CHAIR - WACO BROTHERS - BLOODSHOT 32 DJ MIXED.COM/MICRO - VARIOUS ARTISTS - MOONSHINE 33 COLORS OF LATIN JAZZ - SOUL SAUCE! - CONCORD 34 DUBS CULTURE INTO... - SCIENTIST - RAS 35 FREAKS & ICONS - DZIHAN & KAMIEN - SIX DEGREES 36 SMOOTH & STRAIGHT - VARIOUS ARTISTS - N-CODED MUSIC 37 MERENGUE EN LA CALLE OCHO 2000 - VARIOUS - PROTEL 38 BOYS AND GIRLS SOUNDTRACK - VARIOUS - ARK 21 39 WHITE CANNIBAL - JAMES CHANCE - ROIR 40 TITAN A.E. SOUNDTRACK - VARIOUS ARTISTS - CAPITOL CAPTAIN FRED'S WORLD CRUISE #13 1) PASS IT ALONG - CHUMBA WUMBA 2) MIC BREAK 3) TRAIN TO DOOMSVILLE - LEE PERRY 4) ABOVE THE MOON - MASTER MUSICIANS OF JAJOUKA 5) PA' GOZAR - RUBEN GONZALEZ 6) LASSIE WI' THE YELLOW COATIE - KORNOG 7) MIC BREAK 8) PIDGEON HEAD SCRATCH - DJ SUSHI 9) FITTEST SHALL SURVIVE - LIMA CALBIO 10) WALKIN' THE DOG - RUFUS THOMAS 11) EMANUEL - DENNIS BROWN 12) MIC BREAK 13) STAR WARS - BUCKETHEAD 14) THUNDERCLAP - JOSH RYAN 15) RAMPART STREET RUMBA - CUBANISMO! 16) KARGYRAA MOAN - PAUL PENA 17) MIC BREAK 18) THIRD PLANET - THE THIRD PLANET 19) MUD UP - ISRAEL VIBRATION 20) LAS ESTREYAS - CONSUELO LUZ 21) BABY DON'T GO - BIG BILL BROONZY 22) MIC BREAK 23) BUZZ LIGHT YEARS - EDDIE DEF 24) EL RITMO BOMBA - LA MAKINA Captan Fred's World Cruise, a wild mix of music and sound from all over the planet, is now available for broadcast on any micro-power station. You can get it as an audio cd or as a MP3 file. For more information, drop a line to: ASSOCIATION OF MICRO-POWER BROADCASTERS PMB 22, 2018 SHATTUCK AVE. BERKELEY, CA 94704 ampb@california.com If you feel you received this message mistakenly, or would like to be removed from the list, simply reply to this message with the word "reply". ### ### (Q) (Q) . . ###### ###O### #### -Paul From nlgcdc-admin Sun Jan 21 18:36:43 2001 Received: from california.com (global.california.com [209.3.224.15]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0M2agv31405 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:36:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from [209.3.225.79] (HELO [209.3.225.79]) by california.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.3.2) with SMTP id 10982758; Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:34:44 -0800 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 18:36:38 -0800 To: ampb@california.com From: ampb@global.california.com (Paul Griffin) X-Sender: ampb@global.california.com (Unverified) Message-ID: Subject: [nlgcdc] ampb report #40 Dear Readers, Radio World recently published the results of a low power fm station conducted by Jim Trapani. With the blessing of the FCC, Jim set up an experimental station, WA2XRY, and proved that there is no way that a LPFM station could possibly interfere with a high power FM station. Reprinted below is a letter I sent to Radio World on their article... I enjoyed your January 3 issue very much, especially the letters from Jim Trapani. I really thought Fred Krock was way off in his estimate of interference caused by LPFM stations, but I lacked the proof. Jim provided the real-world testing that showed Krock was wrong. The real story is that high power broadcasters are interfering with the american citizens' access to the media, by using political influence and "lobbying". Now we've lost Bill Kennard as FCC chairman and I doubt low power broadcasting will ever get legalized. The text of the Radio Broadcast Preservation Act of 2000 passed by congress prohibits anyone who's ever broadcasted illegally from ever getting a LPFM license. The dirty little secret no one wants to talk about is that lots of gainfully employed radio professionals have been involved in "pirate" radio at one time or another. How about some amnesty for violators? If it weren't for all the little stations out there challenging FCC regulations, LPFM would have never been proposed. If the radio dial wasn't clogged with bland cookie cutter stations that all sound the same, there would be no need for outlaw broadcasting. I support giving local communities access to the airwaves. Thanks for letting both sides of the LPFM issue have their say in your newspaper! - Paul Griffin (for the Association of Micro-Power Broadcasters) STATION ALERT From: worker-microradio@lists.tao.ca FCC Chairman William Kennard on Low Power FM I am surprised and profoundly disappointed by the statements of National Public Radio and International Association of Audio Information Services regarding the FCC's recently released Reconsideration Order for Low Power FM Service. Sadly, NPR is not satisfied that the FCC Reconsideration Order goes the extra mile to address their concerns, even though: We created an expedited complaint procedure for rapidly responding to unexpected interference; We added full protection for radio reading services from new LPFM stations while we test the concerns about receivers that NPR brought to us; We committed to protecting translator service in a manner compatible with the LPFM service. What we declined to do was to give NPR stations new authority to allow NPR translators that are dislocated in the future to knock LPFM stations off the air. The public interest should not fall prey to an all-or-nothing approach. I had hoped that NPR would see that their overriding mission to bring noncommercial radio service to the public is furthered by the establishment of new LPFM radio service that would serve small communities and niche markets. It is a sad day when National Public Radio advocates a policy that would deny the public new radio service. From: jonathan jay, jonathan@speakeasy.net THIS IS A MicroRadio.NET LPFM UPDATE In keeping with the recent BUSH Presidential installation, an invigorated GOP-Majority Congress has moved rapidly to gut LPFM legislation, closed campaign access, and stripped the FCC of their basic regulatory powers for spectrum management, awarding that power to: congress! Is this what democracy looks like? Read on! Just this week, legislation finally passed through both houses, the so-called "Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000" does in fact 'freeze' the dial and lock in the status quo of big broadcaster hegemony, preserving the regulatory paradigm of spectrum scarcity, and phenomenal radio revenues (3 BILLION dollars in the last election cycle alone!) for the existing license holders of our 'public airwaves' like the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters), and NPR (National Public Broadcasters). Also, in order effect any future changes to the FM dial, the FCC must now petition GOP Congress, who now has granted themselves final authority. In effect, rather than regulating the FM spectrum, the FCC must now petition the GOP controlled Congress for rule making alterations. Adding insult to injury, NPR has also been freed from the legal requirement to offer free airtime to all political candidates. Call that campaign finance reform? Welcome to what a post-democratic, corporate republic looks like! It was hoped that the new LPFM service would allow several thousand FCC sanctioned small, new, non-commercial voices to blossom on the FM dial across the nation as petitioned for surprisingly effectively by dedicated core of radio-activists. Instead strong-arm tactics by corporate funded lobbies, have gutted the intended service, and now only several dozen LPFM licenses will be issued. These will be limited almost exclusively to rural america (none in any major metropolitan markets), and a couple of test markets. Woop-di-doo. So much for citizen access to the airwaves. What does all this mean for MicroRadio.NET and our distributed model of people's participation in media making via autonomous pirate deployment? 1) With our intentionally high profile, MicroRadio.NET must make crystal clear our role as internet content providers AS DISTINCT and DISTINGUISHED FROM autonomous FM distribution as ELECTRONIC CIVIL DISOBEDIANCE voluntarily undertaken by *you* the downloader/enduser of our audio delivery services... to protect our facility and insulate ourselves from hassle from the man. There is only one of us, but myriad of you, it is a simple numbers game ;) 2) we must accelerate our contacts and discussions toward the setting up a legal defence fund for the dauntless defenders o' liberty, the frontline fighters for freedom, the deliverors of robust micro FM to your neighborhood, AKA YOU! Think we'd let you twist in the wind? fuck no! 3) we must adopt a generally more robust security policy, including the use of PGP encryption (pretty good protection) just like Amnesty International DOES when operating in a hostile host country... which as far as free speech goes, we sure seem to be! 4) until at least 2002 if not further, our model of internet audio distribution to a growing mosquito fleet of autonomous pirate downloader/rebroadcasters AKA *you* seems to be the best game in town (and across the land) for forward progress toward citizen participation, and community communication via the people's airwaves in this time of political regression. 5) fuck the GOP, fuck congress, fuck the NAB, fuck NPR. Did i miss anyone? More important than them is that we fuck ourselves. I figure if we keep fucking, soon we will outnumber them! Offended at my language? Fuck you! ;) In Conclusion: As i write this, the walls are now primed, and the dust is settling in the new public-access world wide web audio production facility (CODE NAME: Project X2). The pending completion of our free speech platform for the 21st century has got us pretty excited and invigorated, so if *you* can bone up on RF theory and practice, get your soldering iron warmed up, reduce your SWR to something close to 1.0, make sure yer signal is filtered absolutely clean, and you have found an open slot on the dial, cuz we've got some audio for you and yours, so GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO GO! best of luck to you all! jonathan jay Seattle From: shiriki unganisha, stoptargetingtheafrikancommunity@yahoo.com A Servant Of The People January 6, 2001 As we move into the 21st century The People are beginning to awaken and rethink the politics of this kountry. The Presidential election of 2000 have been the wake-up call that The People needed to realize that nothing have really changed for Afrikans, Women, other people of color and poor whites. The 1965 Voters Rights Act is only 35yrs. old and the so-called Emancipation of 1865, freeing the enslaved Afrikans happened 135yrs. ago. The People understand the U.S. government is controlled by corporations and there is no difference between the two political parties. The Green Party 2000 Campaign captured the imagination and energy of The People by addressing some of their concerns. As we began to build a third party in this kountry i would like to suggest we rethink what A Servant Of The People really is. We have been trained to elect an individual to represent us in Congress, then allow that individual to do as they wish,this is where we The People make our mistake. A Servant Of The People is someone who acts on the words and guidance from The People. When we elect an individual to represent us, i believe that persons responsibility is to empower The People with the knowledge of how the political process works. That individual must understand their opinions and thoughts are kool, however, it is The People who have the last say in all the decisions. i would like to attempt to explain my vision of how an elected official(servant) and political party should operate in serving The People. The servant will come from the communities of The People, therefore, the servant will have knowledge of the needs of The People. The servant office should be staffed with individuals from the community and not their families and childhood friends. Supporters from different precincts in which the servant represent should identify a contact person that will be responsible for disseminating information to The People of that precinct. For example,when bills are introduced, a staff person will contact the information runners of each precinct with the particular bill for analyzing and disscusion. Once The People examined the legislation, there will be a vote from each precinct as to whether or not the servant will vote in favor of the legislation or vote against it. This can and should be done on state and federal levels of government, because our lives are controlled by politics and you should want to be part of directing change instead of going through changes. Whatever party The People build, its' platform should be grounded in the needs of the poorest of poor amongst us and it should involve the working people who are expolited and catch the most hell from this government. i have a motto of, "Learn The Rules Of The Game And Then Don't Play By Them". For example, i have listed above a plan of how i think a politician/political party should operate, which is not in the traditional way, which means you are not playing by the rules. When people know the rules of the game, they bring knowledge to the table which puts them at an advantage instead of a disadvantage. If The People are informed of the process they would be more likely than not to participate. As we began to build The People Political Movement, let history be our guide, remember we are struggling against a system that was set-up by and maintained by the rich and powerful. They are not going to roll-over and let us build The People Political Movement, "COINTELPRO" and "NEWKILL" intelligence type operations will be employed against us. History shows us this government will attack you if they deem you a threat to the status quo. Knowing this, The People must work toward building a society which all people have a desire to participate and bring about productive change. There is an Afrikan Proverb that says, "When spider webs unite, they can tie up a lion." In Struggle, Sista Shiriki From:Lyn Gerry, redlyn@loop.com A 60 second promo for the 4th Annual Homelessness Marathon is now available for download in 128kbps stereo mp3. You can download it directly at http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=2494 or go yothe Homelessness Marathon Website http://www.homelessnessmarathon.org/ Also, check out our website for the most current schedule. The marathon will be available on C-Band, KU Band and streaming MP3 via microradio.net and the Boston IMC The 4th Annual Homelessness Marathon 7 pm EST Jan 24 - 9 am EST Jan 25, 2001 www.homelessnessmarathon.org From:Richard Wenzel, rich.wenzel@lycos.com The following website is loaded with very useful activist tools and valuable links. A couple examples - 1. the ability to write a "letter to the editor", and have it go out to a variety of newspapers all over the country. As someone on MRN has already noted, newspapers are more likely to report on broadcasting inequities and abuses. 2. the ability to send out an article or press release in a similiar manner, to newspapers, radio, and tv stations all over the country. (these email addresses can include a good list of independents & alt media orgs also) 3. establishing a web page the easy way. I hope you find this site useful - http://activistsE-Z.com/ From: radman, resist@best.com FCC ANNOUNCES FIRST 255 APPLICANTS ELIGIBLE FOR LOW POWER FM RADIO STATIONS Issue: Radio The FCC has announced that 255 noncommercial educational applicants in 20 states are eligible for new low power FM (LPFM) licenses. Applicants could begin receiving construction permits for their new LPFM stations after 30 days. Additional eligible applicants from these twenty states, whose applications conflict with other applications filed in the same geographic area, will be announced at a later date. [SOURCE: FCC] (http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/News_Releases/2000/nrmm0047.html) See Also: SUMMARY OF THE ANTI-LPFM LEGISLATION From: Frank Moore Subject: DON'T WATCH/LISTEN TO LUVER IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON! that is especially true on thursdays...it's info pipeline starting from 3:30pm and...with only two musical breaks...running to 1am pt! yesterday we ran a major 3-hour anti-globalization conference. but no day is safe on luver. like today, the news ran way over...because we had a lot to cover...the up-coming d.c. protests, the fbi/cia war on native americans, the corporations keeping crips as product/slaves even in the new in-home care "INDUSTRY"!...then a very in-depth look at the new [eu]gentic movement from the crip's p.o.v. LUVER AIN'T EASY! In Freedom Frank Moore Visit http://www.eroplay.com Listen to LUVeR! http://www.luver.com LUVeR Alternative News http://www.luver.org From:John Anderson, pirateradio.guide@ABOUT.COM AIRWAVES FOR ALL January 16, 2000 - Vol. 3, No. 3 ~ Target: Translator ~ Schnazz: Another Double Digit Week ------------------ Hot Pick ------------------ HELPFUL HOW-TOS We're expanding our how-to listings; currently, we've got step-by-step lists on building and running a station, fundraising, and other tech tips like tuning your antenna. There's strategies there, too, for avoiding busts and reacting to visits. Check the latest list and tell us what you think we need more of: http://pirateradio.about.com/c/ht/How_index.htm TARGET: TRANSLATOR Last week, we told you about some new tactics that have begun to be employed for taking back the airwaves. 'Borrowing' a translator is one of those mentioned; this week, we've got an in-depth look at just how translator takeovers are done, courtesy of someone who's done it: http://pirateradio.about.com/library/weekly/aa011601.htm SCHNAZZ: ANOTHER DOUBLE DIGIT WEEK Enjoy the 10 new links: Tons of new stations from several countries, more online engineering resources unearthed, new news and much more - several categories of our Subjects library have been updated, too: http://pirateradio.about.com/blfinds.htm WILLIAM KENNARD - FRIEND OR FOE? As the FCC Chairman leaves office to take a think-tank job, there's been some movement made to thank the man for his work on low power radio legalization. As you know, we're revamping our Radio Hall of Shame and expanding its scope - does William Kennard deserve a spot there, or has he really been an advocate we should be proud of?: http://forums.about.com/ab-pirateradio/messages?msg=3D180.1 ------------------ You Talk Back ------------------ 'Tbone22' doesn't like the idea of attacking the corporate media directly: "We already know there are plenty of open frequencies open for pirates to use. They have been put to good use, in my opinion. Why incite intentional interference and risk giving the whole movement a bad name?" I'm not inciting anything - I'm just providing information. What people do with it is their choice. But I can tell you that there's many folks out there who feel that the LPFM fiasco was the last real hope at media reform - possibly the last chance we had to make some change for years to come. When you get backed into a corner like this, previous options which looked impractical now look pretty damn good. Still, the risks go to those who take action. Whatever action that may be, well, at least they're *acting* - and that's something we can use more of, no matter what the individual cost is. I'm always open to further thoughts: http://pirateradio.about.com/mpremail.htm From: San Francisco Liberation Radio , sflr@slip.net We need a pledge for an additional $40 a month (or two pledges for $20)-plus a donated pentium computer. With a total of $80 a month we would be able to acquire the type of enhanced, or "business class" DSL which will give us a reliable Internet signal with a clear, high quality sound. If you can help , please call our office at 415-386-3135. Again we'd like to remind everyone that you can now make a secure credit card donation to the station by means of our Pay Pal account. To do so, simply go to our web site at http://www.slip.net/~dove, scroll mid-way down the page and click on the purple "dove" button. The book, "Rising Up: Class Warfare in America from the Streets to the Airwaves," by SFLR co-founder Richard Edmondson, is now available on Amazon.com. It can also be found in the following independent, locally-owned bookstores in San Francisco: Modern Times, 888 Valencia St.; Bound Together Books, 1369 Haight St.; The Booksmith, 1644 Haight St.; and City Lights, 261 Columbus Ave. Direct purchase from Librad Press, via the SFLR web site, is also possible. "Rising Up," which documents the history of the micro radio movement, is now being distributed by AK Press, which has been largely responsible for moving it into the above-listed area bookstores. Many thanks to the folks at AK Press! From: Free Speech TV , newslett@freespeech.org WANTED: DIRECT ACTION VIDEO COVERAGE FROM YOUR HOMETOWN A pilot for Indymedia is currently in pre-production. If successful, Indymedia would bcome a monthly television program featuring progressive, direct actions from across the country and around the world. The series would be broadcast nationally on FSTV'sDish Network Channel 9415 as well as to our network of public acess cable stations, and streamed live on our website. To get involved subscribe to the imc-satellite@indymedia.org list serve (http://lists.indymedia.org), or send e-mail to programming2@fstvorg. # TITLE - ARTIST - LABEL 1-A CHILD'S CELEBRATION OF SOUL-VARIOUS-M.F.L.P. 2-STRICTLY THE BEST VOL. 26 -VARIOUS-VP 3-MORE GRIP-SIDESTEPPER-PALM PICTURES 4-MUSIC FROM THE TEA LANDS-VARIOUS-PUTUMAYO 5-STANKONIA-OUTKAST-ARISTA 6-HEROES AND MARTYRS-HOWARD ZINN-ALT. TENTACLES 7-TRIBUTE TO...-ELIADES OCHOA-HIGHER OCTAVE 8-CUE'S HIP HOP SHOP VOLUME 2-VARIOUS-STRAY 9-GLOBAL MESSENGER-MACKA B-ARIWA 10-JUST PAYIN' THE RENT-VARIOUS ARTISTS-HIP HOP SLAM 11-THE RETURN OF EL SANTO-KING CHANGO-LUAKA BOP 12-BRAINSCAPES 2001-ALAIN ESKINASI-CYBEROCTAVE 13-LOVERS ROCK-SADE-EPIC 14-COMPLETE BBC RECORDINGS-JOY DIVISION-FUEL 2000 15-CUBA WITHOUT BORDERS-VARIOUS ARTISTS-SIX DEGREES 16-KING OF THE HIGHWAY-NORTON BUFFALO-BLIND PIG 17-THE SIXTH SESSION-DIESELBOY-PALM PICTURES 18-CHANCHULLO-RUBEN GONZALES-WORLD CIRCUIT 19-TALES FROM THE CRYPT-JOE "KING" CARRASCO-ROIR 20-THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE FUNKY-TOM TOM CLUB-RYKO 21-KID A-RADIOHEAD-CAPITOL 22-DUBS CULTURE INTO...-SCIENTIST-RAS 23-ELECTRIC WACO CHAIR-WACO BROTHERS-BLOODSHOT 24-THE DEVIL'S SWING-VARIOUS ARTISTS-ARHOOLIE 25-SONGLINES PRESENTS WORLD MUSIC-MANTECA 26-LIVE AT REGGAE SUNSPLASH-TOOTS & THE MAYTALS-GENES 27-DJ MIXED.COM/MICRO-VARIOUS ARTISTS-MOONSHINE 28-COLORS OF LATIN JAZZ - SOUL SAUCE!-CONCORD 29-OPIATE SEA-SHAPESHIFTER-PINCH HIT 30-DUB PLATES VOLUME TWO-TWILIGHT CIRCUS-M RECORDING 31-KEN BURNS' JAZZ-VARIOUS ARTISTS-SONY 32-IQIZEH-BANCO DE GAIA-SIX DEGREES 33-ROAD ROCK-NEIL YOUNG-REPRISE 34-DON'T SLEEP-DJ HURRICANE-TVT 35-GREATEST HITS-LISETTE MELENDEZ-WARLOCK 36-IDIR AN DA SHOLAS-DHOMHNAILL-GREEN LINNET 37-RENEGADES-RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE-EPIC 38-SYMPHONY #2-SAITO KINEN ORCHESTRA-SONY 39-LOOKOUT! FREAKOUT-VARIOUS ARTISTS-LOOKOUT! 40-NEW YORK, ON THE ROAD-MEKONS-ROIR CAPTAIN FRED'S WORLD CRUISE #15 1) SIGNAL SIGNAL - COMMON RIDER 2) MIC BREAK 3) LA BARA - SIDESTEPPER 4) SOUL FIRE - TOM TOM CLUB 5) SPANISH KEY - MILES DAVIS 6) MIC BREAK 7) THE NATIONAL ANTHEM - RADIOHEAD 8) ALL MY LOVE - MARCIA GRIFFITHS 9) INVID - DIESLEBOY 10) KICKIN' WICKED RHYMES - DJ HURRICANE 11) MIC BREAK 12) NO QUIERO CELOS - ELIADES OCHOA 13) SLAVE SONG - SADE 14) SHUFFALO - NORTON BUFFALO 15) B.O.B. - OUTKAST 16) MIC BREAK 17) 537 C.U.B.A. - ORISHAS 18) WHAT POLITICIANS SAY - KING CHANGO 19) BACKBONE - LIBERATION ARMY 20) EVERYDAY PEOPLE - TAJ MAHAL 21) MIC BREAK 22) IN MY EYES - RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE 23) PARTY WEEKEND - JOE "KING" CARRASCO 24) MIC BREAK 25) WELCOME THE GREY - MACKA B Comments or Questions? Drop us a line at: Association of Micro-Power Broadcasters PMB 22 2018 SHATTUCK AVE. BERKELEY, CA 94704 (510) 848-1455 ampb@california.com If you feel you have received this email by mistake, just reply to this message with the word "remove" in the subject field. Thanks for reading this message. ### ### (Q) (Q) . . ###### ###O### #### -Paul From nlgcdc-admin Mon Mar 5 09:43:38 2001 Received: from mail03.rapidsite.net (mail03.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.52]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f25HhbM64202 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 09:43:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail03.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.58s) with SMTP id 07574348 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 12:37:09 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20010305093721.00ae7020@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 09:37:27 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Massive PROTEST >From: Degraw86@aol.com >Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 00:49:05 EST >Subject: Massive PROTEST >To: aakorn@igc.org >X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 117 > > >we have just begun to plan a protest against the concentration of media - it >will take place on june 14th in times square, nyc - the response already has >been amazing! we would appreciate any advice or help that you could give! >check our home page - we just put it up - www.AmericanResurrection.com > >thank you >david From nlgcdc-admin Tue Mar 6 16:15:16 2001 Received: from mail05.rapidsite.net (mail05.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.42]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f270FFM84855 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2001 16:15:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.58s) with SMTP id 02671110 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2001 19:12:50 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20010306161255.00af0600@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 16:13:07 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_7472640==_.ALT" X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Interview --=====================_7472640==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Anyone want to respond? >From: CzarIt@aol.com >Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 19:01:08 EST >Subject: Interview >To: aakorn@igc.org >X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10501 > >Hello, my name is Ian Tyner, and I am a Senior at Evanston Township High >School in Evanston, IL. In order to fulfill my English AP requirements, I am >required to research in depth on a topic that needs to be exposed, and told >to the general public. The topic that I chose was the controversy over free >radio. In order to help make my arguments more concrete I am seeking possible >interviewees to answer some radio/pirateradio/freespeech type questions. I >would be honored if your organization could help me by taking part in an >email interview. Or if you are in the Chicago land area, within the next >week, I could use your interview as part of video documentary that I am doing >for the same class. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for >time. > >Sincerly, > >Ian Tyner >2700 Park Place >Evanston IL 60201 >847-328-9420 >czarit@aol.com --=====================_7472640==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Anyone want to respond?

From: CzarIt@aol.com
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 19:01:08 EST
Subject: Interview
To: aakorn@igc.org
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10501

Hello, my name is Ian Tyner, and I am a Senior at Evanston Township High
School in Evanston, IL. In order to fulfill my English AP requirements, I am
required to research in depth on a topic that needs to be exposed, and told
to the general public. The topic that I chose was the controversy over free
radio. In order to help make my arguments more concrete I am seeking possible
interviewees to answer some radio/pirateradio/freespeech type questions. I
would be honored if your organization could help me by taking part in an
email interview. Or if you are in the Chicago land area, within the next
week, I could use your interview as part of video documentary that I am doing
for the same class. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for time.

Sincerly,

Ian Tyner
2700 Park Place
Evanston IL 60201
847-328-9420
czarit@aol.com
--=====================_7472640==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Mon Mar 12 20:22:06 2001 Received: from m1.boston.juno.com (m1.boston.juno.com [64.136.24.64]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2D4M6o51956 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from cookie.juno.com by cookie.juno.com for <"67xEiIE6aTJPD0abKN/xjDDJvKIGweKSTeYRoERTySyXg8yqAD8kfw=="> Received: (from boog59@juno.com) by m1.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id FYDSN2BM; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 23:21:10 EST To: nlgcdc@rdrop.com Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 22:15:43 -0600 Message-ID: <20010312.221545.-921295.9.boog59@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,7-10 X-Juno-Att: 0 X-Juno-RefParts: 0 From: boog59@juno.com Subject: [nlgcdc] collection of forfeiture Howdy Luke, Peter, Alan, et al., I got a letter today from the US Attorney's office in Wichita indicating that they are going to pursue collection of a monetary forfeiture for unauthorized broadcasting from a client of mine in Garden City, KS. My impression has been that they mostly haven't tried to collect these in the past. Is that impression incorrect, or is situation changing? Any insights would be appreciated. Boog Highberger Lawrence, Kansas (785) 843-0995 From nlgcdc-admin Mon Mar 12 21:56:39 2001 Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2D5uco59281 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:56:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from igc.org ([63.193.243.105]) by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0GA400GPNG7NQO@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> for nlgcdc@rdrop.com; Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:50:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 21:50:13 -0800 From: "Louis N. Hiken" Subject: Re: [nlgcdc] collection of forfeiture To: boog59@juno.com, nlgcdc@rdrop.com Reply-to: hiken@igc.org Message-id: <3AADB515.30BFE5ED@igc.org> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en References: <20010312.221545.-921295.9.boog59@juno.com> Hi, Boog, Regardless of whatever other defenses you have, you should surely raise a selective prosecution defense. This is the first attempt to collect that I've heard of. In addition, you should raise the arbitrary nature of the fine. There is no relationship whatsoever between the harm done and the fine assessed. In fact, if you look at the history of these fines, you'll see that everytime defendants challenged the fine classifications, the FCC changed them. If they are going to attempt to create a class of fines for these violations, they should have to explain what they are basing the amounts upon. At the NAB convention I attended, the spokespeople got up and acknowledged that the existence of microradio actually helped boost the sales and income of the established radio stations. If that is so, they should have to pay your client, instead of vice versa. Finally, I would really look into their assertion that they can assess a fine for each and every violation. That's bullshit! Either there is interference and loss of income, or there isn't. They should have to relate the amount of the fine to the actual damages. Any attempt to catergorize the fine as a liquidated amount should fail - the fines are so excessive in that context as to be laughable. Good luck, Luke boog59@juno.com wrote: > Howdy Luke, Peter, Alan, et al., > > I got a letter today from the US Attorney's office in Wichita indicating > that they are going to pursue collection of a monetary forfeiture for > unauthorized broadcasting from a client of mine in Garden City, KS. My > impression has been that they mostly haven't tried to collect these in > the past. Is that impression incorrect, or is situation changing? Any > insights would be appreciated. > > Boog Highberger > Lawrence, Kansas > (785) 843-0995 > > _______________________________________________ > nlgcdc mailing list > nlgcdc@rdrop.com > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/nlgcdc From nlgcdc-admin Wed Mar 14 15:58:31 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.206]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f2ENwTo78763 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2001 15:58:31 -0800 (PST) Received: (cpmta 13337 invoked from network); 14 Mar 2001 12:41:05 -0800 Received: from dialup-64-34-3-58.telocity.com (HELO tecra) (64.34.3.58) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.206) with SMTP; 14 Mar 2001 12:41:05 -0800 X-Sent: 14 Mar 2001 20:41:05 GMT Message-ID: <000001c0acc6$e4467a20$6401a8c0@tecra> From: "Peter Franck" To: , References: <20010312.221545.-921295.9.boog59@juno.com> Subject: Re: [nlgcdc] collection of forfeiture Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 09:53:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Boog, this is almost the first time (may be, in fact) that we have heard of an attempt to collect. It raises some interesting procedural possibilities, since they must file a civil action in district court, and your client is entitled to a trial de novo on the issues. Give me a call if you like, and we should discuss. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 8:15 PM Subject: [nlgcdc] collection of forfeiture > Howdy Luke, Peter, Alan, et al., > > I got a letter today from the US Attorney's office in Wichita indicating > that they are going to pursue collection of a monetary forfeiture for > unauthorized broadcasting from a client of mine in Garden City, KS. My > impression has been that they mostly haven't tried to collect these in > the past. Is that impression incorrect, or is situation changing? Any > insights would be appreciated. > > Boog Highberger > Lawrence, Kansas > (785) 843-0995 > > _______________________________________________ > nlgcdc mailing list > nlgcdc@rdrop.com > http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/nlgcdc > From nlgcdc-admin Thu Mar 15 20:43:43 2001 Received: from mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com (mailout4-1.nyroc.rr.com [24.92.226.166]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2G4hho28608 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2001 20:43:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from emma.rochester.rr.com (roc-204-210-131-164.rochester.rr.com [204.210.131.164]) by mailout4-0.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.2/RoadRunner 1.03) with ESMTP id f2G4e8b21788 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2001 23:40:08 -0500 (EST) From: "Lyn Gerry" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 23:44:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <3AB153C1.18764.F135394@localhost> Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Subject: [nlgcdc] (Fwd) RFC BUSTED! ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 20:26:57 -0800 (PST) From: Radio Free Cascadia To: redlyn@loop.com Subject: RFC BUSTED! FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE! FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE! WHAT: F.C.C. RAID SHUTS DOWN RADIO FREE CASCADIA 98.5FM WHEN: AM MARCH 15 TH, 2001 CONTACT: STEVE BOUTON at 242-0943; email: radio985@efn.org; PO Box 12200 Eugene, OR 97440 Early in the morning of Thursday, March 15th, the Federal Communications Commision (FCC), along with 8 U.S. Marshalls, 3 local cops, and other agents arrived with a search warrant, battering ram, and drawn guns to search and seize the long running micro-power station, Radio Free Cascadia (RFC) 98.5 FM. People living at the Whiteaker neighborhood residence were awoken and questioned individually as to the operations of the station and people involved. All broadcasting equipment was taken into custody. Radio Free Cascadia has been providing an alternative to corporate radio for over three years to the Eugene community. This was an obvious attack on free speech and autonomy. RFC claims "We will be back on the air!" Stay tuned for more information. The following is taken from the Evolutionary Statement of RFC 98.5FM: " The capitalist marketplace has put a price on the earth and the very thoughts of citizens, as if these were products to be owned and traded by faceless economic machines. Huge multinational conglomerates, facilitated by the industrial governments of the world, use their profits to control more and more public space, from national forests and city parks to television, print and radio media. Following this global trend of consolidating private ownership of public resources, channels of mass communication have become less and less accessible to individuals and local communities. The assumption that most of our society disires a spoon-fed version of current political and cultural events, denies the potential for an ever-changing blend of ideas and values to stimulate social change on a local level. Mass media provides a constant flow of meaningless, consumer-oriented, mass-produced cultural symbols that simultaneously encourage both uniformity and competition. This commercialization of culture is a massive obstacle to the emergence of the creative social interaction and artistic expression that is vital to confront the diverse problems facing civilization. Citizens around the globe have chosen to respond to this domination of public discourse nonviolently and pro-actively, by simply reclaiming these public spaces, even in the face of violent government repression. Micro-power or "pirate" radio is one such response. Radio Free Cascadia seeks to be only one outlet for the incredible diversity of ideas and perspectives in our bio-region. Like the water, air and soil, radio airwaves are a public resource, and as such should be utilized for the greatest common good. RFC believes that the public freedoms expressed by the First Amendment of the Constitution should apply equally to micro-power radio, Internet web sites and your local community bulletin board. Perhaps the FCC's insistence on control over the airwaves is best explained by their economically biased regulatory process - hopelessly skewed in favor of corporate interests. RFC believes that to allow profit-driven corporate entities to elbow out grass roots media channels is to mock the notion of free speech, and suppress the possibility of deeper social interations in our daily lives. RFC is prepared to confront this threat to the survival of our civil liberties through continued nonviolent direct action and constitutionally-based legal defense." ------- End of forwarded message ------- @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ The A-Infos Radio Project http://www.radio4all.net Information was meant to be free From nlgcdc-admin Sun Mar 25 21:16:38 2001 Received: from snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2Q5Gbo22063 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 21:16:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from [209.110.238.142] (ali-ca77-14.ix.netcom.com [209.110.238.142]) by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA25222; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 21:15:38 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200103260515.VAA25222@snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 21:14:18 -0800 From: "Art Persyko" To: stop-ftaa@globalexchange.org, "ftaa-l" CC: microradio@lists.tao.ca, nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] FW: request for info. re: FTAA impact on media >>Could someone post info to the list about media conglomeration & privitization >>and how [media] corporations will benefit from FTAA? I need this info for protest we >>are doing in Austin but others on this list could probably use the info. I >>would particularly appreciate any info as it relates to FOX Network. But any >>and all such info is welcome. >> >> >>===== >>. [|=-=slave=-=|] >>. Free Radio Austin 97.1 http://pirateradio.org/fra >>. Austin Independent Media Center: http://austin.indymedia.org >>. From nlgcdc-admin Sun Apr 1 10:45:00 2001 Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f31Hixi63549 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 10:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smui02.slb.mindspring.net (smui02.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.25]) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA18980; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:43:57 -0400 (EDT) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui02.slb.mindspring.net id NAA0000000539; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:43:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 13:43:56 -0400 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Cc: sheri@indymedia.org, andrea@media-alliance.org Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 205.188.196.43 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: FW: KCMU & Paul Allen To the NLG CDC This just in from Seattle. Apparently Paul Allen has entered into some kind of programming agreement with the Seattle college/community station KCMU. What's more interesting is Nat'l Public Radio conference in Seattle in early May. Seems to me we should organize and give them a WTO-style welcome. Any thoughts? - Alan sheri wrote: > some better info. geov is a great ally, writer/founder of eat the state! local publication, and has a column in the weekly. he's as radical as they get and quite an excellent writer. ets! is one of the imc's subtenants (we share space :).... ah the sage continues. love sheri ---------- From: "Geov L. Parrish" Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 17:13:35 -0800 To: sheri Cc: Geov Parrish , Mark Worth , Jill Freidberg , Mike McCormick , Sally Soriano Subject: Re: KCMU & Paul Allen Hi Sheri et al, Mike knows more, but the basic scoop is that the new calls as of Monday will be KEXP (I had it as KEMP originally, sorry). UW will retain the license, but under an agreement signed Thurs with Allen, Allen will essentially have control of the station. He will provide rent-free studio space downtown (N. Dexter, where KZOK-FM used to be) in exchange for this. There were articles in Fri's Times and P-I on this, and in both those articles and conversations Mike has had with Don Yates, there have been assurances that programming will not change--but that's always what they say in radio before they throw people out and change the locks. Mike and I obviously are not in a position to raise a stink, unless, of course, Mike is fired. But other folks might want to. I wonder how much public traction it will have, though--every time KCMU (now KEXP) gets a little more compromised, the public reaction has gotten more and more muted as people realize that the station's management has the license and doesn't have to care what the community thinks. On a different issue that Sheri, Sally, and other alternative media folks might be *very* interested in: there will be a national public radio (NPR, PRI, etc.) conference in Seattle in early May. I've been invited by a nice lady who handles special events for NPR in DC--on the improbable recommendation of both KPLU and KUOW (Quick! What can I do to discredit myself?)--to address the conference on LPFM and public radio's lack of service to diverse communities. (Apparently they searched high and low because they just couldn't find anyone they knew who supported LPFM, which shows just how cloistered their world is.) They seem to think they're throwing me to the lions; I have a different view of it :) , and Mike, I sure hope we can tape it. I've also requested, and been promised, a press pass to the entire event, which will get me access to workshops, the exhibition hall, and other places where interesting data will doubtless be available. I don't know where this conference will be held yet, and I somehow doubt KPLU/KUOW will be inviting the public (I'll bet registration is pricy--love that public radio!). But at minimum I think there should be some folks pounding on the doors, demanding that public radio be, well, public. I'll pass on more as I find it out, but in the meantime, we should probably start planning... Geov sheri wrote: > hey friends, > > i just heard some news about kcmu that has me in shock. can someone > confirm? has paul allen actually bought the license for kcmu and is the > call letters changing to kemp and the offices are moving downtown? and how > can a public radio license on the left hand of the dial go into the hands of > an individual. > > geov, 1.5 years ago there was the move of kcmu from communications to the > other technical comm department and people were talking about paul allen > being involved....what was the story on that? > > mark, all the research you did for the "save the kcmu news hour", where is > it? > > sally, do you have a database of the community powered radio folks? > > okay, this sucks. let's make a stink about this. another step toward > privatizing the commons. a perfect lead in to the ftaa. this is the kind > of thing we can expect. > > someone just told me that on the history cable channel, they did a special > for labor day last year -- it was all about prisons! labor day? prisons? > hello? what kind of contempt is this for working people? > > anyway, i'm so pissed i can't believe it. i just want to get the facts and > work from there. > > love > sheri > 633 1987 From nlgcdc-admin Sun Apr 1 11:21:57 2001 Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f31ILui65295 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:21:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.110.239.82] (ali-ca78-82.ix.netcom.com [209.110.239.82]) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA29834 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2001 11:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200104011820.LAA29834@hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 11:19:26 -0700 From: "Art Persyko" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] question re: picketing on federal property NLG lawyers: I am forwarding a question posed by a group of media protesters. Please post an answer or tell me who to contact for one. Thanks. -Art Persyko question: "Does anyone > know what federal law says about pickets , or even arrests for sit-ins is > on Federal land?" From nlgcdc-admin Wed Apr 4 06:27:56 2001 Received: from swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.123]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f34DRui35671 for ; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 06:27:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.110.239.51] (ali-ca78-51.ix.netcom.com [209.110.239.51]) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA26456; Wed, 4 Apr 2001 06:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200104041325.GAA26456@swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 06:23:37 -0700 From: "Art Persyko" To: fair@fair.org, savepacifica@igc.org, nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com, nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com CC: freepacifica@ella.recordist.com, freepac@ella.recordist.com Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] FW: [MRN] KCMU & Paul Allen (fwd): College Radio Station Moves Off Campus and becomes affiliated with Microsoft, without prior notice College radio station moves off-campus and becomes affiliated with Microsoft, without prior notice: (excerpt): "> Why can't the students have their stations? Does it not seem odd to anyone > besides myself that the governing body representing the students of the > University of Washington don't have access to facilities that were created > specifically to train and serve those very students? That these facilities > have been relocated making them physically inaccessable to the citizens who > made them possible in the first place? That University students and staff, > station employees and the outlying community were neither served notice nor > had any voice in the decision making process? > > We must give these institutions, these tools back to the people who were > meant to wield them." (full forwarded message below:) ---------- From: SCN User To: microradio@lists.tao.ca Subject: [MRN] KCMU & Paul Allen (fwd) Date: Wed, Apr 4, 2001, 12:30 AM this came off a punk list - more of seattle goes into the pockets of microsoft money men.... Brian Etc.... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- To: A discussion list for punk music in the northwest seattle music web - http://www.seattlemusicweb.com/ free speech seattle http://freespeechseattle.org/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 01:05:49 -0700 From: Mike McCormick Subject: Re: FW: KCMU & Paul Allen Hey Ya'll I obviously will never be a writer but for better or for worse I sent this off to select City Council members, King County Council members and some people in labor. I'm hoping it'll give them some perspective on what is going down. I sincerely believe we can still win this one. Mike McCormick Hello, My name is Mike McCormick and I'm the public affairs coordinator at KCMU 90.3 FM Seattle. This morning (Monday) at 6:00 a.m. KCMU 90.3 FM Seattle will move off the University of Washington campus (it's been there since 1972), land at 113 Dexter Ave. North and rename itself KEXP. Quick, what association do you make with the call letters KEXP? If you're like most people I've asked you'd say experience, as in Experience Music Project. But according to the press release you'd be wrong. It stands for experimental. It's just a coincidence that the renovated old KZOK studios the station is moving into are being paid for by EMP (besides wouldn't they have named it KEMP?) I first heard that we were moving last Thursday afternoon. I was told things were moving really fast and then given the same info that you can see on the KCMU web link below and I was told that my job was secure. I was told as of midnight that night it would all be official and word would go out the next day via press release and our web page KCMU's web site info http://www.kcmu.org/kexp/kexp.htm I was really in shock. The very thing that had been rumored over a year ago, which I'd continually had to repress as finding no supporting evidence beyond hearsay had happened. Paul Allen and the Experience Music Project were merging with the radio station. To top it off they were changing the call letters. It was around a year ago when we were all set to move with our sister station (big sister mind you) and land on "the Ave." (read bright lights, big city) in a custom built state of the art studio. We'd both grown too large for our current space and supposedly the University needed the space for classes. It would be a dramatic change for us. New equipment (we had always had the hand-me-down clothes from our older sibling) and we were actually going to be sharing space with KUOW as well (the two stations had been next door to each other but separate). We were all nervous and excited and for me you can add worried because of what had happened to the News Dept. In July it'll be five years for me at the station. I started back when the news department was getting the axe from what appeared to be KUOW management. If it seems strange that the KCMU News Dept. would be put to sleep by KUOW management then you're not alone. I don't understand it myself. Apparently the University has a board of directors that oversees the two stations (which seems really unique to me but what do I know?). It was either the board or Wayne Roth, KUOWs Station Manager, or both who decided that the half-hour of Pacifica and the locally produced half-hour of news needed to be replaced with music. "Where the Music Matters" was our motto and you'd better make sure you don't get in the way of that. Seriously, one was hard pressed to understand the rationale for the axing. It wasn't like the station had been flooded with letters or swamped with calls from people for more music, more music. Quite the opposite. The news had a sizeable audience that was reflected in every fund drive by bringing in lots of pledges. For whatever reason it became a defining experience with the station and the new name of the knot in my stomach in anticipation of the upcoming move to the Ave. I think it was just a matter of days before KCMU was scheduled to move to the Ave. (Big sister was already moved in and got first dibs on the bed) that we heard there was a change of plans. We weren't moving. We were being acquired/bought by the C&C Dept. (Computing and Communications). All we heard was they were high tech and going to supply us with cutting edge broadcast equipment and we'd kind of become their radio flagship. Nerds and DJ's, just the party everyone's dying to go to. That's when the rumor started. "Paul Allen was buying the station and you guys suck for selling out" became the number one hit on my voice mail at the station. Being no fan of Paul Allens (our public affairs is one of the few venues in town critical of the man) that didn't resonate well with me and I called Don Yates my boss and KCMUs Station Manager and told him about the messages. He assured me that it was all a rumor and that Paul Allen had absolutely nothing to do with the stations acquisition. I believed him but felt uneasy. The rumor was that Paul Allen was buds with some of the big wigs running C&C and it was only a matter of time before we'd be assimilated and become part of the collective. We moved from our small space in the Communications Building to a much larger space in the basement of Kane Hall. It was a lot bigger. Maybe things were looking up after all. The word from above was that Kane was temporary while they look for permanent space either on or off campus. Eastlake was hinted at as being a desirable location if space on campus could not be found. I hoped for the campus myself. I love the grounds and it seemed integral to the stations identity that it remain here. Time passed, about a year and we began to forget about a move. Nobody talked about it and it wasn't like there was a newsletter on what was going on. So when I got the call this last Thursday that all systems were go and we were looking at T-minus 12 hours and counting, I was blown away. No review process, no public input, no DJ input, no nothing. Seattle Times article 3/30/01 http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis/web/vortex/display?s lug=kcmu3 0&date=20010330 Seattle PI article 3/30/01 http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/local/kcmu30.shtml For those of you keeping score that's two-for-two university based public radio stations that have moved off the university campus in less than a year without the consent of the University students or staff, station employees, local community or any other citizens. How many of YOUR constituents were consulted before this radio station shell game began? It's ironic that two years ago, the ASUW (Associated Students of the University of Washington) created a Task Force to look into the possibility of starting another radio station on campus (for some reason feeling the two current stations were beyond hope of getting back) but have so far faced significant obstacles to achieving that goal. See their web site for details on their efforts... http://depts.washington.edu/asuwrdio/ Why can't the students have their stations? Does it not seem odd to anyone besides myself that the governing body representing the students of the University of Washington don't have access to facilities that were created specifically to train and serve those very students? That these facilities have been relocated making them physically inaccessable to the citizens who made them possible in the first place? That University students and staff, station employees and the outlying community were neither served notice nor had any voice in the decision making process? We must give these institutions, these tools back to the people who were meant to wield them. You are all getting this email because I know that you have integrity and have each earned my respect over the years. You also have graced our airwaves with your words of wisdom in part because others who have come before us had the vision to create these venues so that all our voices can be heard. If together we don't act soon to save our airwaves, I promise that very soon your words will be falling on deaf ears. Sincerely, Mike McCormick KCMU 90.3 FM Public Affairs Coordinator ========================================= The Microradio Network --- To unsubscribe send a message to: majordomo@lists.tao.ca In the message body, type: unsubscribe microradio ========================================= From nlgcdc-admin Thu Apr 5 11:09:29 2001 Received: from mail01b.rapidsite.net (mail01b.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.229]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f35I9Si79323 for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2001 11:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail01b.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.58s) with SMTP id 017549309; Thu, 5 Apr 2001 14:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20010405120437.00ab85e0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 12:08:27 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Cc: rebeka@media-alliance.org, wgskroll@igc.org, lisa@webtactix.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Next CDC Meeting - Monday April 9 at 7:30 pm. Hi folks The next CDC meeting will be held at 3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco this coming Monday at 7:30 p.m. The office is at the intersection of Geary and Stanyon. If the door is locked and you don't have a key, you can call Peter's cell # at 415/806-1269. Hope you all can make it. If possible, please RSVP so I'll know how much pizza to order. Thanks. Alan Korn aakorn@igc.org 415/397-0995 From nlgcdc-admin Wed Apr 18 12:21:25 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h013.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.220]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3IJLPB18945 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 29416 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2001 12:21:11 -0700 Received: from dialup-64-34-3-51.telocity.com (HELO Tecra8100.culturelaw.com) (64.34.3.51) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.220) with SMTP; 18 Apr 2001 12:21:11 -0700 X-Sent: 18 Apr 2001 19:21:11 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010418112655.00a6a030@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 11:28:40 -0700 To: microradio@tao.ca From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] an interesting conservative take on 'the death of micro' >Who killed micro radio? > >Thomas W. Hazlett [American Enterprise Institute] > >COMMENTARY--Low power FM radio is a superb idea. Allowing small, >community-oriented stations to spring up--emitting just the power of an >ordinary light bulb-- would be a burst of fresh broadcast air. Transmissions >limited to just three and a half miles would politely avoid cacophony with >existing stations, while empowering local pundits and entrepreneurs to speak >their peace. From neighborhood Pentacostals to the angry urban militant, from >mom & pop bookstores to the library's poetry circle, low power FM >(LPFM) radio >could be a delight to listeners, a windfall for local enterprise, and a >boon to >community awareness. > > >It will never happen. Airspace that could sing will be silent. Like a long >list of wireless services new and old, it is blocked by the spectrum >allocation >system. What gives this story a twist is that LPFM found champions at the >heart of that system, the Federal Communications Commission. As has been >widely chronicled, the FCC's plan for low-power radio was derailed this past >December by the U.S. Congress, under pressure from existing (full-power) >broadcasters. The New York Times reported that a sleeper budget provision >"sharply curtails the ambitious plans of the Federal Communications Commission >to issue licenses for low-power FM radio stations to 1,000 or more schools, >churches and other small community organizations." The rules instituted by >Congress would limit the FCC to licensing perhaps just 250 stations. Then-FCC >Chairman William E. Kennard decried the "the dangers of politicizing spectrum >management." > > >It made good press. Clinton-Gore Democrats in bed with Christian >conservatives >to promote free speech, only to be slaughtered in Congress by lobbyists >for the >National Association of Broadcasters and National Public Radio. (Hey, what >happened to the House GOP radicals for capitalism? And what about those >corporate liberals pushing diversity at NPR?) But the brutal truth is even >uglier: community radio was already hovering near death when bludgeoned by >Congress. The FCC's regulatory process routinely stifles new technologies; >politics-as-usual guaranteed that LPFM would never flourish. Most ironic is >that it was doomed to fail by those who claimed to be its friends. > > >Sounds of silence > > >According to FCC rules, the radio waves are jammed. Are atmospheric >conditions >responsible? Yes. The atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. > > >There are 269 U.S. radio markets, from New York, New York to Casper, Wyoming. >Listeners in the average market can tune to 15 FM stations. Since there are >100 channels allotted to FM stations, 85 channels go unused. The "ambitious" >FCC plan offered to drop in just four low-power stations per market. Most >households would be unlikely to receive even a single one. > > >The major roadblock is the FCC's practice of silencing three channels on >either >side of a full-power FM station as a buffer against interference. This soaks >up precious bandwidth, a ridiculously slothful way to limit static. The >broadcasters, knowing competitors could be slotted into those frequencies, pay >big bucks for engineering studies showing such squandering necessary for easy >listening. > > >The FCC knows otherwise. Full-power stations peacefully co-exist with >just one >channel of separation. Hundreds of FM stations were "short spaced" into >various cities as long ago as 1964, and interference complaints have been nil. >These situations involve stations emitting up to one thousand times >low-power's >100 watt limit. Proven separations for citywide blasters ought be civil for >neighborhood whispers. > > >Using this simple logic and conservative assumptions about radio spacing, >there >exists bandwidth to easily insert in excess of 100,000 low-power stations >around the U.S. Community radio could unleash virtually ubiquitous broadcast >opportunities for artists, schools, churches, local governments, police and >fire departments, over-the-air classifieds, community newspapers, discount >warehouses and grocery stores (announcing merchandise, produce or specials), >book dealers and libraries (books on tape, poetry readings, services for the >blind), parks (Little League play-by-play), political parties, legit theater, >art galleries, foreign language communities, hospitals, youth and senior >centers, 12-step programs, Kiwanis and Rotary clubs, social welfare >organizations--the universe of niches is varied and vast. > > >Gratuitous burdens > > >This radio bazaar will not materialize under the parsimonious allocation of >licenses contemplated by the FCC. Indeed, low-power service will attract only >trivial audiences on those few stations licensed (before or after >congressional >restrictions) due to uneconomic Commission mandates. > > >Under FCC rules only non-profit organizations are allowed to own licenses. >Commercial, advertising-supported stations are prohibited. Initially, >only one >station is permitted per organization. (After three years, a maximum of ten >micro stations may be owned in different markets.) No license goes to a >newspaper or other local media outlet. And licensing rules can force stations >to program eight hours of original shows daily. > > >Regulatory overkill assures that low power FM stations are expensive to >operate, difficult to fund, and a yawn to audiences. Entrepreneurs who might >discover how to make low-power FM popular are eliminated: for-profits need not >apply. LPFM could provide finely targeted audiences for advertising by local >shops, craftsmen, or repair services, but commercial ad time is illegal. >Economies from networking local operations are powerful in radio--as the >ongoing conglomeration of hundreds of full-power FM and AM stations in >mega-mergers attests--but common ownership is strictly >limited. Leveraging the >resources of local newspapers, including alternative weeklies, to create >content is a cost-savings no-brainer. Illegal monopolization. Syndication of >unique audio programs would enhance free speech. But these bump into original >content obligations. As would attempts to serve an immigrant enclave by >broadcasting home country news and entertainment. > > >The bitterest aftertaste left by these poison pills is that they were imposed >with the advise and consent of low-power's most vocal advocates. LPFM >activists proudly tout the technology as analogous to public access >channels on >cable television. The irony--the utter failure of public access channels to >attract viewers despite countless millions in subsidies from cable TV systems >coast-to-coast--is lost. > > >LPFM champions such as Andrew Schwartzman of the Media Access Project were >eager to impose economically debilitating limits on low-power FM operators. >Schwarztman argued that the FCC should "place stricter ownership limits on low >power FM stations than on full power stations," and restrict "low power >licensees to a single license." This is bizarre public policy. By severely >handicapping fledgling stations, the policy reduces both free speech and >market >competition. That is the outcome of a regulatory system that is broken. > > >Rodger Skinner, the low power FM advocate who filed one of the two 1998 >petitions that provoked the FCC into opening a rule making on the matter, >fought a lonely battle for liberal rules allowing financially viable stations. >Many low-power advocates were really just into "play radio," says Skinner, a >retired radio engineer who sought to create "a full fledged new broadcasting >service." It was a "huge blow when the FCC limited LPFM to non-commercial >use," he says, leaving operators with "no way to support a real radio >station." >He believes that LPFM "died" January 20, 2000--the date FCC regulations were >adopted. > > >Mbanna Kantako is a blind disc jockey broadcasting "Human Rights Radio" to >Springfield, Illinois' housing projects since 1987. The airwaves have quiet >spaces available for tens of thousands of Kantakos to bloom. But the >seedlings >will not be planted. Indeed, Kantako is himself ineligible; as a "pirate" >broadcaster, FCC rules bar his license application. In this silence, a >careful >listener hears "the dangers of politicizing spectrum management." It is as >shattering at the FCC as it is in Congress. > > >Hazlett is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a >former FCC Chief Economist. This essay is based on research in his paper, "The >Wireless Craze," forthcoming in the Harvard Journal of Law & >Technology. He can >be reached via thazlett@aei.org. From nlgcdc-admin Thu Apr 19 06:18:30 2001 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3JDIUB99877 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.110.238.244] (ali-ca77-116.ix.netcom.com [209.110.238.244]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA25231; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200104191318.GAA25231@snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:16:03 -0700 From: "Art Persyko" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com CC: hiken@igc.org, aakorn@igc.org, pfranck@culturelaw.com, phltymon@sonic.net, markfenster@earthlink.net Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 1 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] FW: [bayareaDAN] Urgent : City of San Diego Revokes Permit for US /Mexico Border anti-FTAA Demonstration NLG attorneys- FYI: The lawyers for the San Diego/Tiajuana FTAA protesters are the Midnight Special Law Collective, (510)325-9574, or in San Diego: (619)237-5496. Contact them to find out more, or if you have any thoughts or any assistance to provide on this matter. Thank you! -Art Persyko ---------- From: SIUHIN@aol.com To: bayareaDAN@yahoogroups.com Subject: [bayareaDAN] Urgent : City of San Diego Revokes Permit for US /Mexico Border Demonstration Date: Thu, Apr 19, 2001, 1:53 AM Urgent : City of San Diego Revokes Permit for US /Mexico Border Demonstration April 18. 2001 San Diego, CA - The City of San Diego has revoked the permit for a non-violent demonstration in opposition to the FTAA. The protest planned for Saturday April 21, at Border Field State Park on the US / Mexico Border, is a show of solidarity in opposition to the Free Trade Area of the Americas and The Summit of the Americas. This is one of three events planned for the weekend by the Anti - FTAA coalition. With only 72 hours until the planned action San Diego organizers must scramble to find a peaceful resolution. Local organizers plan a legal challenge. The city of San Diego revoked the permit on a technicality. Now with thousands of activists on the way, the fate of this peaceful protest is uncertain. . A citizen's right to Freedom of Speech is being suppressed. Your support is needed and you can help by contacting the following city agencies ASAP: The City of San Diego Park Department Special Events office telephone number is (858) 642-0407. The Mayor's office (Dick Murphy) can be reached at (619) 236-6330 and the City Council is available at (619) 236-6330. The Sheriff's Office telephone number is (858) 565-5200 ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~> ClubMom is the first free organization dedicated to rewarding and celebrating Moms! Join today - it's free - and get your chance to win in our $5,000 Family Vacation Sweepstakes! http://us.click.yahoo.com/Cb4mCA/TFaCAA/tvCFAA/nc4XlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------_-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: bayareaDAN-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From nlgcdc-admin Thu Apr 19 06:49:12 2001 Received: from snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.62]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3JDnBB02221 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:49:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [209.110.238.244] (ali-ca77-116.ix.netcom.com [209.110.238.244]) by snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA08751 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:49:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200104191349.GAA08751@snipe.mail.pas.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 06:46:47 -0700 From: "Art Persyko" To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] FW: (stop-ftaa) Urgent!!! Officials restricting access to protest in San Diego more details on San Diego protest, from an earlier e-mail-Art ---------- From: Madaster@aol.com To: stop-ftaa@globalexchange.org Subject: (stop-ftaa) Urgent!!! Officials restricting access to protest in San Diego Date: Wed, Apr 18, 2001, 11:46 PM Word has it that the border state park officials in San Diego, the place where the 2nd part of the protest is going to be held, are threatening to restrict the number of people who participate on Saturday. They have gone so far to say that they will not permit more than 300 people, that we didn't get permission in enough time, and that we will have to pay for the extra officers that they are going to need for the event. They just told us these things today! Up until now, we have had the green light with everything that is being planned- the huge gathering, rally, music, etc. This is entirely outrageous and goes to show the length that the state will go in trying to repress free speech and progressive movements! They have probably finally received heat from the INS and the Feds about the protests against the FTAA and the potential danger of "terrorists." So these are the crappy excuses they are trying to use to discourage us. More than likely they are bluffing and won't really do anything to us the day of. In any case, people should call the following number and demand the right to protest. Call John Quirk at (858) 642- 4200. He is the district state park officer. In solidarity, Mike Estrada ____________________________________________________________________ Global Exchange http://www.globalexchange.org To unsubscribe, email stop-ftaa-request@globalexchange.org with unsubscribe in the body of the message. From nlgcdc-admin Thu Apr 19 17:50:17 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.206]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f3K0oHB66630 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:50:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 16192 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2001 17:50:10 -0700 Received: from dialup-64-34-3-2.telocity.com (HELO Tecra8100.culturelaw.com) (64.34.3.2) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.206) with SMTP; 19 Apr 2001 17:50:10 -0700 X-Sent: 20 Apr 2001 00:50:10 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010419174515.026ceeb0@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 17:47:12 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgsf@pacbell.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] summary of cdc for guild report The SF Chapter is doing a glossy report to the members, which will be circulated at its upcoming annual dinner, and distributed elsewhere. They wanted a description of cdc's work (and they are getting the same from the other SF based committees of the chapter or national. I have drafted the following for them. Comments? Suggestions? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The Center On Democratic Communications (CDC) is a national project of the Guild based in San Francisco, led and staffed (part time) by members of the chapter. CDC, which has been a standing Guild committee for more than 15 years is in many respects the legal arm of the growing media democracy movement. CDC's focus in recent years has been on the rights of low power radio broadcasters (variously called 'pirates' or 'micro radio'); CDC developed the legal groundwork for the defense of groups like Free Radio Berkeley, played a major role in the FCC's shaping of the new low power (LPFM) service, and is now working to help community groups and grass roots groups work through the licensing process. CDC looks at the extreme media concentration in recent years and is working with other groups to find ways of countering or reversing it, believing that the law means what it says, that the airwaves belong to the public, not to special interests. From nlgcdc-admin Mon May 7 00:32:49 2001 Received: from igs01.netentertainment.com ([195.42.200.157]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f477WmB48827 for ; Mon, 7 May 2001 00:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 00:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200105070732.f477WmB48827@agora.rdrop.com> Received: from - (193.15.85.125 [193.15.85.125]) by igs01.netentertainment.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id K2XW09SK; Mon, 7 May 2001 09:21:50 +0200 To: From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Subject: [nlgcdc] ADV: Top Search Engine Rankings Removal instructions below. I saw your listing on the internet. I work for a company that specializes in getting clients web sites listed as close to the top of the major search engines as possible. Our fee is only $29.95 per month to submit your site at least twice a month to over 350 search engines and directories. To get started and put your web site in the fast lane, call our toll free number below. Mike Bender 888-532-8842 To be removed call: 888-800-6339 X1377 From nlgcdc-admin Wed May 9 17:25:18 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.206]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4A0PIB94833 for ; Wed, 9 May 2001 17:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 12508 invoked from network); 9 May 2001 17:25:11 -0700 Received: from dialup-64-34-3-40.telocity.com (HELO Tecra8100.culturelaw.com) (64.34.3.40) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.206) with SMTP; 9 May 2001 17:25:11 -0700 X-Sent: 10 May 2001 00:25:11 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010509172030.00a301d0@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 17:20:55 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] congressional progressive caucus hearing on media consolidation Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 10:01:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Deborah Stayers [communications director for Cong. Owens' district office] Subject: Pacifica/Comm. radio hearing To: pfranck@culturelaw.com Hi Peter, Thank your for your email message. Please find press release on the hearing for your information and attention. Unfortunately, Andrea would not be able to make it due to economic consideration, however, Media Access [Project] in D.C. will fill in [on LPFM testimony; PF] and I think that they would be sutiable to do the job. I will get back to you on information re a more comprehensive hearing in the fall. Many thanks for your kind assistance and enormous interest. Regards Deborah PRESS RELEASE CONGRESSMAN MAJOR R. OWENS MAY 9, 2001 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: DEBORAH GARRAWAY-STAYERS at (718) 773-3100 or ROBIN BRAZLEY (202) 225-6231 OWENS TAKES ON MEDIA ACCESS FIGHT. Congressman Major R. Owens, an executive member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, has announced that The Progressive Caucus of the U.S. House of Representatives is conducting a forum "On the State of Community Radio: Pacifica Radio Foundation, Free Speech And Citizen Access To The Spectrum." The forum will be held on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. in Room 2261 Rayburn House Office Building. The Progressive Caucus is chaired by Congressman Dennis Kucinich and co-chaired by Congresswoman Barbara Lee. "Any action that serves to restrict and delimit the progressive voice in this country any further is dangerous and an intolerable threat to our democracy" Owens said recently when asked about the purpose of the forum. "Since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, there has been a savage consolidation of ownership and control of radio and television stations that seriously limit access of alternative views and grassroots voices to the media. This Pacifica conflict threatens one of the few significant radio access points open to all of the people. Open access to the airwaves is a critical part of democracy," Owens said. Two Panels will discuss public access to the airwaves, obstacles to such access, and the free speech implications of limited access. Specifically, the Caucus will be reviewing the growing conflict between the Pacifica Foundation Board and Pacifica listener supporters across the country over democratic principles of free speech, access, and the mission Pacifica was licensed to meet. Low power radio broadcasting, the impact of the Telecommunications act of 1996, and changes at the FCC, will also be reviewed. The main objective is to open the debate on the democratic principles at the heart of the Pacifica Foundation conflict: censorship, equal access, future viability of non-profit status, and national vs local control in public supported organizations. Owens became a major player in this conflict after he was cut off the air during a live broadcast on WBAI in March. Speaking about the incident on the floor of the House of Representatives, Owens blasted the irresponsible act of censorship calling it a " weird and frightening experience of being gagged by a radio station manager in my own home city of New York." On Monday 5 March, Congressman Owens was rudely interrupted and turned off the air when he called in as a guest on WBAI. Speaking on "Building Bridges: Your Community and Labor Report," Owens was several minutes into a discussion on recent changes at the listener-sponsored station, when WBAI's interim general manager pulled the plug on his interview without explanation or apology. Representatives from both sides of the conflict will present testimony on the democratic principles of free speech, access and the mission of the Pacifica Foundation. From nlgcdc-admin Thu May 17 13:15:43 2001 Received: from mail01b.rapidsite.net (mail01b.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.229]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4HKFgB16611 for ; Thu, 17 May 2001 13:15:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail01b.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.60s) with SMTP id 013747528 for ; Thu, 17 May 2001 16:15:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010517141517.00ac8140@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 14:15:45 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: help request (FYI) >X-MindSpring-Loop: cdc@nlg.org >Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 13:21:29 -0600 >From: "A.J. Lewis" >X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) >X-Accept-Language: en >To: cdc@nlg.org >Subject: help > >Brothers & Sisters, > Thank you for using your knowledge and skills for the good of all >life on our beautiful mother earth. > I am a complete technical novice. I live in the boonies 20 miles >southwest of Taos, NM. Following the Pacifica battle and reading your >website inspired this request. My mate and I are longtime community >activists. > How can we go about getting LPFM radio in our community? . A.J. >Lewis, . Gratitude House (we are grateful for the >gift of ALL LIFE and this amazing and beautiful LIFE CREATING COSMOS to >live it in. Not to mention the free, 24 hour entertainment with reserved >seats for all beings. With constant exciting program changes), 7 Freedom >Road, Carson, NM 87517. Thank You. Do not doubt it. UNIDOS VENCEREMOS. > p.s.The above declaration is verified by 84 years of Cosmic flight >time disguised as a separate, solid being. Ah, beatific illusion! But >actually constructed of billions of constantly interacting/interchanging >"empty" atoms seething with Promethian FIRE. Used also to fashion >supernovas, deadly cold icebergs and a tiny Spaceship noiselessly >circumnavigating planet earth at over 1k mph while giving its passengers >the illusion of being constantly motionless and independent of the >invisible cosmic soup from which all creation is evolved and into which >it apparently disappears. (note: please DELETE before or after reading >and quote only without attribution to avoid the merciless intervention >of government agents disguised as EMT's or " little men in white coats". >Anonymously Yours. From nlgcdc-admin Mon May 21 22:38:21 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.217]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4M5cKB77867 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 22:38:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 21296 invoked from network); 21 May 2001 22:38:10 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra.culturelaw.com) (64.130.35.25) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.217) with SMTP; 21 May 2001 22:38:10 -0700 X-Sent: 22 May 2001 05:38:10 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010521221306.02ab8eb0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 22:25:03 -0700 To: microradio@tao.ca From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_8224127==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] coming down to the wire/ lets make sure activists get their fair share. --=====================_8224127==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed The last LPFM window for some time is opening in a few short days (June 11 to 15). Many people seem to have been discouraged from filing, or exploring the idea of filing for an LPFM license because of Congresss' stealth passage of the Grahams bill cutting back LPFM in the closing days of the last congress. In fact the law did not cut out as much lpfm frequency space as first feared (it seems to have cut out about half the potential licenses). Groups in the states coming up in this window (see next message) can check our web page for the latest information www.nlgcdc.org , and we may be able to help with determining whether there is an available frequency in your area. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC) 3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963 pfranck@culturelaw.com ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_8224127==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" The last LPFM window for some time is opening in a few short days (June 11 to 15).  Many people seem to have been discouraged from filing, or exploring the idea of filing for an LPFM license because of Congresss' stealth passage of the Grahams bill cutting back LPFM in the closing days of the last congress.  In fact the law did not cut out as much lpfm frequency space as first feared (it seems to have cut out about half the potential licenses).  Groups in the states coming up in this window (see next message) can check our web page for the latest information www.nlgcdc.org , and we may be able to help with determining whether there is an available frequency in your area.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC)
3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org
CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963
pfranck@culturelaw.com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_8224127==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Mon May 21 22:38:27 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h011.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.217]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4M5cQB77922 for ; Mon, 21 May 2001 22:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 21408 invoked from network); 21 May 2001 22:38:17 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra.culturelaw.com) (64.130.35.25) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.217) with SMTP; 21 May 2001 22:38:17 -0700 X-Sent: 22 May 2001 05:38:17 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010521222542.02ab8d60@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 22:26:27 -0700 To: microradio@tao.ca From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_8224132==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] states in the final filing window for lpfm 100 --=====================_8224132==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Alabama Arizona Arkansas Florida Guam Iowa Kentucky Massachusetts Montana Nebraska New Jersey New Mexico North Carolina North Dakota Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas U.S. Virgin Islands Vermont Washington West Virginia --=====================_8224132==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Alabama
Arizona
 Arkansas
 Florida
 Guam
 Iowa
 Kentucky
 Massachusetts
 Montana
 Nebraska
 New Jersey
 New Mexico
 North Carolina
 North Dakota
 Oregon
 Pennsylvania
 Tennessee
 Texas
 U.S. Virgin Islands
 Vermont
 Washington
 West Virginia

 --=====================_8224132==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue May 22 09:55:45 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h008.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.214]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4MGtjB35196 for ; Tue, 22 May 2001 09:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 20884 invoked from network); 22 May 2001 09:55:34 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra.culturelaw.com) (64.130.35.25) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.214) with SMTP; 22 May 2001 09:55:34 -0700 X-Sent: 22 May 2001 16:55:34 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010522095250.027fea40@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:53:20 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_6683950==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] interesting response --=====================_6683950==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >From: WRFR@aol.com >Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:52:39 EDT >Subject: Re: [MRN] coming down to the wire/ lets make sure activists get >their fair sh... >To: microradio@lists.tao.ca >Reply-To: microradio@lists.tao.ca > >In a message dated 5/22/01 1:38:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >pfranck@culturelaw.com writes: > > >>Many people seem to have been discouraged from filing, or exploring the idea >>of filing for an LPFM license because of Congresss' stealth passage of the >>Grahams bill cutting back LPFM in the closing days of the last congress. >>In fact the law did not cut out as much lpfm frequency space as first >>feared (it seems to have cut out about half the potential licenses). > > >I worked my tail off trying to help progressive and other change agents in >Virginia apply ... they were almost all so afraid of their own shadow or >thought their chances were better with Fox News letter-writing campaigns that >it was like trying to raise the dead. > >Now I understand a little better that *one* of the major reasons that >conservatives keep getting their way is that conservatives have succeeded in >pursuading many progressives that there is no point in struggling ... yell >and bitch and demonstrate all you like, but do not take any substantial >action ... > >My only hope at this point is that perhaps after King Georgie was crowned and >the near-love-in the media is having for Georgie ... maybe soon progressives >will be sufficiently disgusted to take action and start building their own >separate networks partially based on LPFMs ... > >Then again, maybe they will stay scared of their own shadows. > >I have found that largely people like you and I are typically out in front >alone with a crowd of thousands standing safely in the trees of apathy >cheering us on ... but we better have our own armor in working order because >they *rarely* come out fromt he trees to act ... even in their own self >interest!! > >Thus I applaud your efforts to reach out ... I have the highest regard for >Prometheus Project and think they should have a memorial someday erected to >y'all's work for freedom, REAL freedom ... but in the meantime I'm pretty >disappointed that we suceeded so much at the FCC ... only to have mostly >people who did not lift a finger to get LPFM sweep up most of the >frequencies!!!! > >I don't understand why all those groups that originally signed on to support >LPFM are not Beating the Bushes (pun intended) looking for local groups that >they coalition with to apply for LPFM frequencies!!! > >I would give you an alternative web site with instructions on how to apply >for an LPFM for free ... but so few people visited the web site that when the >server went down, I just was too depressed to even bother kicking it back >into functioning order. --=====================_6683950==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

From: WRFR@aol.com
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:52:39 EDT
Subject: Re: [MRN] coming down to the wire/ lets make sure activists get their fair sh...
To: microradio@lists.tao.ca
Reply-To: microradio@lists.tao.ca

In a message dated 5/22/01 1:38:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
pfranck@culturelaw.com writes:


Many people seem to have been discouraged from filing, or exploring the idea
of filing for an LPFM license because of Congresss' stealth passage of the
Grahams bill cutting back LPFM in the closing days of the last congress.  
In fact the law did not cut out as much lpfm frequency space as first
feared (it seems to have cut out about half the potential licenses). 


I worked my tail off trying to help progressive and other change agents in
Virginia apply ... they were almost all so afraid of their own shadow or
thought their chances were better with Fox News letter-writing campaigns that
it was like trying to raise the dead.

Now I understand a little better that *one* of the major reasons that
conservatives keep getting their way is that conservatives have succeeded in
pursuading many progressives that there is no point in struggling ... yell
and bitch and demonstrate all you like, but do not take any substantial
action ...

My only hope at this point is that perhaps after King Georgie was crowned and
the near-love-in the media is having for Georgie ... maybe soon progressives
will be sufficiently disgusted to take action and start building their own
separate networks partially based on LPFMs ...

Then again, maybe they will stay scared of their own shadows.

I have found that largely people like you and I are typically out in front
alone with a crowd of thousands standing safely in the trees of apathy
cheering us on ... but we better have our own armor in working order because
they *rarely* come out fromt he trees to act ... even in their own self
interest!!

Thus I applaud your efforts to reach out ... I have the highest regard for
Prometheus Project and think they should have a memorial someday erected to
y'all's work for freedom, REAL freedom ... but in the meantime I'm pretty
disappointed that we suceeded so much at the FCC ... only to have mostly
people who did not lift a finger to get LPFM sweep up most of the
frequencies!!!!

I don't understand why all those groups that originally signed on to support
LPFM are not Beating the Bushes (pun intended) looking for local groups that
they coalition with to apply for LPFM frequencies!!!

I would give you an alternative web site with instructions on how to apply
for an LPFM for free ... but so few people visited the web site that when the
server went down, I just was too depressed to even bother kicking it back
into functioning order.
--=====================_6683950==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue May 22 21:25:06 2001 Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4N4P5B31740 for ; Tue, 22 May 2001 21:25:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smui00.slb.mindspring.net (smui00.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.20]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA22697 for ; Wed, 23 May 2001 00:25:00 -0400 (EDT) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui00.slb.mindspring.net id AAA0000026606; Wed, 23 May 2001 00:24:59 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 00:24:59 -0400 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 152.163.201.191 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Call for papers "SIMON, DONALD" <5simondo@stu.jmls.edu> wrote: > John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law ~ Call for Papers ~ The John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law, an international law review that examines recent developments in computer and information technology law and policy, is considering articles for publication in future issues. We are particularly interested in articles related to the following topics: the FBI's Carnivore system; the federal Electronic Signatures Act (E-Sign); Facial Recognition Technology; Business Method Patents; the Patentability of DNA Technology; HIPPA; residuals for entertainment writers, producers, and actors for Internet usage of their works; Potential benefits and effects of the AOL/Time-Warner merger; TiVO technology privacy concerns; Cyber-crime; Cyber-medicine; and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). A complete treatment of any of these topics should include a description and analysis of the relevant technology, and a discussion of implications for privacy, government regulation, and/or electronic commerce; ideally, submissions should offer proposed solutions to perceived problems. The Journal is a quarterly publication of the John Marshall Law School's Center for Information Technology and Privacy Law. The Journal's audience includes scholars and practitioners in the fields of information technology and intellectual property law; the depth and level of analysis should be appropriate for this audience. Prospective authors are encouraged to include supplemental information regarding their relevant qualifications with article submissions. Submissions should be sent to the attention of the solicitation editor as an E-mail attachment or hard copy (double-spaced, 12-point font). The Journal accepts submissions in either Bluebook or ALWD legal citation style. Submissions are received on a rolling basis considered upon receipt. All submissions will receive full consideration for the next issue. If you have any questions or comments please contact: Donald R. Simon, Solicitation Editor The John Marshall Journal of Computer and Information Law 315 S. Plymouth Ct. Chicago IL 60604 312.987.2354 5simondo@stu.jmls.edu From nlgcdc-admin Wed May 23 13:39:35 2001 Received: from c007.snv.cp.net (c007-h000.c007.snv.cp.net [209.228.33.206]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f4NKdYB32793 for ; Wed, 23 May 2001 13:39:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (cpmta 4198 invoked from network); 23 May 2001 13:39:23 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO tecra.culturelaw.com) (64.130.35.25) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.33.206) with SMTP; 23 May 2001 13:39:23 -0700 X-Sent: 23 May 2001 20:39:23 GMT Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20010523133623.021cb750@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 13:36:58 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_889216==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] posted to NLG's list --=====================_889216==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com >From: Peter Franck >Subject: Micro Radio (aka LPFM) action alert > >Vanessa [of the NLG National Office] has just posted to the NLG Home page >an action alert with links to a four page basic hand-out on the last >opportunity to apply for 100 watt LPFM stations. If you did not get a >snail mailing on this *please* take a look there and pass the information >on to any activist groups you are in contact with who might want to (or >should) think about applying. Lots of people think there are no channels >left after the recent congressional cut back on the FCC's LPFM plan. It >was not as bad as we expected and the Guild's CDC (www.nlgcdc.org) can >help group check for available frequencies in their area. Its all on our >re-designed web page (there is a link to it from the NLG page) or people >can contact us directly at lpfm_info@nlg.org. > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC) >3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org >CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963 >pfranck@culturelaw.com >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_889216==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com
From: Peter Franck <pfranck@culturelaw.com>
Subject: Micro Radio (aka LPFM) action alert

Vanessa [of the NLG National Office] has just posted to the NLG Home page an action alert with links to a four page basic hand-out on the last opportunity to apply for 100 watt LPFM stations. If you did not get a snail mailing on this *please* take a look there and pass the information on to any activist groups you are in contact with who might want to (or should) think about applying.  Lots of people think there are no channels left after the recent congressional cut back on the FCC's LPFM plan.  It was not as bad as we expected and the Guild's CDC (www.nlgcdc.org) can help group check for available frequencies in their area.  Its all on our re-designed web page (there is a link to it from the NLG page) or people can contact us directly at lpfm_info@nlg.org.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Peter Franck ,NLG Center for Democratic Communications (CDC)
3450 Geary Blvd., Suite 208, San Francisco, CA 94118; www.nlgcdc.org
CDC: 415.522.9814; P. Franck: 415.381.9960; fax 415.381.9963
pfranck@culturelaw.com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
--=====================_889216==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Thu Jul 5 14:20:43 2001 Received: from exchange.nempodlesi.cz ([194.228.220.154]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f65LKgt99964 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike65@asean-mail.com) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200107052120.f65LKgt99964@agora.rdrop.com> Received: from server23mexijp (SERVER [194.228.88.202]) by exchange.nempodlesi.cz with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id 3HVM32B8; Thu, 5 Jul 2001 23:21:40 +0200 To: From: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Subject: [nlgcdc] ADV: Search Engine Registration Removal instructions below I saw your listing on the internet. I work for a company that specializes in getting clients web sites listed as close to the top of the major search engines as possible. Our fee is only $29.95 per month to submit your site at least twice a month to over 350 search engines and directories. To get started and put your web site in the fast lane, call our toll free number below. Sincerely, Mike Taylor 888-892-7537 To be removed call: 888-800-6339 X1377 From nlgcdc-admin Thu Jul 12 16:36:39 2001 Received: from mail01e.rapidsite.net (mail01e.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.42]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f6CNact43532 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:36:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail01e.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.60s) with SMTP id 08619097 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:34:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010712163430.020b61a0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:35:13 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Re: The Fed visits KBFR... (Boulder Free Radio, I believe) >Date: 12 Jul 2001 19:19:06 -0400 >X-Sent: 12 Jul 2001 23:19:06 GMT >To: kbfr@msn.com >From: k3og >Cc: aakorn@igc.org, AESALLBERG@fortlewis.edu, Animalhouse460@aol.com, > rkdzmar@yahoo.com, BigOde8888@aol.com, Carolena123@aol.com, > CHLOECARDS@aol.com, e112258@yahoo.com, graphtricks@hotmail.com, > Dennis.Dube@Colorado.EDU, dube1@pubsource.com, ericjacobson@boulderco.com, > frontrangemusic@yahoo.com, k3og@yahoo.com, ianthompson@earthlink.net, > jen@southeastasia.com, merritt151@mta543.mail.yahoo.com, > jprassl@hotmail.com, JonBaribeau@netscape.net >X-Mailer: Web Mail 3.9.3.5 >Subject: Re: The Fed visits KBFR... >X-Sent-From: pfahringer@stoller.com > >To Monk and others associated with KBFR, > >First, let me say I'm really disappointed to hear the FCC gave KBFR a >warning letter and is now off the air. > >As an FCC licensed radio operator (my email is my callsign) I'd like to >express my support for KBFR's FM broadcasts and for the call to liberate >LPFM rules. When over half the FM broadcast stations in the US are owned >by large corporations something is wrong. The airwaves belong to the >people. As Monk pointed out, current laws make it nearly impossible to >operate a low-power community radio station where a sizable audience exists. > >I just completed a brief statement to my local congressmen urging their >support for low-power radio broadcasts and a review of the current >laws. I used email to contact them. These are the Congressional links >for Boulder: Sen. Wayne Allard, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, or Rep. Mark >Udall > >http://www.senate.gov/~allard/contactme/index.cfm >http://www.senate.gov/~campbell/ >http://wwwa.house.gov/markudall/contact.htm > >Pete, K3OG From nlgcdc-admin Thu Jul 12 16:37:11 2001 Received: from mail01e.rapidsite.net (mail01e.rapidsite.net [207.158.192.42]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id f6CNbAt43658 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:37:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from www.ericfarber.com (207.158.232.49) by mail01e.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.60s) with SMTP id 08574866 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:36:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010712163541.020bd140@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:36:54 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_34243684==_.ALT" X-Loop-Detect: 1 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: The Fed visits KBFR... --=====================_34243684==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > >To our regular listeners: > >Pass the word.. We were visited by the FCC today issuing a 'warning'. It >says: "WARNING: Unlicensed Radio Operation" and about a page and a half >of 'cut it out, here's the law saying so.. etc" text. As a result, we've >decided to shut down KBFR until we determine next steps. This is the >equivalent of the first 'letter' they send letting you know that they know >you're there. The first legal step in killing off an underground station. > >The reason behind this visit after being on the air for such a short time, >we believe, is a combination of a couple of things. First, the National >Community Radio Conference, hosted by KGNU, is being held in Boulder this >weekend (fri/sat/sun). Attendee's start arriving this evening. > >It wouldn't be kosher to have an underground station (especially a popular >one running a pretty strong signal) up and running during this >conference. "The FCC can't even keep someone off the air even during our >conference!" is very likely what someone said. We suspect that's one of >the two primary reasons for the shut down. > >It's also likely a local station or someone affiliated with one that >complained. (A licensed FCC holder is usually the only one that can get >the FCC's attention. A regular citizen complaining isn't as likely to be >responded to-unless it's a whole BUNCH of them). So, effectively, only >local FCC license holders can report us. That leaves the likely >complainer to be either KBCO or KGNU. The KGNU staff is friendly towards >us, but with 200 plus volunteers, that may not be the case across the >board with them. (for those of you who wanted to give us donations, we >still, as always, urge you to give them to KGNU... >www.kgnu.org or 303-449-4885). > >Second, we put out about 100 flyers to local businesses the last few days >and our summer intern seems to have put one on the windshield of a car at >KGNU that's parked next to the front door entrance (very unfortunate, >since we specifically asked him to avoid the KGNU building- even though >friendly, no reason to be anything less than low profile regarding other >stations). Our guess is, most likely, this flyer combined with the >National Radio Conference here in Boulder this weekend was what set off >the call to the FCC and their visit. > >And, of course, KBCO might have been noticing an awful lot of listeners >missing from their Arbitrons (radio's way of determining listenership) >lately. We had one local garage that specialized in imports tell us that >50% of the cars his shop worked on recently had their stations tuned to >KBFR. Hmmmm.... > >Don't get us wrong. We support KGNU and what they're doing (still do, >always will). And KBCO has it's place (compared to most radio in the US, >it's still a great station) and are in no way pointing fingers. It's just >there's not a lot of likely suspects for the quick response of the FCC >other than our two locally focused stations (or someone closely affiliated >with one of them). > >Since we are non-political (focusing purely on playing good music, no more >no less) and in no way 'ruffling' any feathers (other than just existing), >the quick response by the FCC surprised us. Most underground stations are >on the air at least 6 months, often a year before being 'warned'. We're >sorry we couldn't be here for you longer. > >Want to complain? Tell your senator and your congressman. Tell them to >'open up' the LPFM (Low Power FM) law that they effectively killed in >December due to the lobbying of National Public Radio (that's right, NPR) >and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). That's what got me >started with KBFR. I started the process of applying for an LPFM license >and was cut off at the knees by the change in the FCC's rules. The >original rules laid out in Jan. 2000 would have had KBFR's placement on >the dial (96.9) as legal. The change in the law requires more 'space' >between stations effectively killing the ability to have an LPFM station >in any area where there's more than a few radio stations (i.e. Urban areas >like Boulder/Denver). You could have one in the mountains, say, or the >middle of a Utah desert, but what's the point if no one's around to >listen? NPR and the NAB convinced a few senators (with the help of a lot >of special interest donations no doubt) that it would cause interference >with existing stations. That would be true, if you were using the same >technology that was used in radio's and broadcasting equipment 50 years >ago. Today, with how the technology works, we could have, literally, >twice the stations we have now (and many could have been small local LPFM >stations like KBFR).. but 50 year old rules written for 50 year old >technology is still being touted by the establishment radio broadcasting >industry as relevant. It's not. And you're the one who loses out. > >And call the local media outlets letting them know how you feel about >what's happening to our local airwaves: (Mostly) sold off to 3 large >corporations that charge you for access (forcing you to listen to ads) to >a natural resource (Radio Spectrum) that's like air, water or >land. Imagine if Disney, Paramount and Universal controlled (licensed by >a federal agency like the FCC), say, all the national parks. You can get >in free, (i.e. listen to the airwaves free) but every 50 feet on the >trails there's a billboard selling something, or a speaker whispering 'buy >buy buys' as you hike past. You get the idea. That's no different than >what the FCC has done to the natural, limited resource of Radio Spectrum >today. Think about it. > >For updates on what's happening... you can visit our website at >HTTP://COMMUNITIES.MSN.COM/KBFR > >You can also listen to KBFR, on the web, at >WWW.LIVE365.COM/STATIONS/259942 >. If you get a 404 server not found screen just enter in the 'Search >for:' field Boulder Free Radio. Or go to >www.live365.com and search on Boulder Free >Radio. We're 'on the internet' as of the FCC visit. > >We're not sure what our next steps are going to be, but you'll be able to >keep informed via the >HTTP://COMMUNITIES.MSN.COM/KBFR website above. > > > >Monk >email: KBFR@MSN.COM >phone: 303-818-3619 >July 12th, 2001 > >P.S. please let any other listeners you might know what's happening.. Thx M. > > > > > >---------- >Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com --=====================_34243684==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

To our regular listeners:
 
Pass the word.. We were visited by the FCC today issuing a 'warning'.  It says:  "WARNING:  Unlicensed Radio Operation" and about a page and a half of 'cut it out, here's the law saying so.. etc" text.  As a result, we've decided to shut down KBFR until we determine next steps.  This is the equivalent of the first 'letter' they send letting you know that they know you're there.  The first legal step in killing off an underground station.
 
The reason behind this visit after being on the air for such a short time, we believe, is a combination of a couple of things.  First, the  National Community Radio Conference, hosted by KGNU, is being held in Boulder this weekend (fri/sat/sun).  Attendee's start arriving this evening. 
 
It wouldn't be kosher to have an underground station (especially a popular one running a pretty strong signal) up and running during this conference.  "The FCC can't even keep someone off the air even during our conference!" is very likely what someone said.  We suspect that's one of the two primary reasons for the shut down.

It's also likely a local station or someone affiliated with one that complained.  (A licensed FCC holder is usually the only one that can get the FCC's attention.  A regular citizen complaining isn't as likely to be responded to-unless it's a whole BUNCH of them).  So, effectively, only local FCC license holders can report us.  That leaves the likely complainer to be either KBCO or KGNU.  The KGNU staff is friendly towards us, but with 200 plus volunteers, that may not be the case across the board with them.  (for those of you who wanted to give us donations, we still, as always, urge you to give them to KGNU... www.kgnu.org or 303-449-4885).

Second, we put out about 100 flyers to local businesses the last few days and our summer intern seems to have put one on the windshield of a car at KGNU that's parked next to the front door entrance (very unfortunate, since we specifically asked him to avoid the KGNU building- even though friendly, no reason to be anything less than low profile regarding other stations).  Our guess is, most likely, this flyer combined with the National Radio Conference here in Boulder this weekend was what set off the call to the FCC and their visit.
 
And, of course, KBCO might have been noticing an awful lot of listeners missing from their Arbitrons (radio's way of determining listenership) lately.  We had one local garage that specialized in imports tell us that 50% of the cars his shop worked on recently had their stations tuned to KBFR.  Hmmmm....
 
Don't get us wrong.  We support KGNU and what they're doing (still do, always will).  And KBCO has it's place (compared to most radio in the US, it's still a great station) and are in no way pointing fingers.  It's just there's not a lot of likely suspects for the quick response of the FCC other than our two locally focused stations (or someone closely affiliated with one of them).
 
Since we are non-political (focusing purely on playing good music, no more no less) and in no way 'ruffling' any feathers (other than just existing), the quick response by the FCC surprised us.  Most underground stations are on the air at least 6 months, often a year before being 'warned'.  We're sorry we couldn't be here for you longer.
 
Want to complain?  Tell your senator and your congressman.  Tell them to 'open up' the LPFM (Low Power FM) law that they effectively killed in December due to the lobbying of National Public Radio (that's right, NPR) and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).  That's what got me started with KBFR.  I started the process of applying for an LPFM license and was cut off at the knees by the change in the FCC's rules.  The original rules laid out in Jan. 2000 would have had KBFR's placement on the dial (96.9) as legal.  The change in the law requires more 'space' between stations effectively killing the ability to have an LPFM station in any area where there's more than a few radio stations (i.e. Urban areas like Boulder/Denver).  You could have one in the mountains, say, or the middle of a Utah desert, but what's the point if no one's around to listen?  NPR and the NAB convinced a few senators (with the help of a lot of special interest donations no doubt) that it would cause interference with existing stations.  That would be true, if you were using the same technology that was used in radio's and broadcasting equipment 50 years ago.  Today, with how the technology works, we could have, literally, twice the stations we have now (and many could have been small local LPFM stations like KBFR).. but 50 year old rules written for 50 year old technology is still being touted by the establishment radio broadcasting industry as relevant.  It's not.  And you're the one who loses out.
 
And call the local media outlets letting them know how you feel about what's happening to our local airwaves: (Mostly) sold off to 3 large corporations that charge you for access (forcing you to listen to ads) to a natural resource (Radio Spectrum) that's like air, water or land.  Imagine if Disney, Paramount and Universal controlled (licensed by a federal agency like the FCC), say, all the national parks.  You can get in free, (i.e. listen to the airwaves free) but every 50 feet on the trails there's a billboard selling something, or a speaker whispering 'buy buy buys' as you hike past.  You get the idea.  That's no different than what the FCC has done to the natural, limited resource of Radio Spectrum today.  Think about it.
 
For updates on what's happening... you can visit our website at HTTP://COMMUNITIES.MSN.COM/KBFR
 
You can also listen to KBFR, on the web, at WWW.LIVE365.COM/STATIONS/= 259942 .  If you get a 404 server not found screen just enter in the 'Search= for:' field Boulder Free Radio.  Or go to www.live365.com and search on Boulder= Free Radio.  We're 'on the internet' as of the FCC visit.
 
We're not sure what our next steps are going to be, but you'll be able to= keep informed via the HTTP://COMMUNITIES.MSN.COM/KBFR website above.
 
 
 
Monk
email: KBFR@MSN.COM
phone: 303-818-3619
July 12th, 2001
 
P.S. please let any other listeners you might know what's happening..= Thx  M.




Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
--=====================_34243684==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Sun Jul 22 13:57:22 2001 Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.226]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f6MKvL495211 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 13:57:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from smui02.slb.mindspring.net (smui02.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.25]) by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA14181 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:57:20 -0400 (EDT) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui02.slb.mindspring.net id QAA0000028718; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:57:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 16:57:20 -0400 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 152.163.213.186 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Free Radio Takilma Busted "Mar, Leo & Ry Goodman" wrote: > On thursday July 19 at approxiamately 5:30 Two FCC agents entered free radio takilma's studio with out a warrant ( they were allowed inside) they proceeded to inspect and catalogue the transmitter (broadcasting @ 65 watts) and other equiptment. The DJ on duty refused to sing any paper work. Other community members were present. The agents did not sieze any equiptment but threatened to do so if we didn't shut down, also a $10,000 fine was mentioned. We haven't decided how to respond, Legal advice and support is requested. Thank You, Sincerely, Leo Goodman From nlgcdc-admin Sun Aug 19 20:36:19 2001 Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7K3aIA67202 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 20:36:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from smui03.slb.mindspring.net (smui03.slb.mindspring.net [199.174.114.22]) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA31156 for ; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:36:17 -0400 (EDT) From: aakorn@igc.org Received: by smui03.slb.mindspring.net id XAA0000004248; Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:36:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 23:36:17 -0400 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Sender: aakorn@igc.org Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: 152.163.201.202 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: LPFM Story John Broomall wrote: >

Joke or Horror Story?  Gather around boys and girls for Story Time.  Once upon a time this pastor decided he wanted a radio station so he filed an LPFM application.  Unfortunately he became greedy and decided that if one was great, two would be better ... why not ten? Twenty? Thirty? .... 70????  Ah, yes, that is a really good number!!!  So he had a consultant file for 70 stations nationally.

Bad joke or horror story?? You decide - but this story is true and happened this June in the final LPFM filing window, primarily in Florida and Massachusetts.

Want to hear another story???  Good, here it is.  Ring, ring goes the phone.  "Hello" answers the Old Lady.  "Do you like Christian Music?" "Good" says the nice Young Man on the other end of the line, "we will put you down for an LPFM radio station."  The Old Lady was confused and said something like "Yeh???"  This sounded vaguely like "yes" didn't it - so he listed the Old Lady and her Sister, and her Daughter-in-Law as applicants for an LPFM.  "This is fun" he said to his Engineer Friend called "The Chief" who lives on "Crooks Avenue" "let's do it again ... and again ... there is nothing wrong since we are not charging anybody."

Unbelievable fairy tale?  No, true story ... and The Chief literally lives on Crooks Avenue!!!  What makes this into a HORROR story is that it happened more than 200 times!!!   What a headache for the FCC!  What if some of these people decide they want to keep the station "given" to them by the Nice Stranger?

Oh, and there is the board for one church applicant group in which all the board members have "zero" vote and "zero" ownership.  Is direct heavenly control allowed???

Thanks to Bberkowitz@Yahoo.com, publisher of THE LPFM TIMES for breaking The Case of the Phantom Applicants.  Doubt these stories are true? The documentation is in the FCC CDBS database.  If you face a competing application and the group's name contains "St. " (Saint) or "Educational Association" you should check it out!!!

JohnBroomall@Yahoo.com > Do You Yahoo!? > Make international calls for as low as $0.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger. From nlgcdc-admin Thu Oct 11 13:56:45 2001 Received: from pimout3-int.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f9BKujS12669 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2001 13:56:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from alan.igc.org (adsl-209-76-222-64.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [209.76.222.64]) by pimout3-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f9BKuh3287490 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2001 16:56:43 -0400 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20011011135552.00abfec0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 13:56:15 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: [MRN] Lawyers Guild sends in the cavalry to combat Calvary > >from rbr.com: > >Lawyers Guild sends in the cavalry to combat Calvary (10/11) > >National religious organization Calvary Chapel has been very busy filing >applications for low power FMs. Now the National Lawyers Guild Center on >Democratic Communications, the Microradio Implementation Project and the >Prometheus Radio Project have been just as busy objecting to them. At >least 32 proposed Calvary Chapel FMs drew informal objections. > >The Guild's (et al) two-part objection claims that Calvary's local >licensees are not substantially different from the national organization, >and have not demonstrated that in each case the broadcasts will have "a >distinct local presence and mission." They note that in most of the >Calvary applications, a boilerplate description of local broadcast intent >is used. "Despite theses generalities," they write, "there is no mention >of anything 'distinctly local' in this statement of educational purpose. >The applicant does nothing to distinguish its 'distinct local purpose' >from that of the national Calvary Chapel, nor does it satisfactorily >explain how it intends to distinguish its programming from that of the >national Calvary Chapel or the Calvary Satellite Network." > > >Part two of the objection notes the Commission's prohibition of any entity >owning more than one LPFM in the first two years of the service's existence. > >Calvary is also subject of a petition to deny filed by Durango, CO-based >Proclaiming Christ's Love Ministries Inc. (PCLM). PCLM claims that >Calvary's proposal to build an LPFM on 96.1 mHz will cause interference. >PCLM has a translator in town, which rebroadcasts the 42-miles distant >signal of KPCL-FM Farmington, NM on 105.9 mHz. That is not the problem. >Calvary's 96.1 signal, seven miles from PCLM's translator, is a >second-channel adjacency to KPCL on 95.7 mHz, and would effectively >prevent the translator from receiving its host signal. > > > > >Alan Freed >Beat Radio >Minneapolis >http://www.beatworld.com > > >========================================= >The Microradio Network >--- >To unsubscribe send a message to: majordomo@lists.tao.ca >In the message body, type: unsubscribe microradio >========================================= From nlgcdc-admin Mon Nov 19 17:06:43 2001 Received: from mail-server.znufe.edu.cn ([202.114.224.5]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAK16gv51125 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:06:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from search0717@qudsmail.com) Received: from qudsmail.com by mail-server.znufe.edu.cn (8.9.3+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id JAA03522; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 09:06:57 +0800 (CST) From: To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:59:06 Message-Id: <475.321262.8781@qudsmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [nlgcdc] ADV: Promote Your Website! Untitled Document

Removal Instructions Below

Make Your Web Counter Go Ballistic!

Learn the secrets of the TOP SEARCH ENGINES like, YAHOO, GOOGLE, EXCITE, LYCOS, HOTBOT and others!

Never worry about submitting your web site to the search engines again!

Have your web site submitted twice monthly to Over 400 of the world's best search engines and directories for only $29.95 per month!

* No Contracts!

*Periodic reports showing your search engine rankings!

*Keyword (Meta Tag) optimization included!

 

Start today and never worry about your web site rankings again!

Call Toll Free: (888) 532-8842

 

 

 

To Be Removed Call: (888) 800-6339 X1377
From nlgcdc-admin Mon Nov 19 23:27:10 2001 Received: from snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fAK7RAv03094 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:27:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from UserID@pacbell.net) Received: from pacbell.net ([64.161.25.230]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with ESMTP id <0GN300HH78P5T0@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for nlgcdc@rdrop.com; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:27:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:33:19 -0700 From: Your Name To: nlgcdc@rdrop.com Message-id: <3BF9F92F.F1C02A54@pacbell.net> Organization: Pacific Bell Internet Services MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72C-PBI-NC472 (Macintosh; U; PPC) Content-type: text/plain; x-mac-creator=4D4F5353; x-mac-type=54455854; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en Subject: [nlgcdc] REMOVE ME FROM LIST From nlgcdc-admin Fri Jan 18 09:55:54 2002 Received: from pimout1-int.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g0IHtrH36384 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 09:55:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from alan.igc.org (adsl-209-76-222-115.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [209.76.222.115]) by pimout1-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g0IHtml267280 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:55:52 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20020118095531.01d3c3a0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 09:55:40 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: crucial Supreme court ruling >Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 09:07:40 -0500 >Reply-To: roundtable@cni.org >Sender: owner-roundtable@cni.org >From: "W. Curtiss Priest" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: crucial Supreme court ruling >X-To: "List, Cyberspace Society" , > "List, Telecom Policy - NorthEast list" , >X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win16; I) > >This ruling reverses a prior ruling about FCC rate setting for >broadband lines on utility poles, etc. > >The FCC does have that authority according to the new ruling. > >Not since the 1996 Telecom reform act have we had, perhaps, >a statement of public policy of this magnitude. > >Note, in particular, Thomas's commentary in his dissent >asking for someone to decide "whether high-speed Internet >access provided through cable wires constitutes cable >service or telecommunications service or falls into >neither category." > >Indeed. > >W. Curtiss Priest > >["fair use," "teachable moment," "archival," Section 107(a), 1976 >Copyright Act and 1998 Digital Millennium Act] > >Court rules FCC may set high-speed Net line fees > >By Associated Press, 1/17/2002 > >WASHINGTON - In a victory for the cable industry, the Supreme Court >said yesterday that a federal agency can control rates that cable >companies pay for high-speed Internet lines. The ruling could affect >the availability and cost of online services. > >Cable television companies pay utilities to attach wires for >high-speed Internet service to the utilities' poles. > >A federal appeals panel had ruled that the Federal Communications >Commission did not have the authority to regulate pole rental rates >for Internet service. The Supreme Court reversed that decision. > >"It's a good thing for the public. It makes it more likely high-speed >Internet access will get into their hands faster," said Randal C. >Picker, a law professor at the University of Chicago. > >Cable industry spokesman said Dan Brenner said the decision "overcomes >a potential impediment to broadband deployment, especially in rural >areas." > >Justices also said cellular telephone companies are entitled to pay >government-limited rates for attaching their equipment to utility >poles. > >Picker said there is a downside to the decisions. "It will make more >clutter on telephone poles. It will become more crowded and a little >more unsightly." > >Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice David H. Souter, dissented >in part of the ruling. Thomas said the FCC should be required to >explain its rationale for regulating rates. > >"Such a determination would require the commission to decide at long >last whether high-speed Internet access provided through cable wires >constitutes cable service or telecommunications service or falls into >neither category," Thomas wrote. > >The case is one of three the court is considering this year involving >a 1996 congressional overhaul of the nation's telecommunications laws. > >Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said electric >utilities wrongly argued in this case that "if a cable company >attempts to innovate at all and provide anything other than pure >television, it loses the protection of the Pole Attachments Act and >subjects itself to monopoly pricing." > >Kennedy said Congress in 1996 intended to promote expanded Internet >service, not discourage it. > >With government regulation of the rates, the cable industry paid about >$5 a pole annually to string and operate its wires, according to the >National Cable and Telecommunications Association. After the 11th US >Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in 2000, one utility began charging >$38 a pole, the association had said. > >Justice Sandra Day O'Connor did not participate in the decision. She >has stock in companies that could be affected by the court's ruling, >including telephone companies AT&T and MCI, and several computer or >Internet firms. > >This story ran on page E4 of the Boston Globe on 1/17/2002. c >Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company. > >-- > > > W. Curtiss Priest, Director, CITS > Center for Information, Technology & Society > 466 Pleasant St., Melrose, MA 02176 > Voice: 781-662-4044 BMSLIB@MIT.EDU > Fax: 781-662-6882 WWW: http://Cybertrails.org From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 10:57:52 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18Ivqk12874 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:57:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 5489 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 10:57:46 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 10:57:46 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 18:57:46 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208104952.00a9cd90@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 10:52:16 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Cc: Marti Hiken Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] while we are at it this list has been pretty quiet lately, partly because we were in something of an enforced lull. Now a new grant from the macarthur foundation has enabled us to step up the level of work, and retain marti hiken as our coordinator. It would be good if people on this list would let her know if they want to stay on, and [optionally] if they have ideas or interests for what the activities of cdc should be in the coming period. Thanks. From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 11:30:29 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h016.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.230]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18JUSk17780 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:30:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 17388 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 11:30:21 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.230) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 11:30:21 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 19:30:21 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208112947.02aba8e0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:30:25 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_838256==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] CCR victory in challenge to RPA ban on micro radio pioneers, dissent --=====================_838256==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge, dissenting: I dissent from the majority's holding that the challenged provision of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act (Act)-- withholding future low power FM (LPFM) licenses from those who have illegally engaged in LPFM broadcasting in the past--falls short of the "something more than minimum rationality"standard adopted in News America Publishing, Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800 (D.C. Cir. 1988). Quoting News America, the majority charges that the Act's license restric- tion is so "poorly aimed at maximizing future compliance with broadcast laws and regulations as to 'raise[ ] a suspicion' that perhaps Congress's true objective was not to increase regula- tory compliance, but to penalize pirate microbroadcasters' 'message.' " Maj. Op. at 16 (quoting 844 F.3d at 805). This case, however, is nothing like News America. In News America the court overturned a funding resolution that barred the FCC from using appropriated funds " 'to extend the time period of current grants of temporary waiv- ers to achieve compliance with such rules.' " 844 F.2d at 802 (quoting Pub. L. No. 100-202, 101 Stat. 1329, 34 (1987)). The court found the provision "astonishingly underinclusive" for two reasons. First, it did not prohibit extension of waivers granted after its enactment but only of those already in existence. Second, it forbade only extensions of existing waivers and not the granting of new waivers. In fact, be- cause of its narrow focus the restriction affected only a single party, News America Publishing, Inc., a corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch, striking him, in the court's words, "with the precision of a laser beam." 844 F.2d at 814. By contrast, the license restriction here applies to the entire class of those who as of the time of their license applications have unlawful- ly engaged in LPFM broadcasting.1 Further, the restriction substantially furthers the plain intent of the Congress which __________ 1 This class includes persons who broadcast illegally after the Act's passage as well as those who had already done so before enactment. It is therefore not a "closed" class as was the case in News America. See 844 F.2d at 810 & n. 13 (noting that challenged provision "impinges on a closed class" because "Murdoch is not only the sole current member of the class, but is the sole party that can ever be a member"). believed that "the operation of an unlicensed station demon- strates a lack of commitment to follow the basic rules and regulations which are essential to having a broadcast service that serves the public, and those individuals or groups should not be permitted to receive licenses in the LPFM service." H.R. Rep. No. 506 at 8 (2000). What could be more reason- able or logical than to suspect that those who ignored the Commission's LPFM broadcast regulations in the past are likely to do so in the future and therefore to head them off. The majority claims this class is underinclusive because it excludes a host of other scofflaws such as "civil wrongdoers, felons, and even inveterate regulatory violators other than pirates." Maj. Op. at 13. As the majority acknowledges, however, " 'Congress ordinarily need not address a perceived problem ... all at once.' " Maj. Op. at 14 (quoting News America, 844 F.2d at 815.).2 It is no surprise that in legisla- tion addressing LPFM licensing the Congress began with known violators of LPFM regulations. In any event, given that the class's members here are many and unidentified, see supra note 1, I am at a loss to understand how we can infer __________ 2 As the majority points out, the court in News America noted other courts' rejection of the "one-bite-at-a-time explanation for rules affecting important First Amendment values." News Amer- ica, 844 F.2d at 815, quoted in Maj. Op. at 14. Judging from the examples cited in News America, the court meant only that a proffered governmental interest will not suffice if the challenged statute does not reasonably serve the interest, that is, if the statute is underinclusive or overinclusive or both. See FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364, 396 (1984) (striking down statute of "patent overinclusiveness and underinclusiveness" because it "clear- ly 'provide[d] only ineffective or remote support for the govern- ment's purpose.' ") (quoting Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n of N.Y., 447 U.S. 557, 564 (1980)); Community- Serv. Broadcasting v. FCC, 593 F.2d 1102 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (reject- ing statute that "[a]t best ... serves as an overly restrictive means" of achieving asserted purpose) (en banc). I see no reason the legislature cannot permissibly tackle a single part of a perceived problem (including one touching on the First Amendment) through a statute, such as the one here, which is neither overinclusive nor underinclusive. the Congress intended to punish any particular "message" the way the senators mentioned in News America targeted Mur- doch's message.3 __________ 3 As the News America court recounted, Murdoch was thoroughly excoriated in the Senate shortly after the Act was passed. See News America, 844 F.2d at 807-10. --=====================_838256==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
I dissent from the majority's holding that the challenged
provision of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act (Act)--
withholding future low power FM (LPFM) licenses from
those who have illegally engaged in LPFM broadcasting in
the past--falls short of the "something more than minimum
rationality"standard adopted in News America Publishing,
Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800 (D.C. Cir. 1988). Quoting News
America, the majority charges that the Act's license restric-
tion is so "poorly aimed at maximizing future compliance with
broadcast laws and regulations as to 'raise[ ] a suspicion' that
perhaps Congress's true objective was not to increase regula-
tory compliance, but to penalize pirate microbroadcasters'
'message.' " Maj. Op. at 16 (quoting 844 F.3d at 805). This
case, however, is nothing like News America.
In News America the court overturned a funding resolution
that barred the FCC from using appropriated funds " 'to
extend the time period of current grants of temporary waiv-
ers to achieve compliance with such rules.' " 844 F.2d at 802
(quoting Pub. L. No. 100-202, 101 Stat. 1329, 34 (1987)). The
court found the provision "astonishingly underinclusive" for
two reasons. First, it did not prohibit extension of waivers
granted after its enactment but only of those already in
existence. Second, it forbade only extensions of existing
waivers and not the granting of new waivers. In fact, be-
cause of its narrow focus the restriction affected only a single
party, News America Publishing, Inc., a corporation owned
by Rupert Murdoch, striking him, in the court's words, "with
the precision of a laser beam." 844 F.2d at 814. By contrast,
the license restriction here applies to the entire class of those
who as of the time of their license applications have unlawful-
ly engaged in LPFM broadcasting.1 Further, the restriction
substantially furthers the plain intent of the Congress which
__________
1 This class includes persons who broadcast illegally after the
Act's passage as well as those who had already done so before
enactment. It is therefore not a "closed" class as was the case in
News America. See 844 F.2d at 810 & n. 13 (noting that challenged
provision "impinges on a closed class" because "Murdoch is not only
the sole current member of the class, but is the sole party that can
ever be a member").
believed that "the operation of an unlicensed station demon-
strates a lack of commitment to follow the basic rules and
regulations which are essential to having a broadcast service
that serves the public, and those individuals or groups should
not be permitted to receive licenses in the LPFM service." H.R. Rep. No. 506 at 8 (2000). What could be more reason-
able or logical than to suspect that those who ignored the
Commission's LPFM broadcast regulations in the past are
likely to do so in the future and therefore to head them off. The majority claims this class is underinclusive because it
excludes a host of other scofflaws such as "civil wrongdoers,
felons, and even inveterate regulatory violators other than
pirates." Maj. Op. at 13. As the majority acknowledges,
however, " 'Congress ordinarily need not address a perceived
problem ... all at once.' " Maj. Op. at 14 (quoting News
America, 844 F.2d at 815.).2 It is no surprise that in legisla-
tion addressing LPFM licensing the Congress began with
known violators of LPFM regulations. In any event, given
that the class's members here are many and unidentified, see
supra note 1, I am at a loss to understand how we can infer
__________
2 As the majority points out, the court in News America noted
other courts' rejection of the "one-bite-at-a-time explanation for
rules affecting important First Amendment values." News Amer-
ica, 844 F.2d at 815, quoted in Maj. Op. at 14. Judging from the
examples cited in News America, the court meant only that a
proffered governmental interest will not suffice if the challenged
statute does not reasonably serve the interest, that is, if the statute
is underinclusive or overinclusive or both. See FCC v. League of
Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364, 396 (1984) (striking down statute of
"patent overinclusiveness and underinclusiveness" because it "clear-
ly 'provide[d] only ineffective or remote support for the govern-
ment's purpose.' ") (quoting Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v.
Pub. Serv. Comm'n of N.Y., 447 U.S. 557, 564 (1980)); Community-
Serv. Broadcasting v. FCC, 593 F.2d 1102 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (reject-
ing statute that "[a]t best ... serves as an overly restrictive means"
of achieving asserted purpose) (en banc). I see no reason the
legislature cannot permissibly tackle a single part of a perceived
problem (including one touching on the First Amendment) through
a statute, such as the one here, which is neither overinclusive nor
underinclusive.
the Congress intended to punish any particular "message" the
way the senators mentioned in News America targeted Mur-
doch's message.3
__________
3 As the News America court recounted, Murdoch was thoroughly
excoriated in the Senate shortly after the Act was passed. See
News America, 844 F.2d at 807-10.

 --=====================_838256==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 11:42:03 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18Jg3k19875 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:42:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 6142 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 11:41:59 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 11:41:59 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 19:41:59 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208114057.037a6800@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:41:48 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] trouble posting Sorry if the order of these posts is confusing. The list serve rejects anything over 40k. So I am trying to post the majority opinion in the next two sections. From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 11:42:10 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18JgAk20166 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:42:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 6170 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 11:42:01 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 11:42:01 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 19:42:01 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208114150.037a4ec0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:42:18 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_1549831==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] victory in lpfm case, part 1 of majority opinion --=====================_1549831==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued September 6, 2001 Decided February 8, 2002 No. 00-1100 Greg Ruggiero, Petitioner v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Respondents On Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Communications Commission Robert T. Perry argued the cause for petitioner Greg Ruggiero. With him on the briefs was Barbara J. Olshansky. Jacob M. Lewis, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the briefs were Robert S. Greenspan, Attorney, Jane E. Mago, Acting General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Dan- iel M. Armstrong, Associate General Counsel, John E. Ingle, Deputy Associate General Counsel, C. Grey Pash, Jr. and Lisa E. Boehley, Counsel. Before: Henderson, Rogers, and Tatel, Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Tatel. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge Henderson. Tatel, Circuit Judge: In this case, an unlicensed microb- roadcaster--a "pirate"--challenges the constitutionality of the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000's character qualification provision, which permanently prohibits anyone who ever "engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation of ... the Communications Act of 1934" from obtaining a low-power FM radio license. To survive First and Fifth Amendment challenges in this Circuit, restrictions limiting the future lawful speech of a well-defined class of broadcasters must be more than "minim[ally] ration- al[ ]." News Am. Publ'g, Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800, 812, 814 (D.C. Cir. 1988) ("News America"). Finding nothing in the Act, its legislative history, or the record before us to justify the character qualification provision's unique and draconian sanction for broadcast piracy, nor to explain why a more limited restriction would not achieve Congress's objective, we hold that the provision and its implementing regulation fail to meet this standard and are therefore unconstitutional. I. Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 makes it unlawful to operate a radio station without a license issued by the Federal Communications Commission. 47 U.S.C. s 301. When the Commission began licensing FM radio stations in the 1940s, it licensed both high-power stations and low-power, or "Class D," educational stations operating with a maximum of ten watts of power. In 1978, however, the Commission concluded that the Class D stations were impeding expansion of more efficient high-power operations. Opting to "str[ike] the balance in favor of licensing higher powered stations to ensure that large audiences were served," the Commission stopped licensing low-power stations and required most exist- ing stations to upgrade to at least 100 watts. Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 15 F.C.C. Rcd. 19,208, 19,236 (2000) ("First Low-Power Reconsideration") (recons.) (discussing the 1978 rule, Changes in the Rules Relating to Noncommer- cial Educ. FM Broad. Stations, 70 F.C.C.2d 972, 983 (1979) (codified at 47 C.F.R. s 73.512(d))). Over the next two decades, often in open defiance of this rule, individual pirates began operating unlicensed low-power stations that broadcast local news, music, and commentary. Known as "microradio," this phenomenon expanded signifi- cantly in the late 1990s after Congress amended the Telecom- munications Act to eliminate restrictions on the number of radio stations any one person or entity could own. Telecom- munications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, s 202(a), (b), 110 Stat. 56, 110-12 (1996). Following the amendment, own- ership of licensed radio stations became increasingly concen- trated, leading--according to microradio proponents--to a "marked decline in serious local radio news reporting" and a corresponding increase in the perceived importance and, in turn, number of unlicensed low-power stations. Pet'r's Br. at 6-7. In response to this microradio expansion, the Commis- sion cracked down on pirates, ordering them to cease broad- casting and taking legal action against those who refused. See, e.g., Grid Radio v. FCC, No. 99-1463, __ F.3d __ (D.C. Cir. Feb. 8, 2002); United States v. Dunifer, 219 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2000). In 1999, the Commission again changed course, seeking public comment on proposed rules that would allow licensing of low-power stations. The Commission observed that in contrast to 1978, when it first adopted the microbroadcasting ban, "[n]ow, ... radio service is widely available throughout the country and very little spectrum remains available for new full-powered stations," so licensing low-power stations could "fill ... gaps in the spectrum that would otherwise go unused," First Low-Power Reconsideration, 15 F.C.C. Rcd. at 19,236, providing a "low-cost means of serving" both urban and rural areas, Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 14 F.C.C. Rcd. 2471, 2471 (1999) ("Low-Power Proposal") (notice of proposed rulemaking). Many groups submitted comments, with students, religious groups, and labor unions generally supporting the low-power program, and the established broadcasting industry (including National Public Radio and other noncommercial broadcasters) opposing it. In January 2000, the Commission issued an order authoriz- ing two new classes of low-power stations: 100-watt stations, reaching a radius of roughly 3.5 miles, and 10-watt stations, reaching a radius of less than 2 miles. Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 15 F.C.C. Rcd. 2205, 2205, 2210-12 (2000) ("First Low-Power Rulemaking"). The order encouraged local ownership of low-power stations, limited the number of such stations any single entity could own, required the sta- tions to operate on a noncommercial, educational basis, and prohibited existing media entities from holding interests in them. Id. at 2215-25. The order also included a provision addressing license applications by broadcast pirates. Con- cerned that those who had flouted the licensing process in the past could not be trusted "to deal truthfully with the Commis- sion and to comply with [its] rules and policies," the Commis- sion provided that it would only accept low-power applications from individuals who certified (under penalty of perjury) that if they had operated illegally in the past, they ceased all such operations either within twenty-four hours of being directed by the Commission to do so or within ten days of publication of the Low-Power Proposal. Id. at 2225-26. The Commis- sion also extended this requirement to all parties to any corporate applicant, including the applicant's "parents, its subsidiaries, their officers and members of their governing boards." Id. at 2223-26. This version of the low-power rules was short-lived. Less than a year after the rules' promulgation, Congress, respond- ing to broadcast industry lobbying, see, e.g., 146 Cong. Rec. S8197-8211 (statement of Sen. Grams) (discussing licensed broadcasters' concerns about the low-power rules), passed the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 ("RBPA"), Pub. L. No. 106-553, 114 Stat. 2762 (2000). The RBPA directs the Commission to amend the low-power rules to limit the fre- quencies available for low-power stations, thus reducing the risk of interference to existing stations. Central to this case, the Act also directs the Commission to deny licenses to all applicants whose officers or board members ever "engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in violation" of the Communications Act. Id. s 632(a)(1)(B). This "character qualification provision" thus eliminates the distinction the Commission had drawn between those erst- while broadcast pirates who voluntarily ceased broadcasting within a specified period and those who refused. The provi- sion also rescinds the Commission's discretion to waive the character qualification requirement in cases in which, despite an applicant's--or a party to an applicant's--unlicensed broadcasting, the Commission finds no reason to question the applicant's potential reliability as a licensee. Id. s 632(a)(2)(B). Following passage of the RBPA, the Commission issued rules implementing the Act's character qualification provision. Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 16 F.C.C. Rcd. 8026, 2001 FCC LEXIS 1760 (2001) ("Second Low-Power Rule- making") (amending First Low-Power Rulemaking). Under the new rules--described by the Commission as "minor amendment[s]" that merely "codif[y] a Congressional require- ment"--all pirates and former pirates are automatically and permanently disqualified from applying for low-power licens- es. Id., 2001 FCC LEXIS 1760, at *15. Moreover, an applicant is deemed "ineligible to hold [a low-power] license if it has engaged in unlicensed operation regardless of whether the Commission has made a specific finding that the party has engaged in such conduct." Id., 2001 FCC LEXIS 1760, at *14 (emphasis added). II. Petitioner Greg Ruggiero, an acknowledged former pirate affiliated with microbroadcasting stations in New York City and elsewhere, argues that facially and as applied to him, the character qualification provision and implementing regulation violate the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Before considering the merits of Ruggiero's challenge, we must deal with the Commission's argument that we lack jurisdiction for two independent reasons: because Ruggiero failed to file a petition for review, and because he lacks Article III standing. We consider each in turn. Petition for Review Resolving the Commission's first argument requires an understanding of the history of this case. Ruggiero originally filed a petition for review of the Commission's First Low- Power Rulemaking, in which he argued that the then-current version of the licensing restriction violated both the Adminis- trative Procedure Act and the First Amendment. Following passage of the RBPA, we remanded the record to the Com- mission and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing Ruggiero's standing to pursue his First Amend- ment claim, as well as the merits of that claim as applied "to the Act and any implementing orders or regulations the Commission may issue." Order of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit at 1 (Jan. 8, 2001) (No. 00-1054) ("Order of Jan. 8, 2001"). After the Commission issued the Second Low-Power Rulemaking, the parties submitted the requested supplemental briefs, and we heard oral argument on Ruggiero's constitutional claims-- expanded by a footnote in Ruggiero's Supplemental Brief to include a claim under the Fifth Amendment--as applied to the RBPA and the new rules. The Commission now argues that because Ruggiero never filed a petition for review of the Second Low-Power Rule- making, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear his constitutional challenge. We disagree. Although it is true that Ruggiero did not file a second petition for review, he did, as we directed, file a brief addressing the constitutionality of the RBPA and the Commission's implementing regulation, and that brief, in all but title, satisfies the four statutory require- ments for a petition for review of the Second Low-Power Rulemaking. Specifically, as required by 28 U.S.C. s 2344, Ruggiero filed the brief within sixty days of the rulemaking; stated "the nature of the proceedings as to which review is sought, ... the facts on which venue is based, ... the grounds on which relief is sought, and ... the relief prayed"; attached a copy of the challenged rulemaking; and served the brief on the Commission and the United States Department of Justice. See generally Pet'r's Supp. Br. at 1-10, App. B, Certificate of Service. Accordingly, we may treat the brief as the "functional equivalent" of a petition for review. See Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49 (1992) (internal citations omitted) (construing pro se brief as notice of appeal and noting that "[i]f a document filed within the time specified by Rule 4 gives the notice required by Rule 3, it is effective as a notice of appeal"); Moore v. United States Dep't of Transp., 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 2496, at *12 (7th Cir. Feb. 5, 2001) (unpublished disp.) (citing Smith v. Barry and construing brief as "functional equivalent of a timely petition for review" of agency action). This liberal construction of 28 U.S.C. s 2344 makes particu- lar sense in this case. For one thing, as we learned at oral argument, Ruggiero filed no second petition for review solely because we had directed him to file a supplemental brief addressing the applicability of his First Amendment claims to the RBPA and any subsequent implementing regulations. See Order of Jan. 8, 2001, at 1; cf. Moore v. South Carolina Labor Bd., 100 F.3d 162, 163 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (discussing "the unique circumstances doctrine, under which appellate courts will excuse an untimely notice of appeal where the appellant could have filed a timely notice but was misled to delay filing by a court order or ruling which purportedly extended or tolled the appeal deadline" (citing, inter alia, Thompson v. INS, 375 U.S. 384, 387 (1964) (applying the doctrine))). Moreover, we maintained jurisdiction of Ruggiero's claims throughout the Commission's implementation of the RBPA, remanding only the record for further Commission action. Order of Jan. 8, 2001, at 1; see also D.C. Cir. R. 41(b). Finally, Ruggiero's original contentions, made in his brief challenging the First Low-Power Rulemaking, are sufficient- ly broad to cover at least his First Amendment challenge to the character qualification provision and implementing regu- lation. His original brief asserted that the Commission "vio- lated [his] First Amendment rights in disqualifying [him] from holding a low power FM radio station license" and that "[t]he [a]utomatic [d]isqualification [p]olicy [l]acks the [n]ar- row [t]ailoring [r]equired by the First Amendment." Pet'r's Br. at 2, 23. These broadly worded objections to the First Low-Power Rulemaking are equally valid as objections to the amended rules, as Ruggiero continues to argue primarily that the Commission violated his First Amendment rights by automatically disqualifying him and other unlicensed micro- broadcasters from holding low-power licenses. Cf. Tenn. Gas Pipeline Co. v. FERC, 871 F.2d 1099, 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (finding jurisdiction to review claims despite appellant's fail- ure to file new FERC petition for rehearing because most of appellant's objections to agency's first decision, raised in timely petition for review, were "equally valid" as objections to agency's amended decision). --=====================_1549831==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
United States Court of Appeals

               FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

       Argued September 6, 2001   Decided February 8, 2002

                           No. 00-1100

                         Greg Ruggiero,
                            Petitioner

                                v.

              Federal Communications Commission and
                    United States of America,
                           Respondents

            On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                Federal Communications Commission

     Robert T. Perry argued the cause for petitioner Greg
Ruggiero.  With him on the briefs was Barbara J. Olshansky.

     Jacob M. Lewis, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice,
argued the cause for respondents.  With him on the briefs
were Robert S. Greenspan, Attorney, Jane E. Mago, Acting
General Counsel, Federal Communications Commission, Dan-
iel M. Armstrong, Associate General Counsel, John E. Ingle,

Deputy Associate General Counsel, C. Grey Pash, Jr. and
Lisa E. Boehley, Counsel.

     Before:  Henderson, Rogers, and Tatel, Circuit Judges.

     Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Tatel.

     Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge Henderson.

     Tatel, Circuit Judge:  In this case, an unlicensed microb-
roadcaster--a "pirate"--challenges the constitutionality of the
Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000's character
qualification provision, which permanently prohibits anyone
who ever "engaged in any manner in the unlicensed operation
of any station in violation of ... the Communications Act of
1934" from obtaining a low-power FM radio license.  To
survive First and Fifth Amendment challenges in this Circuit,
restrictions limiting the future lawful speech of a well-defined
class of broadcasters must be more than "minim[ally] ration-
al[ ]."  News Am. Publ'g, Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800, 812, 814
(D.C. Cir. 1988) ("News America").  Finding nothing in the
Act, its legislative history, or the record before us to justify
the character qualification provision's unique and draconian
sanction for broadcast piracy, nor to explain why a more
limited restriction would not achieve Congress's objective, we
hold that the provision and its implementing regulation fail to
meet this standard and are therefore unconstitutional.

                                I.

     Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934 makes it
unlawful to operate a radio station without a license issued by
the Federal Communications Commission.  47 U.S.C. s 301. 
When the Commission began licensing FM radio stations in
the 1940s, it licensed both high-power stations and low-power,
or "Class D," educational stations operating with a maximum
of ten watts of power.  In 1978, however, the Commission
concluded that the Class D stations were impeding expansion
of more efficient high-power operations.  Opting to "str[ike]
the balance in favor of licensing higher powered stations to
ensure that large audiences were served," the Commission
stopped licensing low-power stations and required most exist-

ing stations to upgrade to at least 100 watts.  Creation of
Low Power Radio Serv., 15 F.C.C. Rcd. 19,208, 19,236 (2000)
("First Low-Power Reconsideration") (recons.) (discussing
the 1978 rule, Changes in the Rules Relating to Noncommer-
cial Educ. FM Broad. Stations, 70 F.C.C.2d 972, 983 (1979)
(codified at 47 C.F.R. s 73.512(d))).

     Over the next two decades, often in open defiance of this
rule, individual pirates began operating unlicensed low-power
stations that broadcast local news, music, and commentary. 
Known as "microradio," this phenomenon expanded signifi-
cantly in the late 1990s after Congress amended the Telecom-
munications Act to eliminate restrictions on the number of
radio stations any one person or entity could own.  Telecom-
munications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, s 202(a), (b),
110 Stat. 56, 110-12 (1996).  Following the amendment, own-
ership of licensed radio stations became increasingly concen-
trated, leading--according to microradio proponents--to a
"marked decline in serious local radio news reporting" and a
corresponding increase in the perceived importance and, in
turn, number of unlicensed low-power stations.  Pet'r's Br. at
6-7.  In response to this microradio expansion, the Commis-
sion cracked down on pirates, ordering them to cease broad-
casting and taking legal action against those who refused. 
See, e.g., Grid Radio v. FCC, No. 99-1463, __ F.3d __ (D.C.
Cir. Feb. 8, 2002);  United States v. Dunifer, 219 F.3d 1004
(9th Cir. 2000).

     In 1999, the Commission again changed course, seeking
public comment on proposed rules that would allow licensing
of low-power stations.  The Commission observed that in
contrast to 1978, when it first adopted the microbroadcasting
ban, "[n]ow, ... radio service is widely available throughout
the country and very little spectrum remains available for
new full-powered stations," so licensing low-power stations
could "fill ... gaps in the spectrum that would otherwise go
unused," First Low-Power Reconsideration, 15 F.C.C. Rcd.
at 19,236, providing a "low-cost means of serving" both urban
and rural areas, Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 14
F.C.C. Rcd. 2471, 2471 (1999) ("Low-Power Proposal") (notice
of proposed rulemaking).  Many groups submitted comments,

with students, religious groups, and labor unions generally
supporting the low-power program, and the established
broadcasting industry (including National Public Radio and
other noncommercial broadcasters) opposing it.

     In January 2000, the Commission issued an order authoriz-
ing two new classes of low-power stations:  100-watt stations,
reaching a radius of roughly 3.5 miles, and 10-watt stations,
reaching a radius of less than 2 miles.  Creation of Low
Power Radio Serv., 15 F.C.C. Rcd. 2205, 2205, 2210-12 (2000)
("First Low-Power Rulemaking").  The order encouraged
local ownership of low-power stations, limited the number of
such stations any single entity could own, required the sta-
tions to operate on a noncommercial, educational basis, and
prohibited existing media entities from holding interests in
them.  Id. at 2215-25.  The order also included a provision
addressing license applications by broadcast pirates.  Con-
cerned that those who had flouted the licensing process in the
past could not be trusted "to deal truthfully with the Commis-
sion and to comply with [its] rules and policies," the Commis-
sion provided that it would only accept low-power applications
from individuals who certified (under penalty of perjury) that
if they had operated illegally in the past, they ceased all such
operations either within twenty-four hours of being directed
by the Commission to do so or within ten days of publication
of the Low-Power Proposal.  Id. at 2225-26.  The Commis-
sion also extended this requirement to all parties to any
corporate applicant, including the applicant's "parents, its
subsidiaries, their officers and members of their governing
boards."  Id. at 2223-26.

     This version of the low-power rules was short-lived.  Less
than a year after the rules' promulgation, Congress, respond-
ing to broadcast industry lobbying, see, e.g., 146 Cong. Rec.
S8197-8211 (statement of Sen. Grams) (discussing licensed
broadcasters' concerns about the low-power rules), passed the
Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 ("RBPA"), Pub.
L. No. 106-553, 114 Stat. 2762 (2000).  The RBPA directs the
Commission to amend the low-power rules to limit the fre-
quencies available for low-power stations, thus reducing the
risk of interference to existing stations.  Central to this case,

the Act also directs the Commission to deny licenses to all
applicants whose officers or board members ever "engaged in
any manner in the unlicensed operation of any station in
violation" of the Communications Act.  Id. s 632(a)(1)(B). 
This "character qualification provision" thus eliminates the
distinction the Commission had drawn between those erst-
while broadcast pirates who voluntarily ceased broadcasting
within a specified period and those who refused.  The provi-
sion also rescinds the Commission's discretion to waive the
character qualification requirement in cases in which, despite
an applicant's--or a party to an applicant's--unlicensed
broadcasting, the Commission finds no reason to question the
applicant's potential reliability as a licensee.  Id.
s 632(a)(2)(B).

     Following passage of the RBPA, the Commission issued
rules implementing the Act's character qualification provision. 
Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., 16 F.C.C. Rcd. 8026,
2001 FCC LEXIS 1760 (2001) ("Second Low-Power Rule-
making") (amending First Low-Power Rulemaking).  Under
the new rules--described by the Commission as "minor
amendment[s]" that merely "codif[y] a Congressional require-
ment"--all pirates and former pirates are automatically and
permanently disqualified from applying for low-power licens-
es.  Id., 2001 FCC LEXIS 1760, at *15.  Moreover, an
applicant is deemed "ineligible to hold [a low-power] license if
it has engaged in unlicensed operation regardless of whether
the Commission has made a specific finding that the party
has engaged in such conduct."  Id., 2001 FCC LEXIS 1760,
at *14 (emphasis added).

                               II.

     Petitioner Greg Ruggiero, an acknowledged former pirate
affiliated with microbroadcasting stations in New York City
and elsewhere, argues that facially and as applied to him, the
character qualification provision and implementing regulation
violate the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States
Constitution.  Before considering the merits of Ruggiero's
challenge, we must deal with the Commission's argument that

we lack jurisdiction for two independent reasons:  because
Ruggiero failed to file a petition for review, and because he
lacks Article III standing.  We consider each in turn.

                       Petition for Review

     Resolving the Commission's first argument requires an
understanding of the history of this case.  Ruggiero originally
filed a petition for review of the Commission's First Low-
Power Rulemaking, in which he argued that the then-current
version of the licensing restriction violated both the Adminis-
trative Procedure Act and the First Amendment.  Following
passage of the RBPA, we remanded the record to the Com-
mission and directed the parties to file supplemental briefs
addressing Ruggiero's standing to pursue his First Amend-
ment claim, as well as the merits of that claim as applied "to
the Act and any implementing orders or regulations the
Commission may issue."  Order of the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit at 1 (Jan. 8,
2001) (No. 00-1054) ("Order of Jan. 8, 2001").  After the
Commission issued the Second Low-Power Rulemaking, the
parties submitted the requested supplemental briefs, and we
heard oral argument on Ruggiero's constitutional claims--
expanded by a footnote in Ruggiero's Supplemental Brief to
include a claim under the Fifth Amendment--as applied to
the RBPA and the new rules.

     The Commission now argues that because Ruggiero never
filed a petition for review of the Second Low-Power Rule-
making, this court lacks jurisdiction to hear his constitutional
challenge.  We disagree.  Although it is true that Ruggiero
did not file a second petition for review, he did, as we
directed, file a brief addressing the constitutionality of the
RBPA and the Commission's implementing regulation, and
that brief, in all but title, satisfies the four statutory require-
ments for a petition for review of the Second Low-Power
Rulemaking.  Specifically, as required by 28 U.S.C. s 2344,
Ruggiero filed the brief within sixty days of the rulemaking; 

stated "the nature of the proceedings as to which review is
sought, ... the facts on which venue is based, ... the
grounds on which relief is sought, and ... the relief prayed"; 
attached a copy of the challenged rulemaking;  and served the
brief on the Commission and the United States Department
of Justice.  See generally Pet'r's Supp. Br. at 1-10, App. B,
Certificate of Service.  Accordingly, we may treat the brief as
the "functional equivalent" of a petition for review.  See
Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49 (1992) (internal citations
omitted) (construing pro se brief as notice of appeal and
noting that "[i]f a document filed within the time specified by
Rule 4 gives the notice required by Rule 3, it is effective as a
notice of appeal");  Moore v. United States Dep't of Transp.,
2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 2496, at *12 (7th Cir. Feb. 5, 2001)
(unpublished disp.) (citing Smith v. Barry and construing
brief as "functional equivalent of a timely petition for review"
of agency action).

     This liberal construction of 28 U.S.C. s 2344 makes particu-
lar sense in this case.  For one thing, as we learned at oral
argument, Ruggiero filed no second petition for review solely
because we had directed him to file a supplemental brief
addressing the applicability of his First Amendment claims to
the RBPA and any subsequent implementing regulations. 
See Order of Jan. 8, 2001, at 1;  cf. Moore v. South Carolina
Labor Bd., 100 F.3d 162, 163 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (discussing "the
unique circumstances doctrine, under which appellate courts
will excuse an untimely notice of appeal where the appellant
could have filed a timely notice but was misled to delay filing
by a court order or ruling which purportedly extended or
tolled the appeal deadline" (citing, inter alia, Thompson v.
INS, 375 U.S. 384, 387 (1964) (applying the doctrine))). 
Moreover, we maintained jurisdiction of Ruggiero's claims
throughout the Commission's implementation of the RBPA,
remanding only the record for further Commission action. 
Order of Jan. 8, 2001, at 1;  see also D.C. Cir. R. 41(b). 
Finally, Ruggiero's original contentions, made in his brief
challenging the First Low-Power Rulemaking, are sufficient-
ly broad to cover at least his First Amendment challenge to
the character qualification provision and implementing regu-
lation.  His original brief asserted that the Commission "vio-

lated [his] First Amendment rights in disqualifying [him]
from holding a low power FM radio station license" and that
"[t]he [a]utomatic [d]isqualification [p]olicy [l]acks the [n]ar-
row [t]ailoring [r]equired by the First Amendment."  Pet'r's
Br. at 2, 23.  These broadly worded objections to the First
Low-Power Rulemaking are equally valid as objections to the
amended rules, as Ruggiero continues to argue primarily that
the Commission violated his First Amendment rights by
automatically disqualifying him and other unlicensed micro-
broadcasters from holding low-power licenses.  Cf. Tenn. Gas
Pipeline Co. v. FERC, 871 F.2d 1099, 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1989)
(finding jurisdiction to review claims despite appellant's fail-
ure to file new FERC petition for rehearing because most of
appellant's objections to agency's first decision, raised in
timely petition for review, were "equally valid" as objections
to agency's amended decision).

 --=====================_1549831==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 11:47:27 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18JlQk21844 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:47:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 9932 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 11:47:20 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 11:47:20 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 19:47:20 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208114652.00aa8dc0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:47:21 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] part 2b of majority > Like the prohibition at issue in News America, the RBPA's >character qualification provision raises both First Amend- >ment and Equal Protection concerns, as it restricts future >lawful speech (licensed broadcasting) and applies to a limited >class of pirates and former pirates. See 844 F.2d at 812. >True, as the dissent points out, Dissent at 1 n.1, the class of >pirate microbroadcasters is neither "closed" nor as small as >News America's single-member class, but the former class is >well defined (consisting of all pirates), and the character >qualification provision focuses on it "with the precision of a >laser beam." News Am., 844 F.2d at 814. The character >qualification provision, moreover, is far more severe than the >News America prohibition: An unlicensed broadcaster can >never lawfully operate a low-power station anywhere in the >country, whereas even under the News America prohibition, >Rupert Murdoch could lawfully have operated a television >station outside of any community in which he "own[ed] or >control[led] a daily newspaper." Id. at 803; cf. NCCB, 436 >U.S. at 800 (holding that the cross-ownership rules do not >"condition receipt of a broadcast license upon forfeiture of the >right to publish a newspaper" because even "[u]nder the >regulations, ... a newspaper owner need not forfeit anything >in order to acquire a license for a station located in another >community"). On the other hand, like the News America >prohibition, the character qualification provision is not purely >content-based, nor does it ban "a form of speech ... that lies >at the heart of First Amendment protection," as did the >prohibition on editorializing at issue in League of Women >Voters. 468 U.S. at 381. As in News America, therefore, we >find ourselves in a middle ground, sure only that the appro- >priate standard is neither NCCB's minimal scrutiny nor >League of Women Voters' intermediate scrutiny. Also as in >News America, however, we need not "exact[ly] characteriz[e] >... the proper standard," for "any that is appreciably more >stringent than 'minimum rationality' requires invalidation of >the challenged [provision]." 844 F.2d at 802. > > IV. > > The RBPA's meager legislative history suggests that in >enacting the statute's character qualification provision, Con- >gress sought to increase compliance with Commission regula- >tions in two ways: by deterring future operation of unli- >censed stations and by preventing former pirates--who Con- >gress evidently believes would violate other Commission rules >if given the opportunity--from obtaining licenses. See H.R. >Rep. No. 106-567, at 8 (2000) ("[O]peration of an unlicensed >station demonstrates a lack of commitment to follow the basic >rules and regulations which are essential to having a broad- >cast service that serves the public."); 146 Cong. Rec. S613- >S626 (2000) (statement of Senator Gregg) (arguing that per- >mitting pirates to obtain low-power licenses would "reinforce >their unlawful behavior and encourage[ ] future illegal activity >by opening the door to new unauthorized broadcasters"); see >also Resp'ts' Br. at 7-8 ("[T]he statute ... is reasonably >designed to avoid licensing those whose past conduct por- >tends future unlawful behavior."). Accepting the legitimacy >of this broad goal, we nevertheless believe that the character >qualification provision suffers from the same defect that >doomed the statute challenged in News America: The provi- >sion "bears only the most strained relationship to [its ostensi- >ble] purpose." 844 F.2d at 814. > > To begin with, the provision is "astonishingly underinclu- >sive," id. at 814, excluding some "conduct that seems indistin- >guishable in terms of [the] ostensible purpose" of increasing >regulatory compliance, id. at 805. Specifically, the provision >bans low-power license applications only from broadcasters >who have operated without a license, leaving the Commission >free to evaluate applications from anyone else under its >preexisting, more permissive character qualification policy. >See Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broad. Li- >censing, 102 F.C.C.2d 1179, 1229 (1986), recon. granted in >part and denied in part, 1 F.C.C. Rcd. 421 (1986). As a >result, civil wrongdoers, felons, and even inveterate regulato- >ry violators other than pirates, retain the opportunity to >demonstrate that notwithstanding their offenses, they can >reliably operate microbroadcast stations in the public interest. >In Modesto Broadcast Group, for example, the Commission >considered a license application filed by a station whose >general manager had operated with relatively high, night- >time-authorized power during the day, risking interference >with other stations. 7 F.C.C. Rcd. 3404, 3422 (1992). The >Commission ultimately rejected the application, but only after >considering such factors as the willfulness, duration, and >timing of the general manager's violations--factors that the >RBPA prohibits the Commission from considering in cases >involving pirates who seek microbroadcast licenses. See id.; >see also Alessandro Broad. Co., 99 F.C.C.2d 1, 11 n.13 (1984) >(refusing to disqualify applicant for new broadcast station >permit even though applicant's controlling shareholder had >been convicted of second degree murder because "the crime >was an isolated event that occurred in the remote past and >the state authorities ... [had] determined officially that [the >shareholder was] rehabilitated," so there was "no predictive >nexus between his past crime and his current and future >fitness to be a Commission licensee"); Teleprompter Cable >Sys., Inc., 40 F.C.C.2d 1027, 1028 (1973) (noting that "viola- >tions of Federal antitrust laws are not absolutely disqualify- >ing, but are a circumstance from which the Commission may >draw inferences as to probable future conduct"). Moreover, >the Commission may still grant full-power licenses to stations >affiliated with former unlicensed broadcasters. Neither Con- >gress nor the Commission has articulated any justification for >this double standard. If former misconduct portends non- >compliance with Commission regulations, why shouldn't for- >mer violators of any relevant federal law or regulation be >ineligible to apply for any broadcast license? > > Of course, "Congress ordinarily need not address a per- >ceived problem"--here, the possibility of future regulatory >violations by past wrongdoers--"all at once," but we have >rejected this "facile one-bite-at-a-time explanation" for other- >wise inexplicable underinclusiveness in "rules affecting impor- >tant First Amendment values." News Am., 844 F.2d at 815. >Our dissenting colleague omits the latter half of this quoted >passage, arguing that even in the First Amendment context, >Congress may "permissibly tackle a single part of a perceived >problem ... through a statute ... which is neither overinclu- >sive nor underinclusive." Dissent at 2 & n.2. But the >RBPA's underinclusiveness (and indeed its overinclusiveness, > >too, as we discuss below) is the precise issue at hand. The >dissent's argument proves too much, relabeling any perceived >underinclusiveness as a permissible attempt to address "a >single part of a perceived problem." Dissent at 2 n.2. > > The character qualification provision is poorly aimed for >another reason: It covers circumstances only marginally re- >lated to the purpose of increasing regulatory compliance. >For example, the provision bans applications from former >unlicensed operators who violated the licensing requirement >only briefly or long ago; from operators who have since >exhibited, in whatever manner, an ability to abide by federal >laws and regulations; from operators who plan to serve only >as members of a multi-member board, rather than as presi- >dent or CEO of an applicant station; from operators who >shut down immediately upon receiving a Commission order to >do so; and, most tellingly, from operators who were unaware >of the licensing requirement at the time of the violation. >Again, neither Congress nor the Commission has explained >how a restriction that ignores such factors accurately targets >those former pirates who pose a real risk of future malfea- >sance. > > These examples of the character qualification provision's >under- and overinclusiveness are particularly troubling given >the ready availability of a less restrictive and better aimed >alternative: the analogous provision in the First Low-Power >Rulemaking, which allowed for the possibility of waiver in >certain circumstances and applied only to former pirates who >continued to operate in spite of a Commission request to shut >down. Cf. NCCB, 436 U.S. at 802 n.20 ("The reasonableness >of the [challenged cross-ownership] regulations as a means of >achieving diversification is underscored by the fact that waiv- >ers are potentially available from ... [the] rules in cases in >which a broadcast station and a co-located daily newspaper >cannot survive whithout common ownership."); also News >Am., 844 F.2d at 814 (questioning Congress's chosen ap- >proach to the identified problem of "temporary waivers >'creeping' into permanence" and suggesting alternative legis- >lative solutions). Though potentially still underinclusive, such >a limited restriction would not only permit the Commission to >grant a license to rehabilitated former pirates, but more >accurately identify likely future rule-breakers. Indeed, > >adopting this limited regulatory restriction in the first place, >the Commission rejected the very per se ban that Congress >has now enacted, see First Low-Power Rulemaking, 15 >F.C.C. Rcd. at 2225-26, reasoning that "[t]he reliability as >licensees of parties who ... illegally operated for a time but >... ceased operation after being advised of an enforcement >action ... is not necessarily as suspect" as that of "[p]arties >who persist[ed] in unlawful operation after the Commission >[took] ... enforcement actions," Low-Power Proposal, 14 >F.C.C. Rcd. at 2498. > > Overall, therefore, we find the character qualification provi- >sion so poorly aimed at maximizing future compliance with >broadcast laws and regulations as to "raise[ ] a suspicion" >that perhaps Congress's "true" objective was not to increase >regulatory compliance, but to penalize microbroadcasters' >"message." News Am., 844 F.2d at 805. Indeed, Ruggiero >expressly alleges viewpoint discrimination, pointing to state- >ments in the record that suggest many former pirates violat- >ed the licensing requirement solely because they questioned >the constitutionality of the now-defunct microbroadcasting >ban and viewed their piracy as "civil disobedience." See, e.g., >Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., Comment of Civil Rights >Orgs., reprinted in J.A. 325 ("[O]ne who broadcasts openly, >willingly accepting that the government will attempt to shut >her station down, is engaging in an act of civil disobedi- >ence."); Creation of Low Power Radio Serv., Comment of >Professor Robert McChesney, reprinted in J.A. 339 ("The >tremendous demand for microradio is demonstrated by the >emergence of a national Free Radio Movement, widespread >civil disobedience, ... as well as the proliferation of unli- >censed community radio stations ... whose operators broad- >cast at the risk of financial losses, seizure of property, arrest, >and in some cases, imprisonment."). We need neither en- >dorse the pirates' tactics--in fact, in Grid Radio, slip op. at >11-12, __ F.3d __, (also issued today), we reject an argument >that penalizing microbroadcasting piracy violates the First >Amendment--nor believe the RBPA discriminates against >pirates' "message" to conclude, as we did in News America, >that the provision's inaccurate aim is fatal. > > We emphasize that this result does not leave Congress and >the Commission powerless to bar some past pirates from >applying for licenses. While that might well be the outcome >were we applying intermediate scrutiny, we read News Amer- >ica's more permissive standard as leaving ample room for a >carefully aimed licensing restriction. Indeed, the Commis- >sion already has authority under its general character qualifi- >cation provision to deny licenses to individual pirates who, in >the Commission's considered judgment, have demonstrated >an inability to "comply with the Communications Act and >[Commission] rules and policies." Policy Regarding Charac- >ter Qualifications in Broad. Licensing, 102 F.C.C.2d at 1183. >Even under the News America standard, however, we cannot >sanction an automatic and permanent restriction on unli- >censed broadcasters' future lawful speech without under- >standing why their misdeeds warrant a penalty so much more >severe than that applied to any other misconduct. Yet nei- >ther the RBPA itself, nor the legislative history, nor the >record in this case provides a satisfactory explanation. We >thus have no choice but to declare the statute and the >Commission's implementing regulation unconstitutional. > > V. > > The petition for review is granted, the Second Low-Power >Rulemaking is vacated, and this matter is remanded to the >Commission for further proceedings not inconsistent with this >opinion. > > So ordered. > From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 11:47:30 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18JlPk21839 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:47:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 9913 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 11:47:18 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 11:47:18 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 19:47:18 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208114554.03c22b40@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 11:46:41 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] part 2a of majority > Standing > > In support of its argument that Ruggiero lacks Article III >standing, the Commission relies on two basic facts: First, >although Ruggiero once operated an unlicensed microradio >station, he is not now an applicant for a low-power license, >nor is he associated with any such applicant; and second, >Ruggiero is a resident of New York City where, all concede, >no spectrum space is available for low-power stations. In >response, Ruggiero claims that but for the RBPA's character >qualification provision, he would associate with a low-power >applicant. To support this assertion, he submitted a declara- >tion by the President of a Greenville, South Carolina station >stating that the station has applied for a low-power license >and that "[b]ut for the character qualification provisions[,] ... >[it] would offer [Ruggiero] a position on [its] board of di- >rectors." Wangaza Decl. para. 3. Because the Commission >challenges none of the declaration's factual assertions, we >think Ruggiero has established the prerequisites for Article >III standing: a personal injury (inability to become a director >of the Greenville station), fairly traceable to the challenged >action (the character qualification provision and implementing >regulation), and likely to be redressed by the requested relief >(a declaration that the provision and regulation are unconsti- > >tutional). See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, >560-61 (1992). > > We are equally unpersuaded by the Commission's second- >ary standing argument: that Ruggiero is a "poor candidate" >to challenge the character qualification provision because, >given his history of deliberate and willful licensing violations, >the Commission would be unlikely to grant him a license even >in the absence of the provision. This may be true, but it is >irrelevant. Ruggiero alleges only that the RBPA's per se ban >deprives him of the right to compete in the low-power licens- >ing process, and the Supreme Court has held that such >allegations are sufficient for Article III standing. See North- >eastern Fla. Chapter of the Assocd. Gen. Contractors of Am. >v. City of Jacksonville, 508 U.S. 656, 666 (1993) ("When the >government erects a barrier that makes it more difficult for >members of one group to obtain a benefit than it is for >members of another group, a member of the former group >seeking to challenge the barrier need not allege that he would >have obtained the benefit but for the barrier in order to >establish standing."). > > III. > > To evaluate the constitutionality of the RBPA's character >qualification provision--and, in turn, the implementing regu- >lation--we must first identify the appropriate level of First >and Fifth Amendment scrutiny. The parties agree, as they >must in view of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. >367 (1969), that the "scarcity of broadcast frequencies" neces- >sitates that "broadcast regulations receive more lenient [First >Amendment] scrutiny than ones affecting other types of >speech." News Am., 844 F.2d at 811. Going further, the >Commission asserts that under FCC v. National Citizens >Committee for Broadcasting, we should ask only whether the >challenged character qualification provision "is based on con- >sideration of permissible factors and is otherwise reasonable." >436 U.S. 775, 793 (1978) ("NCCB"). We disagree. > > To begin with, neither NCCB nor any subsequent Supreme >Court case supports the Commission's position that all "rea- > >sonable" broadcasting restrictions automatically pass consti- >tutional muster. NCCB involved both statutory and constitu- >tional challenges to Commission regulations governing cross- >ownership of broadcast stations and daily newspapers in the >same community ("the cross-ownership rules"). Although the >NCCB Court did indeed observe that the Commission has >broad regulatory authority to "issue regulations codifying its >view of the public-interest licensing standard, so long as that >view is based on consideration of permissible factors and is >otherwise reasonable," it made that statement when describ- >ing the Commission's mandate under the Communications >Act. 436 U.S. at 793. Turning to the petitioner's First >Amendment arguments, the Court indicated only that regula- >tion of broadcast frequencies is permissible if the regulation >is content-neutral and preserves "the interests of the 'people >as a whole ... in free speech.' " Id. at 800 (quoting Red Lion >Broad. Co., 395 U.S. at 390). Concluding that the challenged >cross-ownership regulations meet both requirements, the >Court found the regulations "a reasonable means of promot- >ing the public interest in diversified mass communications." >Id. at 802. The Court expressly distinguished broadcast >regulations that turn "on the content of constitutionally pro- >tected speech," however, and said nothing about restric- >tions--like those at issue here--that permanently limit the >speech of certain specific individuals. Id. at 801. > > Supreme Court case law since NCCB, moreover, confirms >that some broadcast regulations merit heightened scrutiny. >In FCC v. League of Women Voters, for example, the Court >used intermediate scrutiny to strike down a statute that >banned noncommercial educational stations from "engag[ing] >in editorializing." 468 U.S. 364, 366 (1984). The Court >observed that although "the broadcasting industry ... oper- >ates under restraints not imposed upon other media," restric- >tions that constrain broadcasters' choices about the view- >points presented fail constitutional scrutiny unless "narrowly >tailored to further a substantial governmental interest." Id. >at 380. > > Finally, in News America, we expressly rejected rational >basis review as the standard for evaluating the constitutional- >ity of a broadcasting restriction analogous to the one chal- >lenged here. See 844 F.2d at 810-14. In that case, we >confronted a statute that forbade the Commission from ex- >tending existing waivers of the cross-ownership rules. The >provision affected only two such waivers, both held by a >single publisher/broadcaster, Rupert Murdoch. News Amer- >ica's challenges to the provision "l[ay] at the intersection of >the First Amendment's protection of free speech and the >Equal Protection Clause's requirement that government af- >ford similar treatment to similarly situated persons." Id. at >804. Reviewing the case law, we identified a "spectrum" of >possible broadcast restrictions, "from the purely content- >based (e.g., 'No one shall criticize the President') to the purely >structural (e.g., the cross-ownership rules themselves)," and >suggested that the applicable level of constitutional scrutiny >increases with the extent to which a challenged provision >relies on the identity of the speaker or the content of the >covered speech. Id. at 812. On this spectrum, we continued, >the "prohibition at issue in League of Women Voters [was] at >some remove from pure content, as it forbade 'editorializing' >of any kind by the covered stations[,]" while the challenged >prohibition on extending cross-ownership waivers was "far >from purely structural ... as it applie[d] to a closed class of >one publisher broadcaster." Id. Concerned that "the safe- >guards of a pluralistic political system are often absent when >the legislature zeroes in on a small class of citizens[,]" but >wary of League of Women Voters' intermediate-scrutiny stan- >dard, we concluded, "[w]hat suffices for this case is that more >is required than 'minimum rationality.' " Id. at 814. Apply- >ing this heightened rational basis standard to the challenged >provision, we concluded that the provision's narrow focus on >extensions of existing waivers of the newspaper-television >cross-ownership rules--rather than, for example, extensions >of future waivers, or extensions of waivers of the newspaper- >radio cross-ownership rules--rendered the prohibition uncon- >stitutionally underinclusive. See id. at 814-15. > > Like the prohibition at issue in News America, the RBPA's >character qualification provision raises both First Amend- >ment and Equal Protection concerns, as it restricts future >lawful speech (licensed broadcasting) and applies to a limited >class of pirates and former pirates. See 844 F.2d at 812. >True, as the dissent points out, Dissent at 1 n.1, the class of >pirate microbroadcasters is neither "closed" nor as small as >News America's single-member class, but the former class is >well defined (consisting of all pirates), and the character >qualification provision focuses on it "with the precision of a >laser beam." News Am., 844 F.2d at 814. The character >qualification provision, moreover, is far more severe than the >News America prohibition: An unlicensed broadcaster can >never lawfully operate a low-power station anywhere in the >country, whereas even under the News America prohibition, >Rupert Murdoch could lawfully have operated a television >station outside of any community in which he "own[ed] or >control[led] a daily newspaper." Id. at 803; cf. NCCB, 436 >U.S. at 800 (holding that the cross-ownership rules do not >"condition receipt of a broadcast license upon forfeiture of the >right to publish a newspaper" because even "[u]nder the >regulations, ... a newspaper owner need not forfeit anything >in order to acquire a license for a station located in another >community"). On the other hand, like the News America >prohibition, the character qualification provision is not purely >content-based, nor does it ban "a form of speech ... that lies >at the heart of First Amendment protection," as did the >prohibition on editorializing at issue in League of Women >Voters. 468 U.S. at 381. As in News America, therefore, we >find ourselves in a middle ground, sure only that the appro- >priate standard is neither NCCB's minimal scrutiny nor >League of Women Voters' intermediate scrutiny. Also as in >News America, however, we need not "exact[ly] characteriz[e] >... the proper standard," for "any that is appreciably more >stringent than 'minimum rationality' requires invalidation of >the challenged [provision]." 844 F.2d at 802. From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 12:32:31 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h000.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.214]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18KWVk29529 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 12:32:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 25562 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 12:32:25 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.214) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 12:32:25 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 20:32:25 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208123223.02d9a090@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 12:32:42 -0800 To: microradio@tao.ca From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_4575986==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Today's LPFM Decision Q&A --=====================_4575986==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 14:51:47 -0500 >From: Cheryl Leanza >Subject: Today's LPFM Decision Q&A > >The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned as >unconstitutional the part of the Radio Preservation Act that prohibited >all former unlicensed broadcasters from applying for low power radio >stations. >http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200202/00-1100a.txt > > > >Q&A on the February 8, 2002 LPFM Court Decision > >Where can I read find a copy of the decision? > >It is on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit web >site: >http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200202/00-1100a.txt > > >Which law was under consideration? >The Radio Preservation Act, the Act that Congress passed at the end of >2000, (Pub. L. 106-553) which limited the number of low power radio >stations available. But, the court was not considering the part of the >law that limited the total number of stations available. This law also >prohibited anyone who had ever broadcast without a license from applying >for a low power radio station. > >Will applicants be able to apply for stations on third adjacent channels >because of the decision? > >No. This decision only considered whether former unlicensed broadcasters >(also known as pirates) could apply for low power radio stations. > >Does this mean all former unlicensed broadcasters (or pirates) can apply >for low power radio stations? > >Not exactly. The Court approved of the FCC's previous policy, which >limited applications to only those who stopped broadcasting when asked, or >stopped broadcasting by a certain date. The FCC will likely readopt a >similar rule. > >Applicants from window one who were dismissed because they could answer >yes to Section III, Question 8(a) on the application should be >reinstated. It is unclear what will happen for applicants who did not >apply in windows 3, 4, and 5 because the legislation barred them from >applying, even though they could answer yes to Question 8(a). It is >possible the FCC will open a new filing window. Keep checking the FCC web >site and other LPFM web sites for more information. > >I heard the court mistakenly overturned the whole act, not just the part >about unlicensed broadcasting, is this true? > >When the court drafted its ordering clause, it was a little broad. This >is likely just an error that the court overlooked. The FCC will probably >seek clarification that the Court only overturned the unlicensed >broadcasting parts, not the rest of the Radio Preservation Act, and the >court will certainly agree. Nothing in the argument below or in the >court's decision discussed the interference portions of the Act. > >Who brought this litigation? > >Greg Ruggerio, a former unlicensed broadcaster. He was represented by >Rober T. Perry at the Center for Constitutional >Rights. http://www.ccr-ny.org/ > >-- >Cheryl A. Leanza >Deputy Director >Media Access Project > >NEW ADDRESS as of 2/1/02: >1625 K St., NW >Suite 1118 >Washington, DC 20006 > >**direct: (202) 454-5683 >main: (202) 232-4300 >fax: (202) 466-7656 > --=====================_4575986==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 14:51:47 -0500
From: Cheryl Leanza <cleanza@mediaaccess.org>
Subject: Today's LPFM Decision Q&A

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned as unconstitutional the part of the Radio Preservation Act that prohibited all former unlicensed broadcasters from applying for low power radio stations.  http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200202/00-1100a.txt
 

Q&A on the February 8, 2002 LPFM Court Decision

Where can I read find a copy of the decision?

It is on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit web site:  http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200202/00-1100a.txt

Which law was under consideration?
The Radio Preservation Act, the Act that Congress passed at the end of 2000, (Pub. L. 106-553) which limited the number of low power radio stations available.  But, the court was not considering the part of the law that limited the total number of stations available.  This law also prohibited anyone who had ever broadcast without a license from applying for a low power radio station.

Will applicants be able to apply for stations on third adjacent channels because of the decision?

No.  This decision only considered whether former unlicensed broadcasters (also known as pirates) could apply for low power radio stations.

Does this mean all former unlicensed broadcasters (or pirates) can apply for low power radio stations?

Not exactly.  The Court approved of the FCC's previous policy, which limited applications to only those who stopped broadcasting when asked, or stopped broadcasting by a certain date.  The FCC will likely readopt a similar rule.

Applicants from window one who were dismissed because they could answer yes to Section III, Question 8(a) on the application should be reinstated.  It is unclear what will happen for applicants who did not apply in windows 3, 4, and 5 because the legislation barred them from applying, even though they could answer yes to Question 8(a). It is possible the FCC will open a new filing window.  Keep checking the FCC web site and other LPFM web sites for more information.

I heard the court mistakenly overturned the whole act, not just the part about unlicensed broadcasting, is this true?

When the court drafted its ordering clause, it was a little broad.  This is likely just an error that the court overlooked.  The FCC will probably seek clarification that the Court only overturned the unlicensed broadcasting parts, not the rest of the Radio Preservation Act, and the court will certainly agree.  Nothing in the argument below or in the court's decision discussed the interference portions of the Act.

Who brought this litigation?

Greg Ruggerio, a former unlicensed broadcaster.  He was represented by Rober T. Perry at the Center for Constitutional Rights.  http://www.ccr-ny.org/

--
Cheryl A. Leanza
Deputy Director
Media Access Project

NEW ADDRESS as of 2/1/02:
1625 K St., NW
Suite 1118
Washington, DC 20006

**direct:  (202) 454-5683
main:      (202) 232-4300
fax:       (202) 466-7656
 
--=====================_4575986==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 12:47:06 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h004.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.218]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g18Kl6k32578 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 12:47:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 10657 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 12:47:00 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.218) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 12:47:00 -0800 X-Sent: 8 Feb 2002 20:47:00 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208124317.02d9b820@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 12:45:56 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Re: [NLG] we win one! appeal? (Kevi is president of the SF chapter of the NLG) >To: "Kevi Brannelly" >From: Peter Franck >Subject: Re: [NLG] we win one! >Cc: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com > >At 2/8/02 at 11:54 AM, Kevi Brannelly wrote: >>Yippy. Shall we start a pool on how long it takes for the FCC to appeal? > > >I am not sure they will. The fcc in their low power order said that any >unlicensed broadcaster who went off the air when told to by the FCC or by >a certain cut off date in early 2000 could apply. Congress overruled that, >and its that statute that was at issue in the decision. Of course it was >a different fcc, but since they are pushing deregulation, i am not at all >sure they will appeal. >In the underlying (precident setting re standard of review) case brought >by pacifica in 1982, which challenged a congressional ban on editorials by >non-commercial stations, the justice department refused to defend that law >and the Senate ended up hiring their own counsel for the case. Billy >Tauzan was one of the main backers of the law in question in the micrardio >case and he has bigger fish to fry right now. You might say we made an >enron around him. From nlgcdc-admin Fri Feb 8 18:33:33 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h013.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.227]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g192XXk91942 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 18:33:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 13222 invoked from network); 8 Feb 2002 18:33:26 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.227) with SMTP; 8 Feb 2002 18:33:26 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Feb 2002 02:33:26 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020208182633.02415140@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 18:31:22 -0800 To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_14041135==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] CDC press release on DC circuit decision --=====================_14041135==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Committee on Democratic CommunicationsNational Lawyers Guild240 Stockton Street, 3rd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94108415.522.9814fax 415.397.9801e-mail: aakorn@igc.org PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release Date: February 8, 2002 Contact: Peter Franck 415-381-9960 Alan Korn 415-397-0995 CENTER ON DEMOCRATIC COMMUNICATIONS PRAISES COURT OF APPEALS REBUFF TO BROADCAST INDUSTRY'S ATTEMPT TO SABATOGE LOW The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, early today, rejected the National Association of Broadcasters' (NAB) and National Public Radio's (NPR) attempts to silence the microradio movement, and threw out as unconstitutional a law passed by Congress to limit the FCC's Low Power FM ("LPFM") service. Alan Korn, CDC Litigation Director, states "For years microradio broadcasters tried to get the FCC to approve a low-power radio service that would address the local needs of people in their communities. After years of struggle, the FCC recognized the legitimacy of these efforts, and issued regulations authorizing the licensing of hundreds, if not thousands, of LPFM stations. But the NAB, NPR and Congress refused to leave well enough alone" Korn said. In response, the National Association of Broadcasters and National Public Radio lobbied Congress to overturn the FCC's Low Power Radio service and protect their economic and corporate interests that dominate the airwaves. Congress dutifully drafted legislation pursuant to the NAB's and NPR's request. The influence that Enron exercised over the Bush White House pales in comparison to the power that the NAB holds over the Congress. Today's decision is unquestionably a victory for the microradio movement. Today's court's decision is typified by the incredulity with which it evaluated the government's argument that Congress did not intend to regulate the content of microradio broadcasts. Rejecting the government's claim, the court suggested instead that Congress' "objective was not to increase regulatory compliance, but to penalize microbroadcasters' 'message'." This morning's decision is the culmination of the efforts of thousands of microradio broadcasters who had the courage to take to the airwaves in spite of regulations prohibiting anybody but the rich from broadcasting, and to their legal supporters: the National Lawyers Guild Center for Democratic Communications, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and in particular to Robert Perry and Barbara Olshansky. END-END-END --=====================_14041135==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Committee on Democratic CommunicationsNational Lawyers Guild240 Stockton Street, 3rd FloorSan Francisco,  CA  94108415.522.9814fax 415.397.9801e-mail:  aakorn@igc.org

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release


Date:   February 8, 2002


Contact:        Peter Franck   415-381-9960
                Alan Korn       415-397-0995


CENTER ON DEMOCRATIC COMMUNICATIONS PRAISES COURT OF APPEALS REBUFF TO BROADCAST INDUSTRY’S  ATTEMPT TO SABATOGE LOW


The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, early today, rejected the National Association of Broadcasters’ (NAB) and National Public Radio’s (NPR) attempts to silence the microradio movement, and threw out as unconstitutional a law passed by Congress to limit the FCC’s Low Power FM (“LPFM”) service.

Alan Korn, CDC Litigation Director, states “For years microradio broadcasters tried to get the FCC to approve a low-power radio service that would address the local needs of people in their communities.  After years of struggle, the FCC recognized the legitimacy of these efforts, and issued regulations authorizing the licensing of hundreds, if not thousands, of LPFM stations.  But the NAB, NPR and Congress refused to leave well enough alone” Korn said.

In response, the National Association of Broadcasters and National Public Radio lobbied Congress to overturn the FCC's Low Power Radio service and protect their economic and corporate interests that dominate the airwaves.  Congress dutifully drafted legislation pursuant to the NAB’s and NPR’s request.  The influence that Enron exercised over the Bush White House pales in comparison to the power that the NAB holds over the Congress.

Today's decision is unquestionably a victory for the microradio movement.  Today’s court's decision is typified by the incredulity with which it evaluated the government's argument that Congress did not intend to regulate the content of microradio broadcasts.  Rejecting the government’s claim, the court suggested instead that Congress’ "objective was not to increase regulatory compliance, but to penalize microbroadcasters' 'message'."

This morning's decision is the culmination of the efforts of thousands of microradio broadcasters who had the courage to take to the airwaves in spite of regulations prohibiting anybody but the rich from broadcasting, and to their legal supporters:  the National Lawyers Guild Center for Democratic Communications, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and in particular to Robert Perry and Barbara Olshansky.

END-END-END

--=====================_14041135==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Sat Feb 9 13:48:31 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h004.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.218]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g19LmVk31954 for ; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 13:48:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 24337 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2002 13:41:44 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.218) with SMTP; 9 Feb 2002 13:41:44 -0800 X-Sent: 9 Feb 2002 21:41:44 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020209134000.00a55540@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 13:42:01 -0800 To: "CDC core group":; From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] kpfa news story on ruggerio case Just did a phone interview with kpfa news, they should be doing a story on the decision, with the pacifica angle, on tonight's news, 6pm 94.1 fm in the bay area, kpfa.www.org on the web. From nlgcdc-admin Wed Feb 13 08:48:04 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h015.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.229]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with SMTP id g1DGm4k04306 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:48:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 24869 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2002 08:47:55 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.229) with SMTP; 13 Feb 2002 08:47:55 -0800 X-Sent: 13 Feb 2002 16:47:55 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020213084709.00a6cd30@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:47:22 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: [NLG] Fw: [IDOF] Poindexter Takes Over DOD Information Awareness Office >To: 9-11 post to list , nlg-interact@igc.topica.com >From: Kit Gage >Subject: [NLG] Fw: [IDOF] Poindexter Takes Over DOD Information Awareness >Office >Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:09:12 -0500 >Reply-To: kgage@bellatlantic.net >X-Topica-Id: <1013616591.inmta007.22436.1252279> >X-Topica-Loop: 700000427 >List-Help: >List-Unsubscribe: >List-Subscribe: >List-Post: >List-Archive: >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Patrice McDermott" >To: ; ; > >Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:24 AM >Subject: [IDOF] Poindexter Takes Over DOD Information Awareness Office > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/13/politics/13DARP.html > > > > February 13, 2002 > > > > Chief Takes Over New Agency to Thwart Attacks on U.S. > > > > By JOHN MARKOFF > > > > John M. Poindexter, the retired Navy admiral who was President Ronald > > Reagan's national security adviser, has returned to the Pentagon to direct > > a new agency that is developing technologies to give federal officials > > instant access to vast new surveillance and information- analysis systems. > > > > The Information Awareness Office, which Mr. Poindexter took over last > > month, is one of two newagencies that the Defense Advanced Research > > Projects Agency, or Darpa, created in recent months as part of the Bush > > administration's effort to grapple with new kinds of military threats >after > > the attacks of Sept. 11. > > > > The other new agency is the Information Exploitation Office and is > > intended to develop advanced computerized battlefield sensor networks to > > shorten the time between when an enemy target is located and when it is > > attacked. > > > > The Information Awareness Office will focus on what the agency refers to > > as "asymmetric threats," or nonconventional military targets like > > potential terrorist organizations. > > > > [...] > > > > Mr. Poindexter, who is 65, was a controversial figure both for his role in > > the Iran-contra scandals and for his efforts to assert military influence > > over commercial computer security technologies. > > > > With Oliver L. North, a former National Security Council aide, Mr. > > Poindexter was convicted in 1986 as part of the guns-for-hostages deal >that > > provoked a Congressional investigation. The conviction was overturned in > > 1991 on grounds that the men had been granted immunity from prosecution as > > a result of their testimony before Congress. > > > > [...] > > > > Mr. Poindexter, who declined a request for an interview on his new > > position, became closely involved as a contractor in 1995 on a Darpa > > development project code-named Genoa intended to give national security > > managers advanced personal computer networks with access to large >databases > > of relevant information. > > > > In recent weeks, Mr. Poindexter has contacted a number of Silicon Valley > > researchers looking for information on specific technologies. > > > > Several scientists who are close to the agency said he had returned to > > government service because he had a passionate concern about assuring that > > the nation's crisis managers had better computerized systems for > > communication and data analysis. > > > > [...] > > > > One component of the new computer information systems that is being > > emphasized by Mr.Poindexter's new office are "data mining" techniques > > intended to scan through vast collections of computer data, which may > > include text, images, sound and other computer data, and find significant > > patterns. > > > > "We now have so many sensors that we need new ways of making sense of the > > information we collect," said Steven Wallach, who is vice president of > > Chiaro Networks and a member of the president's Information Technology > > Advisory Committee. "How do you associate a name with a picture taken in > > Malaysia, a cellphone call in Frankfurt, Germany, and a bank transfer from > > Pakistan to Chicago? There aren't any perfect answers yet." > > > > The development of such advanced surveillance and data-mining techniques > > has raised new concerns among civil liberties groups in the United States, > > and Mr. Poindexter was involved in disputes about the government's role in > > computer security during the 1980's. > > > > [...] > > > > As national security adviser, Mr. Poindexter was involved with a Reagan > > administration initiative in 1984 known as National Security Decision > > Directive, N.S.D.D.-145, which gave intelligence agencies broad authority > > to examine computer databases for "sensitive but unclassified >information." > > > > > > In a later memorandum, Mr. Poindexter expanded this authority to give the > > military responsibility for all computer and communications security for > > the federal government and private industry. > > > > [...] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > In_Defense_of_Freedom mailing list > > In_Defense_of_Freedom@mailman.epic.org > > https://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/in_defense_of_freedom > >==^================================================================ >This email was sent to: pfranck@culturelaw.com > >EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifD.aVxUD2 >Or send an email to: nlg-interact-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com > >T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! >http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register >==^================================================================ From nlgcdc-admin Wed Mar 20 10:01:50 2002 Received: from pimout6-int.prodigy.net (pimout6-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.99]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.11.6/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g2KI1nR10830 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 10:01:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from alan.igc.org (adsl-209-76-222-163.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [209.76.222.163]) by pimout6-int.prodigy.net (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g2KI1lr101346 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2002 13:01:48 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20020320100149.01de0760@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 10:01:55 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: re: FCC exemption of Cable ISPs >Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:35:33 -0500 >Reply-To: roundtable@cni.org >Sender: owner-roundtable@cni.org >From: "W. Curtiss Priest" >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: re: FCC exemption of Cable ISPs >X-To: "List, Cyberspace Society" , > "List, Telecom Policy - NorthEast list" , >X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04 (Win16; I) > >GROUPS PLAN LAWSUIT AGAINST FCC CABLE MODEM RULING >Issue: Broadband >In response to last week's FCC ruling exempting cable ISPs from being >required to open their networks to competitors, several consumer groups >and >Internet service providers are considering a lawsuit. Although the >groups >are considering other options, Media Access Project Deputy Director >Cheryl >Leanza said that a lawsuit protesting the FCC ruling is highly likely. >Media >Access Project is joined by the Center for Digital Democracy, the >Consumer >Federation of America and some unidentified ISPs. The FCCs decision >classified cable ISPs as "information services" rather than >"telecommunications services." Telecom services are required by law to >offer >network access to competitors. Information services are not required to >open >their networks. FCC Chairman Michael Powell spoke in favor of the >ruling, >noting that the FCC needs to spur more broadband investment. Those >against >the ruling, including FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, argue that the >move >would benefit dominant providers, create great uncertainty in the >broadband >market and limit consumer choice. >[SOURCE: Newsbytes; AUTHOR: Robert MacMillan] >(http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/175267.html) > >[Source: Benton.org] >-- > > > W. Curtiss Priest, Director, CITS > Center for Information, Technology & Society > 466 Pleasant St., Melrose, MA 02176 > Voice: 781-662-4044 BMSLIB@MIT.EDU > Fax: 781-662-6882 WWW: http://Cybertrails.org From nlgcdc-admin Fri Apr 5 11:29:55 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (c003-h016.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.230]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g35JTrKf099517 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 11:29:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 16791 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2002 11:23:06 -0800 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.230) with SMTP; 5 Apr 2002 11:23:06 -0800 X-Sent: 5 Apr 2002 19:23:06 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020405112133.02e3d9d0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 11:22:24 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] some people have no sense of humor: fcc asked to intervene Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: > >rronline.com 4/5/02: > >City To Sue KQRC/K.C. Over April Fools' Prank > >The Olathe, KS Daily News reports that city officials intend to file a >complaint with the FCC against the Entercom Active Rocker for announcing >on April 1 that Olathe's water supply was contaminated. Olathe Mayor >Michael Copeland on Tuesday directed City Manager Michael Wilkes to pursue >the complaint, which alleges that morning hosts Johnny Dare and Murphy >Wells "willfully incited public panic" by reporting that Olathe's water >supply contained high levels of dihydrogen hydroxide (actually the >scientific term for water). Additionally, Olathe's city attorney has met >with a Washington-based communications attorney to explore other options >for punishment. KQRC executives told the Daily News the prank was not >intended to cause public panic, and PD Neal Mirsky tells the Kansas City >Star that he pulled the plug on the joke as soon as problems arose. > From nlgcdc-admin Sun Apr 7 18:02:21 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (h015.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.229]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g3812LKf006578 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 18:02:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 23855 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2002 17:55:36 -0700 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.229) with SMTP; 7 Apr 2002 17:55:36 -0700 X-Sent: 8 Apr 2002 00:55:36 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020407175412.028abd80@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 17:54:48 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_35861986==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: Sarah Jones' & FCC censorship Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_35861986==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >Delivered-To: activist-outgoing@mail.serve.com >Delivered-To: activist@serve.com >Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:40:42 -0700 (PDT) >From: Jennifer Pozner >Subject: [MediaAct] i wrote on Sarah Jones' FCC censorship last year >To: activist@mediatank.org >Sender: owner-activist@mail.serve.com >Reply-To: activist@mediatank.org > >just got back from the reproductive rights & social justice conference put >on annually by the Civil Liberties & Public Policy Program at Hampshire >College. it was, as it always is, an amazing event, bringing together >young womnen who organizine around abortion rights but also focus on >everything from ending the occupation in Palestine to welfare organizing, >women in prison, global trade and its effects on international human >rights as well as its effects on women's health, to youth activism... and >they seem to be really open to media stuff. i did a luncheon workshop on >media issues and people were really happy to hear strategies they can use >re. pro-feminist PR, progressive media reform, etc. (oh, and one of the >women at the conference is a DC activist who organizes around feminist >issues as well as homeless rights, HIV prevention, environmentalism and >volunteers at the DC Indymedia). most of the attendees were young women - >high school and college aged (although there were some women in their 30s, >40s and 50s there, too) -- their understanding of the interconnectedness >of all these issues and the need for multiple approaches at once really >gave me hope. > >ok, anyway, here's an article i did on Sarah Jones & the FCC last year: > >CENSORS SET SIGHTS ON FEMINIST MUSICIANS > >By Jennifer L. Pozner, for Sojourner, Sept. 2001 > > > >Feminists have long argued over the most appropriate response to sexism in >popular culture, from bigoted talk shows and demeaning music videos to >constant controversies over hate speech and pornography. Two recent >attacks on feminist musicians illustrate why censorship is not the answer. > > > >RACISM ISN'T "UPBEAT" ENOUGH FOR CBS > >On July 19, independent feminist folksinger Ani DiFranco was scheduled to >make her second appearance on Late Night with David Letterman. But, as the >Washington Post reported, producers canceled DiFranco's performance when >she insisted on singing "Subdivision," a song about American racism and >suburban "white flight" that begins: > > > >"White people are so scared of black people > >they bulldoze out to the country > >and put up houses on little loop-dee-loop streets > >And while America gets its heart cut > >right out of its chest > >the Berlin wall still runs down Main Street > >separating east side from west" > > > >DiFranco's song connects the dots between social segregation and mindless >consumerism ("we're led by denial like lambs to the slaughter/ serving >empires of style and carbonated sugar water"), and ends by daring each >individual to take responsibility for, and overcome, social injustice: > > "I'm wondering what it will take > > for my country to rise > > first we admit our mistakes > > and then we open our eyes > > or nature succumbs to one last dumb decision > > and America the beautiful > > is just one big subdivision" > > > >Not the sort of message commonly heard on network TV-- and CBS seemed to >want to keep it that way. > > > >Days before her scheduled appearance, Letterman's producers told DiFranco >that "Subdivision" wasn't "up-tempo" enough, and demanded she sing a more >"upbeat" song, "Heartbreak Even," instead. "Subdivision" was not rejected >because of its subject matter, the producers told the Post, it's just that >the love song about a stalled relationship was "preferable musically." >When DiFranco refused to make the switch, Letterman replaced her with >another band. > > > >"Subdivision" is one of the most talked-about tracks on Reveling and >Reckoning, the latest of fourteen albums the 30-year-old musician has >released on her own independent label, Righteous Babe Records. For years, >DiFranco has been pursued by many major labels but has rejected them all. >A statement on the Righteous Babe web site explained to fans why she >wouldn't simply accommodate Letterman's people: "As a matter of principle >and a privilege of her hard-earned independence, Ani does not perform >songs on demand... Faced with a choice between playing something 'upbeat' >yet apolitical or not playing at all, Ani chose the latter." > > > >It's no surprise that corporate media prefer the homogenous drumbeat of >the status quo over art that is politically challenging and unique. It's >worth noting that if DiFranco were signed to a corporate label where >profits and exposure are valued more than principle, it's doubtful the >folksinger would have been allowed to bow out of a major TV gig simply >because she'd prefer to sing a harder-hitting song. > > > >FEMINIST RAP TOO "INDECENT" FOR THE FCC > >Self-censorship like the sort practiced by Letterman's producers pales in >comparison to the broader-based suppression of speech by government >"indecency standards," an unintended consequence of which is the stifling >of voices attempting to critique indecency. > > > >At a party sponsored by Puff Daddy, feminist rap artist Sarah Jones >finally got fed up. "I was standing there like some video ho, singing >along to 'bitches ain't shit but hoes and tricks,'" she told AlterNet's >Sara Riscol. "I thought, Something has gone awry. This is not me, you >know, I disagree!" > > > >So instead of singing along to degrading lyrics, she started rapping about >them. The result is "Your Revolution (will not happen between these >thighs)," a fierce, feminist reinterpretation of the famous poem "The >Revolution Will Not Be Televised." Jones' directly references and >renounces the rhymes of some of hip-hop's most famous stars, including >L.L. Cool J, the Notorious B.I.G., Foxy Brown and others: > > > >"Your revolution will not happen between these thighs... > > Your revolution will not find me in the back seat of a jeep > > with L.L. hard as hell, you know > > doing it and doing and doing it well,you know... > > Your revolution will not be you smacking it up, flipping it or rubbing > it down > > nor will it take you downtown, or humping around > > Your revolution will not have me singing Ain't no nigger like the one I got > > Your revolution will not be you sending me for no drip drip V.D. shot... > > or me giving up my behind just so I can get signed > > and maybe have somebody else write my rhymes... > > Because the real revolution > > That's right, I said the real revolution... > > When it finally comes, it's gonna be real" > > > >The lyrics Jones refers to in "Your Revolution" come from some of the most >well-known rap songs ever played on MTV and over the commercial airwaves, >most of which have never garnered a peep of protest from the FCC. But as >the Village Voice's Chisun Lee and AlterNet's Lara Riscol reported, when >Portland, Oregon's community radio station KBOO played "Your Revolution," >the FCC slapped them with a $7,000 fine for violating FCC indecency standards. > > > >Come again? > > > >In its ruling, the FCC said Jones' attack on hip hop misogyny contained >"unmistakable patently offensive sexual references" that "appear to be >designed to pander and shock." KBOO's assertion that the song is "a >feminist attack on male attempts to equate political 'revolution' with >promiscuous sex" and "as such, is not indecent" did not impress the FCC. >In keeping with a long history of radio censorship, the FCC stated that >though "The contemporary social commentary in 'Your Revolution' is a >relevant contextual consideration," when it comes down to it political >context is irrelevant: "the Commission has rejected an approach to >indecency that would hold that material is not per se indecent if the >material has merit." > > > >Two weeks after punishing KBOO, the FCC doled out another $7,000 indecency >fine; this time to Colorado Springs' commercial station KKMG for playing >an edited version of the Eminem hit "The Real Slim Shady" -- even though >KKMG bleeped out or removed expletives before the song aired. > > > >Government regulation of content it deems offensive is a dubious practice, >as Jones' case illustrates. When a feminist hip-hop artist presents a >challenging, progressive response to exploitative music only to find her >own manifesto derided by the FCC as "patently offensive"--and when the >commission places her political critique in the same category as music >that glorifies violent sexism and homophobia by artists like Eminem--it is >clear how ill-suited the FCC is to judge indecency. > > > >Rather than acting as arbitrary arbiters of "indecency," the FCC's time >and energy would be far better spent regulating ownership, cross-holdings, >hiring and promotions, and public-use in the media industry. The rapid >pace of media mergers has a far more wide-ranging impact on media than do >any decency standards: the larger media conglomerates becomes, the more >prone they are to promote offensive yet lucrative media personalities from >lewd and scatalogical morning shock jocks to musical provocateurs like >Eminem, who attract the young male demographic demanded by advertisers. >Yet the FCC's interest in regulating corporate control of the public >airwaves seems to be at an all-time low. FCC chair Michael Powell has >advocated a deregulatory strategy that would likely remove the remaining >legal limits on media consolidation. > > > >By penalizing KBOO, the government is punishing an attempt to respond to >offensive speech with more speech. Sarah Jones' critique is likely to be >a more effective response than censorship to violent and misogynist lyrics >like Eminem's--but if the FCC fails to uphold its mandate of maintaining a >diversity of voices on the public airwaves, there will be fewer and fewer >places where such a critique is likely to be heard. > >Bio: Jennifer L. Pozner once sang (incredibly off-key) on stage with Ani >DiFranco. For a FAIR action alert by Peter Hart with FCC contact >information: www.fair.org/activism/fcc-decency.html. To hear Ani DiFranco >sing "Subdivision" live on Democracy Now!: >www.webactive.com/pacifica/demnow/dn20010504.html. To hear "Your >Revolution": >www.airbubble.com/your_revolution.html. > > > > > > >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax --=====================_35861986==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Delivered-To: activist-outgoing@mail.serve.com
Delivered-To: activist@serve.com
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 17:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jennifer Pozner <jennpozner@yahoo.com>
Subject: [MediaAct] i wrote on Sarah Jones' FCC censorship last=20 year
To: activist@mediatank.org
Sender: owner-activist@mail.serve.com
Reply-To: activist@mediatank.org

just got back from the reproductive rights & social justice conference put on annually by the Civil Liberties & Public Policy Program at Hampshire College. it was, as it always is, an amazing event, bringing together young womnen who organizine around abortion rights but also focus on everything from ending the occupation in Palestine to welfare organizing, women in prison, global trade and its effects on international human rights as well as its effects on women's health, to youth activism... and they seem to be really open to media stuff. i did a luncheon workshop on media issues and people were really happy to hear strategies they can use re. pro-feminist PR, progressive media reform, etc.  (oh, and one of the women at the conference is a DC activist who organizes around feminist issues as well as homeless rights, HIV prevention, environmentalism and volunteers at the DC Indymedia).  most of the attendees were young women - high school and college aged (although there were some women in their 30s, 40s and 50s there, too)  -- their understanding of the interconnectedness of all these issues and the need for multiple approaches at once really gave me hope. 

ok, anyway, here's an article i did on Sarah Jones & the FCC last year:

CENSORS SET SIGHTS ON FEMINIST MUSICIANS

By Jennifer L. Pozner, for Sojourner, Sept. 2001

 

Feminists have long argued over the most appropriate response to sexism in popular culture, from bigoted talk shows and demeaning music videos to constant controversies over hate speech and pornography. Two recent attacks on feminist musicians illustrate why censorship is not the answer.

 

RACISM ISN'T "UPBEAT" ENOUGH FOR CBS

On July 19, independent feminist folksinger Ani DiFranco was scheduled to make her second appearance on Late Night with David Letterman. But, as the Washington Post reported, producers canceled DiFranco's performance when she insisted on singing "Subdivision," a song about American racism and suburban "white flight" that begins:

 

"White people are so scared of black people

they bulldoze out to the country

and put up houses on little loop-dee-loop streets

And while America gets its heart cut

right out of its chest

the Berlin wall still runs down Main Street

separating east side from west"

 

DiFranco's song connects the dots between social segregation and mindless consumerism ("we're led by denial like lambs to the slaughter/ serving empires of style and carbonated sugar water"), and ends by daring each individual to take responsibility for, and overcome, social injustice:

 "I'm wondering what it will take

 for my country to rise

 first we admit our mistakes

 and then we open our eyes

 or nature succumbs to one last dumb decision

 and America the beautiful

 is just one big subdivision"

 

Not the sort of message commonly heard on network TV-- and CBS seemed to want to keep it that way.

 

Days before her scheduled appearance, Letterman's producers told DiFranco that "Subdivision" wasn't "up-tempo" enough, and demanded she sing a more =93upbeat=94 song, "Heartbreak Even," instead. =93Subdivision=94 was not rejected because of its subject matter, the producers told the Post, it's just that the love song about a stalled relationship was "preferable musically." When DiFranco refused to make the switch, Letterman replaced her with another band.

 

"Subdivision" is one of the most talked-about tracks on Reveling and Reckoning, the latest of fourteen albums the 30-year-old musician has released on her own independent label, Righteous Babe Records. For years, DiFranco has been pursued by many major labels but has rejected them all. A statement on the Righteous Babe web site explained to fans why she wouldn't simply accommodate Letterman's people: "As a matter of principle and a privilege of her hard-earned independence, Ani does not perform songs on demand... Faced with a choice between playing something 'upbeat' yet apolitical or not playing at all, Ani chose the latter."

 

It's no surprise that corporate media prefer the homogenous drumbeat of the status quo over art that is politically challenging and unique. It=92s worth noting that if DiFranco were signed to a corporate label where profits and exposure are valued more than principle, it's doubtful the folksinger would have been allowed to bow out of a major TV gig simply because she'd prefer to sing a harder-hitting song.

 

FEMINIST RAP TOO "INDECENT" FOR THE FCC

Self-censorship like the sort practiced by Letterman's producers pales in comparison to the broader-based suppression of speech by government "indecency standards," an unintended consequence of which is the stifling of voices attempting to critique indecency.

 

At a party sponsored by Puff Daddy, feminist rap artist Sarah Jones finally got fed up. =93I was standing there like some video ho, singing along to =91bitches ain=92t shit but hoes and tricks,=92=94 she told AlterNe= t=92s Sara Riscol. =93I thought, Something has gone awry. This is not me, you know, I disagree!=94

 

So instead of singing along to degrading lyrics, she started rapping about them. The result is "Your Revolution (will not happen between these thighs)," a fierce, feminist reinterpretation of the famous poem "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised." Jones' directly references and renounces the rhymes of some of hip-hop's most famous stars, including L.L. Cool J, the Notorious B.I.G., Foxy Brown and others: 

 

"Your revolution will not happen between these thighs...

 Your revolution will not find me in the back seat of a jeep

 with L.L. hard as hell, you know

 doing it and doing and doing it well,you know...

 Your revolution will not be you smacking it up, flipping it or rubbing it down

 nor will it take you downtown, or humping around

 Your revolution will not have me singing Ain't no nigger like the one I got

 Your revolution will not be you sending me for no drip drip V.D. shot...

 or me giving up my behind just so I can get signed

 and maybe have somebody else write my rhymes...

 Because the real revolution

 That's right, I said the real revolution...

 When it finally comes, it's gonna be real=94

 

The lyrics Jones refers to in "Your Revolution" come from some of the most well-known rap songs ever played on MTV and over the commercial airwaves, most of which have never garnered a peep of protest from the FCC. But as the Village Voice's Chisun Lee and AlterNet's Lara Riscol reported, when Portland, Oregon's community radio station KBOO played "Your Revolution," the FCC slapped them with a $7,000 fine for violating FCC indecency standards.

 

Come again?

 

In its ruling, the FCC said Jones' attack on hip hop misogyny contained "unmistakable patently offensive sexual references" that "appear to be designed to pander and shock." KBOO's assertion that the song is "a feminist attack on male attempts to equate political 'revolution' with promiscuous sex" and "as such, is not indecent" did not impress the FCC. In keeping with a long history of radio censorship, the FCC stated that though "The contemporary social commentary in 'Your Revolution' is a relevant contextual consideration," when it comes down to it political context is irrelevant: "the Commission has rejected an approach to indecency that would hold that material is not per se indecent if the material has merit."

 

Two weeks after punishing KBOO, the FCC doled out another $7,000 indecency fine; this time to Colorado Springs' commercial station KKMG for  playing an edited version of the Eminem hit "The Real Slim Shady" -- even though KKMG bleeped out or removed expletives before the song aired.

 

Government regulation of content it deems offensive is a dubious practice, as Jones' case illustrates. When a feminist hip-hop artist presents a challenging, progressive response to exploitative music only to find her own manifesto derided by the FCC as "patently offensive"--and when the commission places her political critique in the same category as music that glorifies violent sexism and homophobia by artists like Eminem--it is clear how ill-suited the FCC is to judge indecency.

 

Rather than acting as arbitrary arbiters of "indecency," the FCC's time and energy would be far better spent regulating ownership, cross-holdings, hiring and promotions, and public-use in the media industry. The rapid pace of media mergers has a far more wide-ranging impact on media than do any decency standards: the larger media conglomerates becomes, the more prone they are to promote offensive yet lucrative media personalities from lewd and scatalogical morning shock jocks to musical provocateurs like Eminem, who attract the young male demographic demanded by advertisers. Yet the FCC's interest in regulating corporate control of the public airwaves seems to be at an all-time low. FCC chair Michael Powell has advocated a deregulatory strategy that would likely remove the remaining legal limits on media consolidation.

 

By penalizing KBOO, the government is punishing an attempt to respond  to offensive speech with more speech.  Sarah Jones' critique is likely to be a more effective response than censorship to violent and misogynist lyrics like Eminem's--but if the FCC fails to uphold its mandate of maintaining a diversity of voices on the public airwaves, there will be fewer and fewer places where such a critique is likely to be heard.

Bio: Jennifer L. Pozner once sang (incredibly off-key) on stage with Ani DiFranco. For a FAIR action alert by Peter Hart with FCC contact information: www.fair.org/activism/fcc-decency.html. To hear Ani DiFranco sing "Subdivision" live on Democracy Now!: www.webactive.com/pacifica/demnow/dn20010504.html. To hear "Your Revolution": www.airbubble.com/= your_revolution.html.

 



Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
--=====================_35861986==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Thu Apr 25 07:48:57 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (h016.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.230]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g3PEmvmL078800 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:48:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 19525 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2002 07:42:10 -0700 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.230) with SMTP; 25 Apr 2002 07:42:10 -0700 X-Sent: 25 Apr 2002 14:42:10 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020425072630.02af2620@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:26:40 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: [MRN] Bill Moyers this Friday Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: >Delivered-To: microradio-outgoing@lists.tao.ca >X-Sender: @mail.earthlink.net (Unverified) >Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 22:47:59 -0700 >To: microradio@lists.tao.ca >From: beatradio@beatworld.com >Subject: [MRN] Bill Moyers this Friday >Sender: worker-microradio@lists.tao.ca >Reply-To: microradio@lists.tao.ca > >from allaccess.com 4/24/02: > >This week's episode of "NOW" WITH BILL MOYERS, to air FRIDAY (4/26) at 9p >on PBS, will feature a report on current radio industry business practices >and why some critics suggest the variety of music available for listeners >has sharply declined over the past decade. BILL plans on discussing the >CLEAR CHANNEL empire and will welcome producer T BONE BURNETT into the >studio for his take on the current radio scene. > > > >Alan Freed >Beat Radio >Minneapolis >http://www.beatworld.com > > >========================================= >The Microradio Network >--- >To unsubscribe send a message to: majordomo@lists.tao.ca >In the message body, type: unsubscribe microradio >========================================= > From nlgcdc-admin Fri May 31 08:15:48 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (h000.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.214]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g4VFFlC1004499 for ; Fri, 31 May 2002 08:15:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 7329 invoked from network); 31 May 2002 08:09:00 -0700 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.214) with SMTP; 31 May 2002 08:09:00 -0700 X-Sent: 31 May 2002 15:09:00 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020531080646.00a30110@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 08:08:45 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_1147354==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Internet "protection" law held unconstitutional Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_1147354==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Judges Toss Out Online Porn Law Fri May 31,10:25 AM ET By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writer PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Public libraries cannot be forced to use Internet filters designed to block pornography, three federal judges said Friday in overturning a new federal law. In a 195-page decision, the judges said the Children's Internet Protection Act went too far because the filters can also block access to sites that contain protected speech. "Any public library that adheres to CIPA's conditions will necessarily restrict patrons' access to a substantial amount of protected speech in violation of the First Amendment," the judges wrote. The law, signed by President Clinton (news - web sites) in 2000, would have required public libraries to install the filters by July 1 or risk losing federal funding. It had been widely criticized by First Amendment groups. "There is no correction to the law that can be made here to save it," said Stefan Presser, the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites)'s legal director in Pennsylvania. "The technology cannot block simply obscene speech, or speech that is harmful to minors, without blocking an enormous amount of speech that is constitutionally protected." The judges, who heard nearly two weeks of testimony in April, wrote that they were concerned that library patrons who wanted to view sites blocked by filtering software might be embarrassed or lose their right to remain anonymous because they would have to ask permission to have the sites unblocked. A message left for a Justice Department (news - web sites) spokesman was not immediately returned Friday. Any appeal of the decision by 3rd U.S. Circuit Judge Edward R. Becker and U.S. District judges John P. Fullam and Harvey Bartle III would go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites). The decision was applauded by the American Library Association and the ACLU, which contended the law was unenforceable, unconstitutional, vague and overbroad. They argued it denied poor people without home computers the same access to information as their wealthier neighbors because the software could mistakenly block Web sites on issues such as breast cancer (news - web sites) and homosexuality. Justice Department lawyers argued that Internet smut is so pervasive that protections are necessary to keep it away from youngsters, and that the law simply calls for libraries to use the same care in selecting online content that they use for books and magazines. They also pointed out that libraries could turn down the federal funding if they want to provide unfiltered Web access. The Children's Internet Protection Act was the third anti-Internet-porn law brought before federal judges for constitutional challenges. The 1996 Communications Decency Act made it a crime to put adult-oriented material online where children can find it. It was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The 1998 Child Online Protection Act required Web sites to collect a credit card number or other proof of age before allowing Internet users to view material deemed "harmful to minors." The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) barred enforcement of that law, saying the standards were so broad and vague that the law was probably unconstitutional. The Supreme Court partially upheld the law in May, but did not rule on its constitutionality as a whole. It remains on hold for further action in lower courts. ___ --=====================_1147354==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Judges Toss Out Online Porn Law
Fri May 31,10:25 AM ET
By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writer

PHILADELPHIA (AP) - Public libraries cannot be forced to use Internet filters designed to block pornography, three federal judges said Friday in overturning a new federal law.

 
In a 195-page decision, the judges said the Children's Internet Protection Act went too far because the filters can also block access to sites that contain protected speech.

"Any public library that adheres to CIPA's conditions will necessarily restrict patrons' access to a substantial amount of protected speech in violation of the First Amendment," the judges wrote.

The law, signed by President Clinton (news - web sites) in 2000, would have required public libraries to install the filters by July 1 or risk losing federal funding. It had been widely criticized by First Amendment groups.

"There is no correction to the law that can be made here to save it," said Stefan Presser, the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites)'s legal director in Pennsylvania. "The technology cannot block simply obscene speech, or speech that is harmful to minors, without blocking an enormous amount of speech that is constitutionally protected."

The judges, who heard nearly two weeks of testimony in April, wrote that they were concerned that library patrons who wanted to view sites blocked by filtering software might be embarrassed or lose their right to remain anonymous because they would have to ask permission to have the sites unblocked.

A message left for a Justice Department (news - web sites) spokesman was not immediately returned Friday.

Any appeal of the decision by 3rd U.S. Circuit Judge Edward R. Becker and U.S. District judges John P. Fullam and Harvey Bartle III would go directly to the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites).

The decision was applauded by the American Library Association and the ACLU, which contended the law was unenforceable, unconstitutional, vague and overbroad. They argued it denied poor people without home computers the same access to information as their wealthier neighbors because the software could mistakenly block Web sites on issues such as breast cancer (news - web sites) and homosexuality.

Justice Department lawyers argued that Internet smut is so pervasive that protections are necessary to keep it away from youngsters, and that the law simply calls for libraries to use the same care in selecting online content that they use for books and magazines.

They also pointed out that libraries could turn down the federal funding if they want to provide unfiltered Web access.

The Children's Internet Protection Act was the third anti-Internet-porn law brought before federal judges for constitutional challenges.

The 1996 Communications Decency Act made it a crime to put adult-oriented material online where children can find it. It was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

The 1998 Child Online Protection Act required Web sites to collect a credit card number or other proof of age before allowing Internet users to view material deemed "harmful to minors." The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) barred enforcement of that law, saying the standards were so broad and vague that the law was probably unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court partially upheld the law in May, but did not rule on its constitutionality as a whole. It remains on hold for further action in lower courts.

___
 --=====================_1147354==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Thu Jun 13 10:28:47 2002 Received: from yahoo.com ([210.179.192.2]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g5DHSLC1046538 for ; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:28:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from thelawcdrom@yahoo.com) Received: from unknown (HELO rly-xw05.mx.aol.com) (244.29.155.152) by rly-xw01.mx.aol.com with local; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 23:26:52 -1000 Reply-To: Message-ID: <2278D4AF-7EB6-11D6-8149-002018A00471@966OeP6r> From: "Jerry Reum" To: Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:29:16 -0580 MiME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00A1_11D12G3I.I1343N65" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal Subject: [nlgcdc] Caution! Use of This Product Will Increase Productivity & Lower Legal Research Costs. Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: ------=_NextPart_000_00A1_11D12G3I.I1343N65 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFkb2N0eXBlIGh0bWwgcHVibGljICItLy93M2MvL2R0ZCBodG1sIDQuMCB0cmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L2VuIj4NCjxodG1sPg0KPGhlYWQ+DQogICA8bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PSJDb250ZW50LVR5cGUi IGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQvaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD1pc28tODg1OS0xIj4NCiAgIDxtZXRhIGh0dHAt ZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtTGFuZ3VhZ2UiIGNvbnRlbnQ9ImVuLXVzIj4NCiAgIDxtZXRhIG5hbWU9 IkdFTkVSQVRPUiIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IEZyb250UGFnZSA0LjAiPg0KICAgPHRpdGxl PlRoZUxhdzwvdGl0bGU+DQo8L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9keSB2bGluaz0iIzk3OEY5QSI+DQoNCjxjZW50 ZXI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iIzAwMDA4MCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0rMz5JTlRST0RVQ0lORzwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxpPjxmb250IGZh Y2U9IlZpbmV0YSBCVCI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwODAiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzM+IlRIRUxB VyI8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2k+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IlZpbmV0YSBC VCI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwODAiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzE+T04gQ0QtUk9NPC9mb250Pjwv Zm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNmb3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2Ui PjxiPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IiI+VElS RUQNCk9GIFBBWUlORyBUSFJPVUdIIFRIRSBOT1NFIEZPUiBXRVNUTEFXPzwvZm9udD4mbmJzcDsg Tk9XIFRIRVJFIElTIEEgTEVHQUwNClJFU0VBUkNIIFRPT0wmbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNmb3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2UiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IiI+VEhBVA0KTE9DQVRF UyBUSEUgU0FNRSBJTkZPUk1BVElPTiBXSVRIT1VUIFBBWUlORyZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0idGV4dC10cmFuc2Zvcm06IA0KdXBwZXJjYXNlIj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250Pjxmb250IGNv bG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIj5PTkUNCk1JTlVURSBPRiBPTi1MSU5FIEZFRVMhPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48 L2I+PC9zcGFuPjwvY2VudGVyPg0KDQo8dGFibGUgQk9SREVSIFdJRFRIPSIxMDAlIiA+DQo8dHI+ DQo8dGQgV0lEVEg9IjEwMCUiIEJHQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPg0KPGNlbnRlcj48Yj48Zm9udCBm YWNlPSJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkZGRkZGIj48aT5USEVMQVc8L2k+ DQpvbiBDRC1ST00gaXMgY29tcGF0aWJsZSB3aXRoIGFsbCBXaW5kb3dzICZhbXA7IE1hY2ludG9z aCBDb21wdXRlcnMuPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2I+PC9jZW50ZXI+DQo8L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjwv dGFibGU+DQoNCjxjZW50ZXI+PHRhYmxlIEJPUkRFUiBXSURUSD0iMTAwJSIgSEVJR0hUPSI2NyIg Pg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkIEFMSUdOPUxFRlQgV0lEVEg9IjQ5JSIgSEVJR0hUPSIxNDQiIEJHQ09MT1I9 IiM2NkZGRkYiPjxiPkhlcmUgYXJlIG9ubHkNCmEgZnJhY3Rpb24gb2YgdGhlIHRvdGFsIHJlc291 cmNlcyBhdmFpbGFibGUgT24tbGluZSB1c2luZyA8aT5UPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNm b3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2UiPmhlTGF3PC9zcGFuPjo8L2k+PC9iPg0KPG9sPg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQg c2l6ZT0tMT5FeHBhbmRlZCBTdGF0ZSAmYW1wOyBGZWRlcmFsIENhc2UgTGF3PC9mb250PjwvbGk+ DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+VGhvdXNhbmRzIG9mIEZyZWUgTGVnYWwgRm9ybXM8L2Zv bnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TaGVwYXJkaXppbmc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4N Cg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5GcmVlZG9tIE9mIEluZm9ybWF0aW9uIChGT0lBKTwvZm9u dD48L2xpPg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlZlcmRpY3RzICZhbXA7IFNldHRsZW1lbnRz PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+U3RhdGUgJmFtcDsgRmVkZXJhbCBS dWxlcyAmYW1wOyBQcm9jZWR1cmVzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+ RWxlY3Ryb25pYyBEYXRhIFJlY292ZXJ5PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9 LTE+RS1GaWxpbmc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TcGVjaWFsaXpl ZCBGaWVsZHMgT2YgUHJhY3RpY2U8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5M ZWdhbCBTdXBwb3J0IFNlcnZpY2VzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+ SW52ZXN0bWVudHMgYW5kIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZpbmFuY2U8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZv bnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TdGF0ZSAmYW1wOyBGZWRlcmFsIExhdyBFbmZvcmNlbWVudDwvZm9udD48L2xp Pg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlN0YXRlICZhbXA7IEZlZGVyYWwgTGF3IExvY2F0b3Jz PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+V29ybGQgQm9kaWVzPC9mb250Pjwv bGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+SW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCBMYXcgTG9jYXRvcnM8L2Zv bnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5MZWdhbCBQcmFjdGljZSBTb2Z0d2FyZTwv Zm9udD48L2xpPg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlVzZW5ldCwgTGF3IExpc3RzICZhbXA7 IE5ld3MgR3JvdXBzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+Q29tcGxldGUg TWVkaWNhbCBSZXNvdXJjZXM8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5Dcmlt aW5hbCAmYW1wOyBQdWJsaWMgUmVjb3JkcyBTZWFyY2g8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCjwvb2w+DQo8L3Rk Pg0KDQo8dGQgQUxJR049TEVGVCBXSURUSD0iMTAwJSIgSEVJR0hUPSIxNDQiPg0KPGJsb2NrcXVv dGU+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0rMT5XZQ0KR3VhcmFudGVlPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGk+PGZvbnQgZmFj ZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMj5USEVMQVc6 PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPg0KPHA+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD4xLiA8dT5XaWxs IFNhdmUgWW91IE1vbmV5ITwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+PGI+PGk+ VEhFTEFXPC9pPjwvYj4gbG9jYXRlcyBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIG9uIHRoZQ0KSW50ZXJuZXQg YW5kIGNvc3RzIGxlc3MgdGhhbiBhbnkgT24tbGluZSBMZWdhbCBSZXNlYXJjaCBEYXRhYmFzZS48 L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD4yLiA8dT5XaWxsIFNhdmUgWW91IFRpbWUhPC91 PjwvZm9udD48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5XaHkgc3BlbmQgY291bnRsZXNzIHVuYmls bGFibGUgaG91cnMgcmVhZGluZyBsZW5ndGh5DQpob3ctdG8gYm9va3Mgb24gSW50ZXJuZXQgTGVn YWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggb3IgYXR0ZW5kaW5nIENvc3RseSBDTEUgU2VtaW5hcnM/DQo8Yj48aT5USEVM QVcNCjwvaT53aWxsDQplYXNpbHkgY3V0IHlvdXIgSW50ZXJuZXQgTGVnYWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggdGlt ZSBieSBtb3JlIHRoYW4gaGFsZi48L2I+PC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzA+My4g PHU+SXMgRWFzeSE8L3U+PC9mb250PjwvYj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPllvdSBkb26SdCBu ZWVkIHRvIGtub3cgYW55dGhpbmcgYWJvdXQgY29tcHV0ZXJzIG9yIEludGVybmV0DQpMZWdhbCBS ZXNlYXJjaC4mbmJzcDsgSnVzdCBpbnNlcnQgdGhlIDxiPjxpPlRIRUxBVyA8L2k+PC9iPm9uIENE LVJPTSBhbmQNCnNpbXBseSBwb2ludC1hbmQtY2xpY2sgdG8gPGI+aW5zdGFudGx5IGFjY2VzcyBt b3JlIHRoYW4gPHU+MTUsMDAwPC91PiA8aT5mcmVlPC9pPg0KTGVnYWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggd2ViIHNp dGVzLjwvYj48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD40LiA8dT5JcyBDb21wcmVoZW5z aXZlITwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+RWZmaWNpZW50bHkgbG9jYXRl IHVwLXRvLXRoZS1taW51dGUgPGI+Y2FzZSwgc3RhdHV0ZQ0KYW5kIGFkbWluaXN0cmF0aXZlIGxh dywgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyByZWNlbnQgY291cnQgZGVjaXNpb25zLCBiaWxscyBhbmQgYWR2YW5jZS1z aGVldHMNCjxpPmZyZWUNCjwvaT5vbg0KdGhlIExlZ2FsIEludGVybmV0LjwvYj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9i bG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC90ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQo8L3RhYmxlPjwvY2VudGVyPg0KDQo8dGFibGUgQk9S REVSIFdJRFRIPSIxMDAlIiA+DQo8dHI+DQo8dGQgV0lEVEg9IjEwMCUiIEJHQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAw ODAiPg0KPGNlbnRlcj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogIzAwMDA4MCI+PGk+ PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGRkZGRiI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0r MT5PcmRlcg0KWW91cnMgVG9kYXkhPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvc3Bhbj48L2Nl bnRlcj4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPC90YWJsZT4NCg0KPGNlbnRlcj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBjb2xv cj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMT5TcGVjaWFsIE9uZS1UaW1lIE9mZmVyLA0KT25seSAt ICQ5OS45NSwgUmVndWxhcmx5ICQ0NDkuOTU8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvaT48L2I+PC9jZW50ZXI+ DQoNCjx0YWJsZSBCT1JERVI9MCBDRUxMU1BBQ0lORz0wIENFTExQQURESU5HPTAgV0lEVEg9IjEw MCUiID4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBXSURUSD0iMzIlIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPkZheCBDcmVk aXQgQ2FyZCBPcmRlcnMgdG86PC9mb250PjwvdT48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGk+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0r MD43NzUtNTg4LTE3MDg8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzwvdGQ+DQoNCjx0ZCBXSURU SD0iMTklIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPkNhbGwgVG9sbCBGcmVlOjwvZm9udD48L3U+PC9i Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxpPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzA+MS04NjYtODQzLTUyOTA8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4N CjxwPiZuYnNwOzwvdGQ+DQoNCjx0ZCBXSURUSD0iNDklIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPk1h a2UgQ2hlY2sgUGF5YWJsZS9NYWlsIHRvOjwvZm9udD48L3U+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJ0ZXh0LXRyYW5zZm9ybTogdXBwZXJjYXNlIj48Yj48aT5USEVMQVc8L2k+PC9iPjwvc3Bhbj4N Cjxicj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPlAuTy4gQm94IDY2MTY8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4NCjxi cj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPlN0YXRlbGluZSwgTlYgODk0NDkgljY2MTY8L2ZvbnQ+PC9p PjwvYj48L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjwvdGFibGU+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPk15IE5hbWU6IF9fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fIENvbXBhbnk6IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+QmlsbGluZyBBZGRyZXNzOiBfX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlNoaXAgVG86IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPC9m b250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+UGhvbmU6IChfX19fXylfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f XyBFLW1haWw6IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fQF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxi cj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPkFjY291bnQjIF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fIEV4cGlyYXRpb24NCkRhdGU6X19fX19fL19fX19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBz aXplPS0xPlNpZ25hdHVyZTogX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXyBOYW1lIG9u IENhcmQ6DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGk+PHU+ PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5QbGVhc2UgTWFrZSBpdCBhIEdpZnQvU2VuZCB0bzo8L2ZvbnQ+PC91Pjwv aT48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5OYW1lOiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+U3RyZWV0OiBfX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18gQ2l0eS9TdGF0ZS9aaXA6DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPHA+DQo8aHI+DQo8Y2VudGVyPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IlRpbWVz IE5ldyBSb21hbiI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMzMzMzMzMiPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTI+QU9MDQpLZXl3 b3JkOiBUSEVMQVc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJUaW1lcyBO ZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjMzMzMzMzIj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPkF2YWlsYWJpbGl0 eToNClNoaXBzIHdpdGhpbiAyNCBob3Vycy48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9u dCBmYWNlPSJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjMzMzMzMzIj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PS0yPk5vdGU6Jm5ic3A7DQpUbyBQcmludCBUaGlzIFBhZ2UsIENsaWNrIHRoZSAiUHJpbnQiIEJ1 dHRvbiBPbiBZb3VyIEJyb3dzZXIuPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8aHI+PC9jZW50ZXI+ DQoNCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFob21hIj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PS0yPllvdXIgZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzcw0KaGFzIGJlZW4gc3VibWl0dGVkIHRvIFRoZSBSZXF1ZXN0 IE5ldHdvcmsgZm9yIG1haWxpbmcgYnkgb25lIG9mPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9IndpZHRoOiA1OTY7IGhlaWdodDogMSI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFo b21hIj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPiZuYnNwO3lvdXINCnJldGFpbCBtZXJjaGFudHMsIG9yIGluY2x1 ZGVkIGFzIHBhcnQgb2YgYW4gYXNzZXRzIHB1cmNoYXNlLiBZb3UgbWF5IHBlcm1hbmVudGx5DQpy ZW1vdmU8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9kaXY+DQoNCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05v cm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9IndpZHRoOiA1OTY7IGhlaWdodDogNiI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFob21hIj48 Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPiZuYnNwO3lvdXJzZWxmDQpmcm9tIHRoaXMgbGlzdCBieSBjbGlja2luZyA8 YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnBlcm1pc3Npb25wYXNzLmNvbS9vcHRvdXQuaHRtIj5IRVJFPC9h Pi4NClRoYW5rIHlvdS48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KDQo8cCBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj48 Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJUYWhvbWEiIHNpemU9IjEiPkNvcHlyaWdodCCpIDIwMDIgVEhFTEFXLCBBbGwg UmlnaHRzIFJlc2VydmVkLjwvZm9udD48L3A+DQoNCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== From nlgcdc-admin Sat Jun 15 10:51:18 2002 Received: from yahoo.com (IDENT:nobody@[211.141.113.13]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g5FHpBC1036842 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:51:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from thelawcdrom@yahoo.com) Received: from 167.79.35.23 ([167.79.35.23]) by da001d2020.lax-ca.osd.concentric.net with QMQP; Thu, 13 Jun 2002 23:49:27 -0000 Reply-To: Message-ID: <02A26C6B-803C-11D6-8149-002018A00471@PhCittrL> From: "Jerry Reum" To: Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:51:51 -0580 MiME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00T7_69W80Z1A.A1111F22" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal Subject: [nlgcdc] Caution! Use of This Product Will Increase Productivity & Lower Legal Research Costs. Caution! Use of This Product Will Increase Productivity & Lower Legal Research Costs. Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: ------=_NextPart_000_00T7_69W80Z1A.A1111F22 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFkb2N0eXBlIGh0bWwgcHVibGljICItLy93M2MvL2R0ZCBodG1sIDQuMCB0cmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L2VuIj4NCjxodG1sPg0KPGhlYWQ+DQogICA8bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PSJDb250ZW50LVR5cGUi IGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQvaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD1pc28tODg1OS0xIj4NCiAgIDxtZXRhIGh0dHAt ZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtTGFuZ3VhZ2UiIGNvbnRlbnQ9ImVuLXVzIj4NCiAgIDxtZXRhIG5hbWU9 IkdFTkVSQVRPUiIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IEZyb250UGFnZSA0LjAiPg0KICAgPHRpdGxl PlRoZUxhdzwvdGl0bGU+DQo8L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9keSB2bGluaz0iIzk3OEY5QSI+DQoNCjxjZW50 ZXI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iIzAwMDA4MCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0rMz5JTlRST0RVQ0lORzwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxpPjxmb250IGZh Y2U9IlZpbmV0YSBCVCI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwODAiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzM+IlRIRUxB VyI8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2k+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IlZpbmV0YSBC VCI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwODAiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzE+T04gQ0QtUk9NPC9mb250Pjwv Zm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNmb3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2Ui PjxiPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IiI+VElS RUQNCk9GIFBBWUlORyBUSFJPVUdIIFRIRSBOT1NFIEZPUiBXRVNUTEFXPzwvZm9udD4mbmJzcDsg Tk9XIFRIRVJFIElTIEEgTEVHQUwNClJFU0VBUkNIIFRPT0wmbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNmb3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2UiPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IiI+VEhBVA0KTE9DQVRF UyBUSEUgU0FNRSBJTkZPUk1BVElPTiBXSVRIT1VUIFBBWUlORyZuYnNwOzwvc3Bhbj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0idGV4dC10cmFuc2Zvcm06IA0KdXBwZXJjYXNlIj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250Pjxmb250IGNv bG9yPSIjRkYwMDAwIj5PTkUNCk1JTlVURSBPRiBPTi1MSU5FIEZFRVMhPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48 L2I+PC9zcGFuPjwvY2VudGVyPg0KDQo8dGFibGUgQk9SREVSIFdJRFRIPSIxMDAlIiA+DQo8dHI+ DQo8dGQgV0lEVEg9IjEwMCUiIEJHQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAwMDAiPg0KPGNlbnRlcj48Yj48Zm9udCBm YWNlPSJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjRkZGRkZGIj48aT5USEVMQVc8L2k+ DQpvbiBDRC1ST00gaXMgY29tcGF0aWJsZSB3aXRoIGFsbCBXaW5kb3dzICZhbXA7IE1hY2ludG9z aCBDb21wdXRlcnMuPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2I+PC9jZW50ZXI+DQo8L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjwv dGFibGU+DQoNCjxjZW50ZXI+PHRhYmxlIEJPUkRFUiBXSURUSD0iMTAwJSIgSEVJR0hUPSI2NyIg Pg0KPHRyPg0KPHRkIEFMSUdOPUxFRlQgV0lEVEg9IjQ5JSIgSEVJR0hUPSIxNDQiIEJHQ09MT1I9 IiM2NkZGRkYiPjxiPkhlcmUgYXJlIG9ubHkNCmEgZnJhY3Rpb24gb2YgdGhlIHRvdGFsIHJlc291 cmNlcyBhdmFpbGFibGUgT24tbGluZSB1c2luZyA8aT5UPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9InRleHQtdHJhbnNm b3JtOiB1cHBlcmNhc2UiPmhlTGF3PC9zcGFuPjo8L2k+PC9iPg0KPG9sPg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQg c2l6ZT0tMT5FeHBhbmRlZCBTdGF0ZSAmYW1wOyBGZWRlcmFsIENhc2UgTGF3PC9mb250PjwvbGk+ DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+VGhvdXNhbmRzIG9mIEZyZWUgTGVnYWwgRm9ybXM8L2Zv bnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TaGVwYXJkaXppbmc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4N Cg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5GcmVlZG9tIE9mIEluZm9ybWF0aW9uIChGT0lBKTwvZm9u dD48L2xpPg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlZlcmRpY3RzICZhbXA7IFNldHRsZW1lbnRz PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+U3RhdGUgJmFtcDsgRmVkZXJhbCBS dWxlcyAmYW1wOyBQcm9jZWR1cmVzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+ RWxlY3Ryb25pYyBEYXRhIFJlY292ZXJ5PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9 LTE+RS1GaWxpbmc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TcGVjaWFsaXpl ZCBGaWVsZHMgT2YgUHJhY3RpY2U8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5M ZWdhbCBTdXBwb3J0IFNlcnZpY2VzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+ SW52ZXN0bWVudHMgYW5kIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZpbmFuY2U8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZv bnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5TdGF0ZSAmYW1wOyBGZWRlcmFsIExhdyBFbmZvcmNlbWVudDwvZm9udD48L2xp Pg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlN0YXRlICZhbXA7IEZlZGVyYWwgTGF3IExvY2F0b3Jz PC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+V29ybGQgQm9kaWVzPC9mb250Pjwv bGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+SW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCBMYXcgTG9jYXRvcnM8L2Zv bnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5MZWdhbCBQcmFjdGljZSBTb2Z0d2FyZTwv Zm9udD48L2xpPg0KDQo8bGk+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlVzZW5ldCwgTGF3IExpc3RzICZhbXA7 IE5ld3MgR3JvdXBzPC9mb250PjwvbGk+DQoNCjxsaT4NCjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+Q29tcGxldGUg TWVkaWNhbCBSZXNvdXJjZXM8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCg0KPGxpPg0KPGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5Dcmlt aW5hbCAmYW1wOyBQdWJsaWMgUmVjb3JkcyBTZWFyY2g8L2ZvbnQ+PC9saT4NCjwvb2w+DQo8L3Rk Pg0KDQo8dGQgQUxJR049TEVGVCBXSURUSD0iMTAwJSIgSEVJR0hUPSIxNDQiPg0KPGJsb2NrcXVv dGU+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6 ZT0rMT5XZQ0KR3VhcmFudGVlPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGk+PGZvbnQgZmFj ZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMj5USEVMQVc6 PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPg0KPHA+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD4xLiA8dT5XaWxs IFNhdmUgWW91IE1vbmV5ITwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+PGI+PGk+ VEhFTEFXPC9pPjwvYj4gbG9jYXRlcyBtb3JlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIG9uIHRoZQ0KSW50ZXJuZXQg YW5kIGNvc3RzIGxlc3MgdGhhbiBhbnkgT24tbGluZSBMZWdhbCBSZXNlYXJjaCBEYXRhYmFzZS48 L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD4yLiA8dT5XaWxsIFNhdmUgWW91IFRpbWUhPC91 PjwvZm9udD48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5XaHkgc3BlbmQgY291bnRsZXNzIHVuYmls bGFibGUgaG91cnMgcmVhZGluZyBsZW5ndGh5DQpob3ctdG8gYm9va3Mgb24gSW50ZXJuZXQgTGVn YWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggb3IgYXR0ZW5kaW5nIENvc3RseSBDTEUgU2VtaW5hcnM/DQo8Yj48aT5USEVM QVcNCjwvaT53aWxsDQplYXNpbHkgY3V0IHlvdXIgSW50ZXJuZXQgTGVnYWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggdGlt ZSBieSBtb3JlIHRoYW4gaGFsZi48L2I+PC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzA+My4g PHU+SXMgRWFzeSE8L3U+PC9mb250PjwvYj4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPllvdSBkb26SdCBu ZWVkIHRvIGtub3cgYW55dGhpbmcgYWJvdXQgY29tcHV0ZXJzIG9yIEludGVybmV0DQpMZWdhbCBS ZXNlYXJjaC4mbmJzcDsgSnVzdCBpbnNlcnQgdGhlIDxiPjxpPlRIRUxBVyA8L2k+PC9iPm9uIENE LVJPTSBhbmQNCnNpbXBseSBwb2ludC1hbmQtY2xpY2sgdG8gPGI+aW5zdGFudGx5IGFjY2VzcyBt b3JlIHRoYW4gPHU+MTUsMDAwPC91PiA8aT5mcmVlPC9pPg0KTGVnYWwgUmVzZWFyY2ggd2ViIHNp dGVzLjwvYj48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMD40LiA8dT5JcyBDb21wcmVoZW5z aXZlITwvdT48L2ZvbnQ+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+RWZmaWNpZW50bHkgbG9jYXRl IHVwLXRvLXRoZS1taW51dGUgPGI+Y2FzZSwgc3RhdHV0ZQ0KYW5kIGFkbWluaXN0cmF0aXZlIGxh dywgYXMgd2VsbCBhcyByZWNlbnQgY291cnQgZGVjaXNpb25zLCBiaWxscyBhbmQgYWR2YW5jZS1z aGVldHMNCjxpPmZyZWUNCjwvaT5vbg0KdGhlIExlZ2FsIEludGVybmV0LjwvYj48L2ZvbnQ+PC9i bG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC90ZD4NCjwvdHI+DQo8L3RhYmxlPjwvY2VudGVyPg0KDQo8dGFibGUgQk9S REVSIFdJRFRIPSIxMDAlIiA+DQo8dHI+DQo8dGQgV0lEVEg9IjEwMCUiIEJHQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAw ODAiPg0KPGNlbnRlcj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjogIzAwMDA4MCI+PGk+ PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVmluZXRhIEJUIj48Zm9udCBjb2xvcj0iI0ZGRkZGRiI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0r MT5PcmRlcg0KWW91cnMgVG9kYXkhPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvc3Bhbj48L2Nl bnRlcj4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPC90YWJsZT4NCg0KPGNlbnRlcj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBjb2xv cj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0rMT5TcGVjaWFsIE9uZS1UaW1lIE9mZmVyLA0KT25seSAt ICQ5OS45NSwgUmVndWxhcmx5ICQ0NDkuOTU8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvaT48L2I+PC9jZW50ZXI+ DQoNCjx0YWJsZSBCT1JERVI9MCBDRUxMU1BBQ0lORz0wIENFTExQQURESU5HPTAgV0lEVEg9IjEw MCUiID4NCjx0cj4NCjx0ZCBXSURUSD0iMzIlIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPkZheCBDcmVk aXQgQ2FyZCBPcmRlcnMgdG86PC9mb250PjwvdT48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGk+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0r MD43NzUtNTg4LTE3MDg8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4NCjxwPiZuYnNwOzwvdGQ+DQoNCjx0ZCBXSURU SD0iMTklIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPkNhbGwgVG9sbCBGcmVlOjwvZm9udD48L3U+PC9i Pg0KPGJyPjxiPjxpPjxmb250IHNpemU9KzA+MS04NjYtODQzLTUyOTA8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4N CjxwPiZuYnNwOzwvdGQ+DQoNCjx0ZCBXSURUSD0iNDklIj48Yj48dT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPk1h a2UgQ2hlY2sgUGF5YWJsZS9NYWlsIHRvOjwvZm9udD48L3U+PC9iPg0KPGJyPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJ0ZXh0LXRyYW5zZm9ybTogdXBwZXJjYXNlIj48Yj48aT5USEVMQVc8L2k+PC9iPjwvc3Bhbj4N Cjxicj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPlAuTy4gQm94IDY2MTY8L2ZvbnQ+PC9pPjwvYj4NCjxi cj48Yj48aT48Zm9udCBzaXplPSswPlN0YXRlbGluZSwgTlYgODk0NDkgljY2MTY8L2ZvbnQ+PC9p PjwvYj48L3RkPg0KPC90cj4NCjwvdGFibGU+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPk15IE5hbWU6IF9fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fIENvbXBhbnk6IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+QmlsbGluZyBBZGRyZXNzOiBfX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPlNoaXAgVG86IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPC9m b250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+UGhvbmU6IChfX19fXylfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f XyBFLW1haWw6IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fQF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxi cj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0xPkFjY291bnQjIF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fIEV4cGlyYXRpb24NCkRhdGU6X19fX19fL19fX19fXzwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBz aXplPS0xPlNpZ25hdHVyZTogX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXyBOYW1lIG9u IENhcmQ6DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188L2ZvbnQ+DQo8YnI+PGI+PGk+PHU+ PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5QbGVhc2UgTWFrZSBpdCBhIEdpZnQvU2VuZCB0bzo8L2ZvbnQ+PC91Pjwv aT48L2I+DQo8YnI+PGZvbnQgc2l6ZT0tMT5OYW1lOiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPGJyPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTE+U3RyZWV0OiBfX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18gQ2l0eS9TdGF0ZS9aaXA6DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fPC9mb250Pg0KPHA+DQo8aHI+DQo8Y2VudGVyPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IlRpbWVz IE5ldyBSb21hbiI+PGZvbnQgY29sb3I9IiMzMzMzMzMiPjxmb250IHNpemU9LTI+QU9MDQpLZXl3 b3JkOiBUSEVMQVc8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJUaW1lcyBO ZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjMzMzMzMzIj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPkF2YWlsYWJpbGl0 eToNClNoaXBzIHdpdGhpbiAyNCBob3Vycy48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxicj48Zm9u dCBmYWNlPSJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iPjxmb250IGNvbG9yPSIjMzMzMzMzIj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PS0yPk5vdGU6Jm5ic3A7DQpUbyBQcmludCBUaGlzIFBhZ2UsIENsaWNrIHRoZSAiUHJpbnQiIEJ1 dHRvbiBPbiBZb3VyIEJyb3dzZXIuPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD48L2ZvbnQ+DQo8aHI+PC9jZW50ZXI+ DQoNCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFob21hIj48Zm9udCBzaXpl PS0yPllvdXIgZW1haWwgYWRkcmVzcw0KaGFzIGJlZW4gc3VibWl0dGVkIHRvIFRoZSBSZXF1ZXN0 IE5ldHdvcmsgZm9yIG1haWxpbmcgYnkgb25lIG9mPC9mb250PjwvZm9udD4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9IndpZHRoOiA1OTY7IGhlaWdodDogMSI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFo b21hIj48Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPiZuYnNwO3lvdXINCnJldGFpbCBtZXJjaGFudHMsIG9yIGluY2x1 ZGVkIGFzIHBhcnQgb2YgYW4gYXNzZXRzIHB1cmNoYXNlLiBZb3UgbWF5IHBlcm1hbmVudGx5DQpy ZW1vdmU8L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9kaXY+DQoNCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05v cm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9IndpZHRoOiA1OTY7IGhlaWdodDogNiI+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iVGFob21hIj48 Zm9udCBzaXplPS0yPiZuYnNwO3lvdXJzZWxmDQpmcm9tIHRoaXMgbGlzdCBieSBjbGlja2luZyA8 YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnBlcm1pc3Npb25wYXNzLmNvbS9vcHRvdXQuaHRtIj5IRVJFPC9h Pi4NClRoYW5rIHlvdS48L2ZvbnQ+PC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KDQo8cCBhbGlnbj0iY2VudGVyIj48 Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJUYWhvbWEiIHNpemU9IjEiPkNvcHlyaWdodCCpIDIwMDIgVEhFTEFXLCBBbGwg UmlnaHRzIFJlc2VydmVkLjwvZm9udD48L3A+DQoNCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== From nlgcdc-admin Tue Jul 9 07:30:58 2002 Received: from c003.snv.cp.net (h015.c003.snv.cp.net [209.228.32.229]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g69EUwdT008072 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2002 07:30:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: (cpmta 908 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2002 07:24:14 -0700 Received: from 64.130.35.25 (HELO Peter.culturelaw.com) by smtp.telocity.com (209.228.32.229) with SMTP; 9 Jul 2002 07:24:14 -0700 X-Sent: 9 Jul 2002 14:24:14 GMT Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020709071903.0246dc40@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 07:20:01 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_1400694==_" Subject: [nlgcdc] [Fwd: [MediaAct] Advisory: ACLU to Release Report Critiquing Cable Broadband] Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_1400694==_ Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_1400698==.ALT" --=====================_1400698==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > >Media Advisory > >The American Civil Liberties Union will release a report Wednesday >examining the threats associated with increasing private control of the >broadband Internet. The study, entitled "Technological Framework for >Public Interest Architecture Of Cable Television Systems," offers >recommendations for how high-speed communications systems can be >structured and operated to preserve the openness, diversity and innovation >that have heretofore characterized the Internet. > >The study was commissioned by the ACLU in collaboration with the Center >for Digital Democracy and prepared by the Columbia Telecommunications >Corporation, a Maryland telecommunications engineering consulting firm. > >WHO: Barry Steinhardt, Associate Director, ACLU > Dr. Andrew Afflerbach, Principal Engineer, CTC > Jeffrey Chester, Executive Director, CDD > Dr. Mark Cooper, Research Director, Consumer Federation of America > >WHAT: Press briefing on open networks and the future of the broadband Internet > >WHEN: Wednesday, July 10 at 9:30 PM Eastern > >WHERE: ACLU Washington Headquarters > 122 Maryland Ave NE > Washington, DC 20002 > (across the street from the Supreme Court) > >Out of town press, please call 800.311.9402. Use the code "broadband." > >Light breakfast will be provided. > >CONTACT: Jay Stanley, ACLU, 202.715.0818 or > Mark Wahl, CDD, 202.452.9009 --=====================_1400698==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

Media Advisory

The American Civil Liberties Union will release a report Wednesday examining the threats associated with increasing private control of the broadband Internet. The study, entitled “Technological Framework for Public Interest Architecture Of Cable Television Systems,” offers recommendations for how high-speed communications systems can be structured and operated to preserve the openness, diversity and innovation that have heretofore characterized the Internet.

The study was commissioned by the ACLU in collaboration with the Center for Digital Democracy and prepared by the Columbia Telecommunications Corporation, a Maryland telecommunications engineering consulting firm.

WHO:    Barry Steinhardt, Associate Director, ACLU
        Dr. Andrew Afflerbach, Principal Engineer, CTC
        Jeffrey Chester, Executive Director, CDD
        Dr. Mark Cooper, Research Director, Consumer Federation of America

WHAT: Press briefing on open networks and the future of the broadband Internet

WHEN: Wednesday, July 10 at 9:30 PM Eastern

WHERE:  ACLU Washington Headquarters
                122 Maryland Ave NE
                Washington, DC 20002
                (across the street from the Supreme Court)

Out of town press, please call 800.311.9402.  Use the code “broadband.”

Light breakfast will be provided.

CONTACT:        Jay Stanley, ACLU, 202.715.0818 or
                Mark Wahl, CDD, 202.452.9009
--=====================_1400698==.ALT-- --=====================_1400694==_ Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="dhalleck.vcf" begin:vcard n:Halleck;DeeDee tel;fax:845 679 7535 tel;work:845 679 2756 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://deedeehalleck.tripod.com adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:dhalleck@weber.ucsd.edu note:Just because I don't like the fruit company, they think I'm a revolutioniste. Ha! --the bandit Rosario in Torrid Zone, 1940 x-mozilla-cpt:;3 fn:DeeDee Halleck end:vcard --=====================_1400694==_-- From nlgcdc-admin Sat Aug 31 23:43:36 2002 Received: from localhost.com ([61.174.203.252]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id g816hYFf000238 for ; Sat, 31 Aug 2002 23:43:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from james2000@etang.com) Message-Id: <200209010643.g816hYFf000238@agora.rdrop.com> From: james2000@etang.com Reply-To: james2000@etang.com To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 14:43:18 +0800 X-Mailer: QuickSender 1.05 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [nlgcdc] ADV: Harvest lots of E-mail addresses quickly ! Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Dear nlgcdc =2C =3CBODY bgColor=3D#ffccff=3E =3CTABLE border=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 cellSpacing=3D0 width=3D475=3E =3CTBODY=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD align=3Dmiddle vAlign=3Dtop=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E=3C=2FTBODY=3E=3C=2FTABLE=3E=3CBR=3E =3CTABLE=3E =3CTBODY=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD bgColor=3D#b8ecff borderColor=3D#0000ff width=3D=2290%=22=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3D=22Arial Black=22 size=3D6=3E =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B Want To Harvest A Lot Of Email =3B =3B Addresses In A Very Short Time=3F=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CP=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D4=3EEasy Email Searcher=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff00ff face=3DArial size=3D4=3E =3B is =3B a =3B powerful =3B Email =3B software =3B =3B that =3B harvests general Email lists from mail servers =3B =3B =3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D4=3EEasy Email Searcher =3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff00ff face=3DArial size=3D4=3Ecan get 100=2C000 Email=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E =3CFONT color=3D#ff00ff face=3DArial size=3D4=3E=3CB=3Eaddresses directly from the Email servers in only one hour! =3B=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CUL=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D2=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3EEasy Email Searcher=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E is a 32 bit Windows Program for e-mail marketing=2E It is intended for easy and convenient search large e-mail address lists from mail servers=2E The program can be operated on Windows 95=2F98=2FME=2F2000 and NT=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D2=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3EEasy Email Searcher=3C=2FFONT=3E =3C=2FB=3Esupport multi-threads =28up to 512 connections=29=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D2=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3EEasy Email Searcher=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E has the ability =3B to reconnect to the mail server if the server has disconnected and continue the searching at the point where it has been interrupted=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D2=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3EEasy Email Searcher=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E has an ergonomic interface that is easy to set up and simple to use=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3C=2FLI=3E=3C=2FUL=3E =3CP=3E=A1=A1=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial=3EEasy Email Searcher is an email address searcher and bulk e-mail sender=2E It can verify more than 5500 email addresses per minute at only 56Kbps speed=2E It even allows you send email to valid email address while searching=2E You can save the searching progress and load it to resume work at your convenience=2E All you need to do is just input an email address=2C and press the =22Search=22 button=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial=3E=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3DArial size=3D4=3E=3CI=3EClick The Following Link To Download The Demo =3A=3C=2FI=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3DArial size=3D4=3E=3CA href=3D=22http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2Fdownload=2Femail=2Fnewees=2Ezip=22=3EDownload Site 1=3C=2FA=3E =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B=3C=2FFONT=3E=3Cfont face=3D=22Trebuchet MS=22=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D4=3E =28 OR You Can Send Email To =3B =3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2Ffont=3E=3Cfont size=3D=224=22 color=3D=22#0000FF=22 face=3D=22Arial=22=3E130=4095951=2Ecom=3C=2Ffont=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3DArial size=3D4=3E =3B For More Information About =3B This Program =29=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3DArial size=3D4=3E=3CA href=3D=22http=3A=2F=2Fbestsoft=2E3322=2Eorg=2Fonlinedown=2Fnewees=2Ezip=22=3EDownload Site 2=3C=2FA=3E =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=A1=A1=3CFONT color=3D#0000a0 face=3DArial size=3D3=3E=3CSTRONG=3EIf =3B you can not download this program =2C =3B please copy the following link into your URL =2C and then click =22 Enter=22 on your Computer Keyboard=2E=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CFONT size=3D2=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000a0 face=3DArial size=3D3=3E=3CSTRONG=3EHere is the download links=3A=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CDIV=3E =3CP=3Ehttp=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2Fdownload=2Femail=2Fnewees=2Ezip=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3Ehttp=3A=2F=2Fbestsoft=2E3322=2Eorg=2Fonlinedown=2Fnewees=2Ezip=3C=2FP=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FDIV=3E =3CP=3E=3C=2FP=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD bgColor=3D#0f95de width=3D=2290%=22=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ffffff face=3D=22Verdana=2C Tahoma=2C Helvetica=2C SansSerif=22 size=3D1=3E=3CB=3EDisclaimer=3A=3C=2FB=3E=3CBR=3EWe are strongly against continuously sending unsolicited emails to those who do not wish to receive our special mailings=2E We have attained the services of an independent 3rd party to overlook list management and removal services=2E This is not unsolicited email=2E If you do not wish to receive further mailings=2C please click this link =3CA href=3D=22 mailto=3Aremoval=40btamail=2Enet=2Ecn =22 target=3D=5Fblank=3E=3CFONT color=3D#fdd32a=3E=3CB=3Emailto=3Aremoval=40btamail=2Enet=2Ecn =3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FA=3E=2E =3B=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT class=3Ddisclaimer color=3D#000080 face=3DArial=3E=3CBR=3EThis message is a commercial advertisement=2E It is compliant with all federal and state laws regarding email messages including the California Business and Professions Code=2E We have provided the subject line =22ADV=22 to provide you notification that this is a commercial advertisement for persons over 18yrs old=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E=3C=2FTBODY=3E=3C=2FTABLE=3E =3CBR=3E From nlgcdc-admin Thu Sep 19 17:04:55 2002 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g8K04sOv082109 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 17:04:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: from Peter.culturelaw.com (adsl-63-206-93-216.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.206.93.216]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g8K04oI8171532 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:04:52 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20020919170521.00a14810@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 17:05:47 -0700 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Peter Franck Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_4830878==.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] status of the RBPA Mandated Third Adjacent channel testing program Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_4830878==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Memo Date: September 19, 2002 To: Interested parties From: Peter Franck, National Lawyers Guild, Center on Democratic Communications (CDC) RE: Information from MITRE Corporation re. status of the RBPA Mandated Third Adjacent channel testing program. The so-called Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act (RBPA) which was passed in December 2000, eliminated about half of the potential LPFM frequencies which would have been available under the FCC's original set of LPFM regulations. It did this by saying that no LPFM could be licensed which was on the third FM channel up or down the dial from an existing FM station in the area (it's a bit more technical than this, but that is the basic idea). This because the NAB and NPR had claimed that LPFM on third adjacent channels would cause interference. This was contrary to several studies, including one CDC commissioned, done during the rulemaking period. The RBPA also required the FCC to contract with an outside organization to conduct tests to see if LPFMs on third adjacent channels would really be a problem. Then the FCC is to report back to Congress, and we may have a shot at getting the ban on 3d adjacents removed. That would open up frequencies at least in mid sized cities, maybe in some larger ones. MITRE Corporation, a large non-profit that does a lot of government testing has been contracted by the FCC to perform the LPFM study. It in turn has subcontracted with a consortium consisting of two other organizations to conduct the field tests. As I understand it, a field test bed (essentially a truck) is being equipped with seven types of FM receivers, ranging from cheap Walkman types up to a high end stereo receiver. The FCC has granted the MITRE subcontractor six experimental licenses at sites around the country, where a portable LPFM station will be set up. These are East Bethel, MN, Avon, CT, Benicia, CA, Brunswick, ME, Owatonna, MN and Winters, CA. (The testing is supposed to involve urban, suburban, rural areas and areas where there is minority ownership of full power broadcasters.) The receivers will digitally record third adjacent channel reception when the Experimental LPFM is transmitting and when it is not transmitting. Attention will also be paid to the impact of the LPFM signal on sub-carriers. (This relates to the congressional "concern" to protect reading services for the blind, which is normally delivered on FM sub-carriers, but in truth it seems to be a moot point since the FCC previously agreed to protect 3d adjacent channels where there was a reading service on an adjacent existing FM sub-carrier.) Interference to FM translators, which are small repeater stations which typically take a big city signal and relay it into smaller communities is also being evaluated (NPR claimed that this was their big concern). Reception will be studied at number of different locations around each of the six LPFM transmission sites. The subcontractors are to render their field test reports to MITRE by February 1, 2003. An analysis will then be made of the technical data by MITRE and a report will be made to the FCC, no later than May 31st 2003. If the technical analysis finds no measurable interference, this will be the end of the testing program. The FCC is to allow a period for public comment on the phase I results before initiating phase II, if test results seem to require phase II. In effect, if measurable interference is shown, then phase II will be required. In Phase II, there will be (1) a listener survey, and (2) an economic analysis. The listener testing will involve playing digitally recorded signals from third adjacent channel stations (recorded during Phase I) to determine whether an average panel of listeners can discern any difference between the recordings made when the LPFM was broadcasting and when it was not broadcasting. The economic analysis is supposed to focus on the issue of whether full power stations, in particular small-market and minority owned stations, can expect to lose audience and then income due to degradation of their signal (perhaps at their periphery) due to an LPFM on a third adjacent channel. --=====================_4830878==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Memo=20
Date:   September 19, 2002=20
To:     Interested parties=20
From:   Peter Franck, National Lawyers Guild, Center on Democratic Communications (CDC)=20
RE:     Information from MITRE Corporation re. status of the RBPA Mandated Third Adjacent channel testing program.

The so-called Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act (RBPA) which was passed in December 2000, eliminated about half of the potential LPFM frequencies which would have been available under the FCC=92s original set of  LPFM regulations.  It did this by saying that no LPFM could be licensed which was on the third FM channel up or down the dial from an existing FM station in the area (it=92s a bit more technical than this, but that is the basic idea).   This because the NAB and NPR had claimed that LPFM on third adjacent channels would cause interference.  This was contrary to several studies, including one CDC commissioned, done during the rulemaking period.   The RBPA also required the FCC to contract with an outside organization to conduct tests to see if LPFMs on third adjacent channels would really be a problem.  Then the FCC is to report back to Congress, and we may have a shot at getting the ban on 3d adjacents removed.  That would open up frequencies at least in mid sized cities, maybe in some larger ones.
MITRE Corporation, a large non-profit that does a lot of government testing has been contracted by the FCC to perform the LPFM study.  It in turn has subcontracted with a consortium consisting of two other organizations to conduct the field tests.
As I understand it, a field test bed (essentially a truck) is being equipped with seven types of FM receivers, ranging from cheap Walkman types up to a high end stereo receiver.  The FCC has granted the MITRE subcontractor six experimental licenses at sites around the country, where a portable LPFM station will be set up.  These are East Bethel, MN, Avon, CT, Benicia, CA, Brunswick, ME, Owatonna, MN and Winters, CA.  (The testing is supposed to involve urban, suburban, rural areas and areas where there is minority ownership of full power broadcasters.)  The receivers will digitally record third adjacent channel reception when the Experimental LPFM is transmitting and when it is not transmitting.  Attention will also be paid to the impact of the LPFM signal on sub-carriers.   (This relates to the congressional =93concern=94 to protect reading services for the blind, which is normally delivered on FM sub-carriers, but in truth it seems to be a moot point since the FCC previously agreed to protect 3d adjacent channels where there was a reading service on an adjacent existing FM sub-carrier.)  Interference to FM translators, which are small repeater stations which typically take a big city signal and relay it into smaller communities is also being evaluated (NPR claimed that this was their big concern).  Reception will be studied at number of different locations around each of the six LPFM transmission sites.

The subcontractors are to render their field test reports to MITRE by February 1, 2003. 
An analysis will then be made of the technical data by MITRE and a report will be made to the FCC, no later than May 31st 2003.  If the technical analysis finds no measurable interference, this will be the end of the testing program. 
The FCC is to allow a period for public comment on the phase I results before initiating phase II, if test results seem to require phase II.  In effect, if measurable interference is shown, then phase II will be required.
In Phase II, there will be (1) a listener survey, and (2) an economic analysis.  The listener testing will involve playing digitally recorded signals from third adjacent channel stations (recorded during Phase I)  to determine whether an average panel of listeners can discern any difference between the recordings made when the LPFM was broadcasting and when it was not broadcasting.
The economic analysis is supposed to focus on the issue of whether full power stations, in particular small-market and minority owned stations, can expect to lose audience and then income due to degradation of their signal (perhaps at their periphery) due to an LPFM on a third adjacent channel.


--=====================_4830878==.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Fri Oct 4 08:56:41 2002 Received: from localhost.com ([61.174.204.142]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with SMTP id g94Fudq4099420 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 08:56:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sony2000@email.com) Message-Id: <200210041556.g94Fudq4099420@agora.rdrop.com> From: sony2000@email.com Reply-To: sony2000@email.com To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 23:55:59 +0800 X-Mailer: QuickSender 1.05 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [nlgcdc] ADV: Harvest lots of Targeted Email addresses quickly .......................... 2002-10-4 23:55:59 Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Dear nlgcdc =2C =3Cbody onload=3D=22window=2Eopen=28'http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2F'=29=3B=22 onunload=3D=22window=2Eopen=28'http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2F'=29=22=3E =3CBODY bgColor=3D#ffccff=3E =3CTABLE border=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 cellSpacing=3D0 width=3D475=3E =3CTBODY=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD align=3Dmiddle vAlign=3Dtop=3E =3CDIV=3E =3B=3C=2FDIV=3E =3CDIV=3E =3B=3C=2FDIV=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E=3C=2FTBODY=3E=3C=2FTABLE=3E=3CBR=3E =3CTABLE=3E =3CTBODY=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD bgColor=3D#b8ecff borderColor=3D#0000ff width=3D=2290%=22=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3D=22Arial Black=22 size=3D6=3E =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B Want To =3BHarvest A Lot Of =3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3ETarget=3CFONT color=3D#ff0080=3Eed=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000=3E =3B Email =3B =3B Addresses In A Very Short Time=3F=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CP=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT size=3D4=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff00ff size=3D4=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000ff=3ETarget Email Extractor =3C=2FFONT=3Eis =3B a =3B powerful =3B Email =3B Program that =3B harvests Targeted Email Addresses from search engines=2C any specified starting URLs =2C including cgi =2C asp pages etc=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CFONT color=3D#000000 face=3DArial size=3D2=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3E =3B It Quickly and automatically search and spider from search engine=2C any specified starting URLs to find and extract e-mail addresses=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3EPowerful targeting ability=2E Only extract the specific email addresses that directly related to your business=2E=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3EIntegrated with 18 top popular search engines=3A Yahoo=2C Google=2C MSN=2C AOL=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3EFast Search Ability=2E Nearly can find thousands of e-mail addresses in an hour=2C allowing up to 500 simultaneous search threads!=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3EHelpful for anyone for internet Email marketing purposes=2E=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CLI=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial size=3D3=3EFree version updates=3C=2FFONT=3E=2E=3CBR=3E=3CBR=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 face=3DArial size=3D4=3E=3CI=3E=3CSTRONG=3EClick The Following Link To Download This Program=3A=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FI=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E =3CP=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D4=3E=3CA href=3D=22http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2Fdownload=2Femail=2FESE=2Ezip=22=3E=3CSTRONG=3EDownload Site 1=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FA=3E=3CFONT color=3D#000000 size=3D3=3E =3B =3B =3B =3CSTRONG=3E=28 OR you can send Email to =3B =3B=3CFONT color=3D#ff0080 size=3D4=3E130=4095951=2Ecom =3B =3B=3C=2FFONT=3Eto get this program =29=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CFONT face=3DArial=3E=3CSTRONG=3E=3CFONT size=3D4=3E=3CA href=3D=22http=3A=2F=2Fbestsoft=2E3322=2Eorg=2Fonlinedown=2FESE=2Ezip=22=3EDownload Site 2=3C=2FA=3E =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3B =3C=2FFONT=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000a0=3EIf =3B you can not download this program =2C =3B please copy the following link into your URL =2C and then click =22 Enter=22 on your Computer Keyboard=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3E=3CFONT size=3D2=3E=3CFONT color=3D#0000a0 face=3DArial size=3D3=3E=3CSTRONG=3EHere is the download links=3A=3C=2FSTRONG=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FP=3E =3CDIV=3E =3CP=3Ehttp=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Ewldinfo=2Ecom=2Fdownload=2Femail=2FESE=2Ezip=3C=2FP=3E =3CP=3Ehttp=3A=2F=2Fbestsoft=2E3322=2Eorg=2Fonlinedown=2FESE=2Ezip=3C=2FP=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FDIV=3E =3CP=3E=3C=2FP=3E=3C=2FLI=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E =3CTR=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD bgColor=3D#0f95de width=3D=2290%=22=3E=3CFONT color=3D#ffffff face=3D=22Verdana=2C Tahoma=2C Helvetica=2C SansSerif=22 size=3D1=3E=3CB=3EDisclaimer=3A=3C=2FB=3E=3CBR=3EWe are strongly against continuously sending unsolicited emails to those who do not wish to receive our special mailings=2E We have attained the services of an independent 3rd party to overlook list management and removal services=2E This is not unsolicited email=2E If you do not wish to receive further mailings=2C please click this link =3CA href=3D=22 http=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Eautoemailremoval=2Ecom=2Fcgi-bin=2Fremove=2Epl =22 target=3D=5Fblank=3E=3CFONT color=3D#fdd32a=3E=3CB=3Ehttp=3A=2F=2Fwww=2Eautoemailremoval=2Ecom=2Fcgi-bin=2Fremove=2Epl =3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FA=3E=2E Auto Email Removal Company=2E Ref# 01222263545=3C=2FFONT=3E=3CB=3E=3CFONT class=3Ddisclaimer color=3D#000080 face=3DArial=3E=3CBR=3EThis message is a commercial advertisement=2E It is compliant with all federal and state laws regarding email messages including the California Business and Professions Code=2E We have provided the subject line =22ADV=22 to provide you notification that this is a commercial advertisement for persons over 18yrs old=2E=3C=2FFONT=3E=3C=2FB=3E=3C=2FTD=3E =3CTD width=3D=225%=22=3E=3C=2FTD=3E=3C=2FTR=3E=3C=2FTBODY=3E=3C=2FTABLE=3E =3CSTYLE=3E=3C=2FSTYLE=3E =3CBR=3E=3CA href=3D=22=22=3E=3C=2FA=3E=3CA href=3D=22=22=3E=3C=2FA=3E=3C=2FBODY=3E From nlgcdc-admin Sat Oct 5 13:26:26 2002 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g95KQPq4022512 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 13:26:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: from Peter.culturelaw.com (adsl-63-206-93-216.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.206.93.216]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g95KQJY5245300; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 16:26:24 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021005132308.00ace5e0@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:24:45 -0700 To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_11259445==.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Convention workshop on World Summit on Information Society Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_11259445==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed World Summit on Racism: Durban, South Africa September, 2001 World Summit on Development: Johannesburg, South Africa, August, 2002 World Summit on The Information Society: Geneva December 2003, Tunis 2005. Porte Alegre or Seattle ? RADIO, TELEVISION, THE INTERNET, COMPUTERS all are becoming global systems, and all are in great danger of coming under the complete control of Western media giants. In the book, "It's the Media, Stupid," Robert McChesny and John Nichols describe the degree to which the media has been consolidated into the hands of a select group of international corporations which dominate and monopolize the industry. Late next year in Geneva, and then in Tunisia in 2005 the United Nations system will hold the "World Summit on The Information Society." (WSIS) As a forum this will be every bit as important as the summits on Racism and Development. As a decision making meeting of the powerful it will be every bit as important as the WTO in Seattle three years ago. This workshop will discuss the issues coming up at the WSIS, and how the Guild and other progressives can influence the outcomes. Media, telecommunications and intellectual property are now so inherently global that major decisions can only be made and influenced at that level. At stake in this World Summit is whether the world will accept the U.S. model of commercialized and corporate controlled media, communications, and intellectual property. The Summit is administered by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and UNESCO. The ITU is one of the world's oldest and least known agencies of Western domination, set up in 1865 to give the imperial nations of the west control of the spectrum used by the new invention: radio. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is the international body from which the Regan administration withdrew just twenty years ago. The reason for US withdrawal was that UNESCO was supporting the demands for informational and cultural self-determination coming from the countries of the global south. For the first time, non-profits and non-governmental organizations have won a formal role in this World Summit. They have a seat at the table (as contrasted to forums on the other side of town, as in Durban and Johannesburg). Already big business and western governments are trying exclude them. However, civil society organizations are mobilizing internationally to hold that place at the table and to guarantee that notions of openness, local control, spectrum and satellites space for all nations, and resources for non-governmental and non-business dominated media are preserved and created. The are fighting for national sovereignty over intellectual property (IP) issues such as copyright. If they (we) can force the ITU and UNESCO to listen to us at the table, this can be a Porto Alegre. It will also be a Porto Alegre in the sense that it will be one of the first global gatherings of media and telecommunications activists. Coming together will be people from a variety of countries who see that social justice and peace cannot come without a democratic media and IP system, domestically and internationally. If the invitation to come inside is not much more than PR, this will also be a Seattle. People will be in the streets making their demands that the Right to Communicate as enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is recognized and enforced. --=====================_11259445==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" World Summit on Racism: Durban, South Africa September, 2001
World Summit on Development: Johannesburg, South Africa,  August, 2002


World Summit on The Information Society: Geneva December 2003, Tunis 2005.

Porte Alegre or Seattle ?

RADIO, TELEVISION, THE INTERNET, COMPUTERS all are becoming global systems, and all are in great danger of coming under the complete control of Western media giants.

In the book, "It's the Media, Stupid," Robert McChesny and John Nichols describe the degree to which the media has been consolidated into the hands of a select group of international corporations which dominate and monopolize the industry.

Late next year in Geneva, and then in Tunisia in 2005 the United Nations system will hold the “World Summit on The Information Society.”  (WSIS)  As a forum this will be every bit as important as the summits on Racism and Development.  As a decision making meeting of the powerful it will be every bit as important as the WTO in Seattle three years ago.  

This workshop will discuss the issues coming up at the WSIS, and how the Guild and other progressives can influence the outcomes.
Media, telecommunications and intellectual property are now so inherently global that major decisions can only be made and influenced at that level. At stake in this World Summit is whether the world will accept the U.S. model of commercialized and corporate controlled media, communications, and intellectual property.

The Summit is administered by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and UNESCO.  The ITU is one of the world’s oldest and least known agencies of Western domination, set up in 1865 to give the imperial nations of the west control of the spectrum used by the new invention: radio.  UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) is the international body from which the Regan administration withdrew just twenty years ago.   The reason for US withdrawal was that UNESCO was supporting the demands for informational and cultural self-determination coming from the countries of the global south.

For the first time, non-profits and non-governmental organizations have won a formal role in this World Summit.  They have a seat at the table (as contrasted to forums on the other side of town, as in Durban and Johannesburg).  Already big business and western governments are trying exclude them.  However, civil society organizations are mobilizing internationally to hold that place at the table and to guarantee that notions of openness, local control, spectrum and satellites space for all nations, and resources for non-governmental and non-business dominated media are preserved and created. The are fighting for national sovereignty over intellectual property (IP) issues such as copyright.

If they (we) can force the ITU and UNESCO to listen to us at the table, this can be a Porto Alegre.  It will also be a Porto Alegre in the sense that it will be one of the first global gatherings of media and telecommunications activists.   Coming together will be people from a variety of countries who see that social justice and peace cannot come without a democratic media and IP system, domestically and internationally.

If the invitation to come inside is not much more than PR, this will also be a Seattle.  People will be in the streets making their demands that the Right to Communicate as enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is recognized and enforced.
--=====================_11259445==.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Sat Oct 5 13:26:27 2002 Received: from pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (pimout2-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.101]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g95KQQq4022514 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 13:26:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: from Peter.culturelaw.com (adsl-63-206-93-216.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.206.93.216]) by pimout2-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g95KQJY7245300; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 16:26:25 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021005132447.00acb440@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002 13:27:08 -0700 To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_11259451==.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] speakers for convention workshop in World Summit Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_11259451==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This workshop is on Sat. Oct. 19 from 3.45 to 5pm, Pacific Ballroom "C" =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Panelists: Seeta Pe=F1a Gangadharan Seeta Pe=F1a Gangadharan is co-director= of=20 the Media and Communications Policy Center at MediaChannel=20 (mediachannel.org), which connects more than 900 groups in a global=20 community concerned with journalism, communication rights, media literacy,= =20 cultural diversity and free expression. Seeta is a freelance writer, media activist and scholar, and has=20 contributed to several publications and books, including "We the Media: A=20 Citizen's Guide to Media Democracy", "SPIN Works!" and "Communications,=20 Revolution and Reform". Prior to MediaChannel, Seeta worked at KQED-TV and= =20 at Active Voice/Television Race Initiative. She has been a researcher at=20 London=92s Institute for Public Policy Research. In 1999, she helped to=20 found an independent online syndication service for youth. Seeta holds a=20 master's from the London School of Economics and Political Science and is=20 currently in the doctoral program in media and communication at=20 Stanford. Since March 2002, she has served on the Advisory Board of the=20 National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications. Prof. Dorothy Kidd, University of San Francisco, media Studies=20 Department. Dorothy Kidd has combined work as an activist producer and as= =20 a policy advocate since the 1970s. As a producer she was involved in the=20 first community TV station in Canada (her home country) as well as being=20 part of a major community radio collective. Kidd is a member of the=20 International Network of alternative media researchers: =93Our Media=94, and= =20 works with the Indy Media movement. Her work is appearing in two forthcoming books: =93Cyber=20 Resistance,=94 published by Routledge, and =93Representing Resistance=94 = from=20 Greenwood. Her previous work on international community media has been=20 published in =93A Passion For Radio=94 1992 and in =93Women In Grassroots=20 Communication: Furthering Social Change=94 1994, and in Whole Earth Review= =20 and MediaFile. Kidd also serves on the Advisory Board of the National=20 Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications. Chair and Introduction: Peter Franck, Chairperson of NLG=92s Center on=20 Democratic Communications. --=====================_11259451==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This workshop is on Sat. Oct. 19 from 3.45 to 5pm, Pacific Ballroom "C"
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


Panelists: Seeta Pe=F1a Gangadharan Seeta Pe=F1a Gangadharan i= s co-director of the Media and Communications Policy Center at MediaChannel (mediachannel.org), which connects more than 900 groups in a global community concerned with journalism, communication rights, media literacy, cultural diversity and free expression.

Seeta is a freelance writer, media activist and scholar, and has contributed to several publications and books, including "We the Media: A Citizen's Guide to Media Democracy", "SPIN Works!" and "Communications, Revolution and Reform".  Prior to MediaChannel, Seeta worked at KQED-TV and at Active Voice/Television Race Initiative. She has been a researcher at London=92s Institute for Public Policy Research.  In 1999, she helped to found an independent online syndication service for youth.  Seeta holds a master's from the London School of Economics and Political Science and is currently in the doctoral program in media and communication at Stanford.  Since March 2002, she has served on the Advisory Board of the National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications.

Prof. Dorothy Kidd, University of San Francisco, media Studies Department.  Dorothy Kidd has combined work as an activist producer and as a policy advocate since the 1970s.  As a producer she was involved in the first community TV station in Canada (her home country) as well as being part of a major community radio collective. Kidd is a member of the International Network of alternative media researchers: =93Our Media=94, and works with the Indy Media movement.

Her work is appearing in two forthcoming books: =93Cyber Resistance,=94   published by Routledge,  and =93Representing Resistance=94  from Greenwood.   Her previous work on international community media has been published in =93A Passion For Radio=94 1992 and in =93Women In Grassroots Communication: Furthering Social Change=94 1994, and in Whole Earth Review and  MediaFile.  Kidd also serves on the Advisory Board of the National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications.

Chair and Introduction:  Peter Franck, Chairperson of NLG=92s Center on Democratic Communications.

--=====================_11259451==.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue Oct 15 15:06:30 2002 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g9FM6TMM000143 for ; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:06:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: from Peter.culturelaw.com (adsl-63-206-93-216.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.206.93.216]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g9FM67nf372846; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 18:06:07 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021015145957.02624490@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: cul00001/mail.culturelaw.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 15:05:40 -0700 To: nlg-interact@igc.topica.com From: Peter Franck Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_6364574==.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] NLG's CDC issues newsletter on media activism and the law Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_6364574==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed We have just issued a new CDC Newsletter, on Media Activism and the Guild, and including more information on our workshops at the Convention. You can go to http://www.nlgcdc.org/articles/newsletter_1002.doc to read it or download it in Word format. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications (CDC) 1840 Woolsey Street, Berkeley CA 94703; www.nlgcdc.org ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_6364574==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
We have just issued a new CDC Newsletter, on Media Activism and the Guild, and including more information on our workshops at the Convention.  You can go to

http://www.nlgcdc.org/articles/newsletter_1002.doc

to read it or download it in Word format.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
National Lawyers Guild Center on  Democratic Communications (CDC)
1840 Woolsey Street, Berkeley CA 94703; www.nlgcdc.org

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ --=====================_6364574==.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue Nov 5 11:56:13 2002 Received: from pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.77]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gA5JuCVh086428 for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:56:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from Alan.igc.org (adsl-64-165-108-202.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.165.108.202]) by pimout1-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gA5Ju7Re389018 for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 14:56:08 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20021105115645.01e189a0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 11:56:57 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_4696196==_.ALT" Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: [MediaAct] extension on FCC rulemaking Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --=====================_4696196==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >PUBLIC NOTICE >Federal Communications Commission >445 12th St., S.W. >Washington, D.C. 20554 >News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 >Internet: http://www.fcc.gov >TTY: 1-888-835-5322 >DA 02-2980 >Released: November 5, 2002 >FCC'S MEDIA BUREAU ADOPTS PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC ACCESS >TO DATA UNDERLYING MEDIA OWNERSHIP STUDIES AND EXTENDS >COMMENT DEADLINES FOR 2002 BIENNIAL REGULATORY REVIEW >OF COMMISSION'S MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES >MB Docket No. 02-277 >MM Docket Nos. 01-235, 01-317, 00-244 >Comment Date: January 2, 2003 >Reply Comment Date: February 3, 2003 >The Federal Communications Commission's Media Bureau and the Media >Ownership Working Group >(MOWG) took three actions today regarding the ongoing biennial review >proceeding examining media >ownership rules. First, the Bureau issued an order extending the deadline >for submitting comments and >reply comments. The new comment deadlines are January 2, 2003, for initial >comments and February 2, >2003, for reply comments. Second, the MOWG released certain additional >information relating to the >media studies that the Commission issued on October 1, 2002. Third, the >Bureau adopted a protective >order establishing procedures to facilitate public review of the >proprietary portions of that data. >The Commission initiated its biennial review on September 12, 2002, with >its adoption of a Notice of >Proposed Rulemaking.1 As an accommodation to interested parties, the >Commission adopted a 60 day >comment period and a 30 day reply comment period. As a further >accommodation, the Commission >delayed commencement of the comment cycle until release of twelve MOWG >studies, which occurred on >October 1st. Accordingly, comments initially were due December 2, 2002, >and reply comments were due >January 2, 2003. In view of the six petitions requesting extension of >those deadlines, and given the >importance of public comment on the issues raised in the NPRM, the Media >Bureau today extended the >initial comment period through January 2, 2003, and the reply comment >period through February 3, >2003.2 >1 In the Matter of 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review - Review of the >Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and >Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act >of 1996, Notice of Proposed >Rulemaking, MM Docket No. 02-277, (rel. Sept. 23, 2002). >2 Parties are reminded to follow the filing provisions set forth in >paragraphs 169-178 of the Biennial Review NPRM, >including the requirement that the Media Bureau's Industry Analysis >Division be copied on all filings in this >proceeding made electronically or by paper. >2 >Separately, the MOWG also made available additional information pertaining >to several of the twelve >media studies released on October 1, 2002. This additional information >falls into two categories: (1) >additional information about the methodology of the studies; and (2) >underlying data or source material >for the studies. The 12 media ownership studies are listed below along >with a description of the >additional information being released for eight of the studies. For four >of those eight studies, the authors >created data sets using proprietary information licensed to the author >and/or the author's employer for >purposes excluding public dissemination. Interested parties may review and >analyze these data sets in the >public reference room at the FCC's headquarters (Room CY-A251, 445 12th >Street, SW, Washington, >D.C.) consistent with the Protective Order adopted today by the Media >Bureau. The procedures >established in that order track the manner in which public access was >permitted to proprietary information >in other Commission proceedings. Outside parties also may obtain licenses >from any or all licensors of >the underlying data to evaluate the results of the studies and/or to >develop other studies that will >contribute to the record in this proceeding. >In conducting on-site evaluation of the underlying data sets, outside >parties are invited to arrange for the >study author(s) to be present to facilitate the review of the underlying >data sets released today. Parties >wishing to make these arrangements should contact Linda Senecal of the >Media Bureau at 202-418-7044. >Interested parties are encouraged to request these meetings with >reasonable advance notice. With respect >to the study entitled "Consumer Substitution Among Media," Dr. Joel >Waldfogel of the University to >Pennsylvania will be available in the Commission's public reference room >from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on >Tuesday, November 19, 2002 to facilitate review and assessment of the data >sets underlying his study. >3 >MEDIA OWNERSHIP WORKING GROUP STUDIES >Below is a listing of the MOWG studies released on October 1st and any >additional information being >released today. >A Comparison of Media Outlets and Owners for Ten Selected Markets: 1960, >1980, 2000, Scott Roberts, >Jane Frenette and Dione Stearns, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, >Federal Communications >Commission. >This report contains a count of the number of broadcast outlets, cable >systems, direct broadcast satellite >systems and daily newspapers located in ten selected Arbitron radio Metro >markets3 for 1960, 1980 and >2000. The report also includes the collective number of unique owners of >these outlets in each city. >Compilation of data: All commercial and non-commercial television stations >in each Designated Market >Area 4 studied and all commercial and non-commercial radio stations >licensed to communities in the radio >Metro market were counted. If cable was available within the radio Metro, >it counted as one outlet and >one owner regardless of the number of separately-owned systems serving a >single metropolitan area. >Direct Broadcast Satellite was counted as two available outlets and two >owners for all ten markets for the >year 2000 only. Daily newspapers published in the radio Metro principal >city were also tallied. All data >were cross-checked for common ownership. The data sources for the outlet >measurement are available in >the FCC's public reference room. >Following is a list of the ten Arbitron radio Metro markets measured and >the counties therein for which >the data were compiled. The same counties were used for 1960, 1980, and 2000. >New York: Bronx, NY; Kings, NY; Nassau, NY; New York, NY; Putnam, NY; >Queens, NY; Richmond, >NY; Rockland, NY; Suffolk, NY; Westchester, NY; Fairfield, CT (partial) >Kansas City: Johnson, KS; Leavenworth, KS; Miami, KS; Wyandotte, KS; Cass, >MO; Clay, MO; >Jackson, MO; Lafayette, MO; Platte, MO; Ray, MO >Birmingham: Blount, AL, Jefferson, AL; St. Clair, AL; Shelby, AL; Walker, AL. >Little Rock: Faulkner, AR; Lonoke, AR; Pulaski, AR; Saline, AR >Lancaster: Lancaster, PA >3 An Arbitron radio Metro market is a specific geographic area consisting >of one or more contiguous counties that >generally coincide with a Metropolitan Statistical Area as specified by OMB. >4 A Designated Market Area (DMA) is the television market specified by >Nielsen Media Research. For this study, >we assume all television stations located in the DMA are receivable in the >radio market. We did not count lowpower >television stations. >4 >Burlington, VT-Plattsburg, NY: Clinton, NY; Essex, NY; Addison, VT, >Chittenden, VT; Franklin, VT; >Grande Isle, VT >Myrtle Beach: Georgetown, SC; Horry, SC >Terre Haute: Clay, IN; Sullivan, IN; Vermillion, IN: Vigo, IN; Clark, IL; >Edgar, IL. >Charlottesville: Albemarle, VA; Charlottesville City, VA, Fluvanna, VA; >Greene, VA >Altoona: Blair, PA >Viewpoint Diversity in Cross-Owned Newspapers and Television Stations: A >Study of News Coverage of >the 2000 Presidential Campaign, David Pritchard, Department of Journalism >and Mass Communication, >University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. >Source material for four of the markets studied are available for review >in the designated reference room >at the Commission. These materials include videotapes of the local >newscasts and copies of the >newspaper articles comprising for four of the markets studied. In >addition, spreadsheets showing the >coding of the news coverage for those markets is available on the >Commission's website at >www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. >Consumer Substitution Among Media, Joel Waldfogel, The Wharton School, >University of Pennsylvania. >The data sets for this study rely on proprietary information and will be >available for public inspection at >the FCC headquarters. Persons complying with the protective order may >review and analyze these >underlying data sets. To facilitate review and assessment of the data >sets, Dr. Waldfogel will be available >at the agency on Tuesday, November 19, 2002, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. in the >public reference room at the >FCC's headquarters (445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC) to assist outside >parties in evaluating the data >sets and regression analysis. Parties wishing to participate should >contact Linda Senecal of the FCC's >Media Bureau at 418-7044 in advance of that date. >Consolidation and Advertising Prices in Local Radio Markets, Keith Brown >and George Williams, >Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission. >The data sets underlying this study are based on proprietary data. These >data sets will be made available >for review and inspection who comply with the protective order in this >proceeding. Parties wishing to >make arrangements to review this data with the assistance of the author >should contact Linda Senecal at >202-418-7044. In addition, the authors have corrected several data entry >errors since the study was >released. The initial results indicated that 3-4% of the 68% increase in >real advertising rates between >1996-2001 was attributable to concentration in local radio markets. The >revised analysis finds a real >advertising rate increase of 60%, and that 3-4% of that 60% is >attributable to concentration in local radio >markets. The authors have also compiled additional information regarding >the methodology employed in >this study. This discussion of methodology is available as a separate >document on the FCC's website at >www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. >Program Diversity and the Program Selection Process on Broadcast Network >Television, Mara Einstein, >Department of Media Studies, Queens College, City University of New York. >5 >The study methodologies and underlying data are contained in the study and >at the website denoted in the >study. >A Theory of Broadcast Media Concentration and Commercial Advertising, >Brendan M. Cunningham, >Department of Economics, U.S. Naval Academy, and Peter J. Alexander, >Industry Analysis Division, >Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission. >The methodology is contained in the published study. The study did not >rely on empirical data. >The Measurement of Local Television News and Public Affairs Programs, >Thomas Spavins, Technical >and Public Safety Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications >Commission; Loretta >Dennison (Legal Intern), Jane Frenette, Scott Roberts, Industry Analysis >Division, Media Bureau, Federal >Communications Commission. >The published study describes the methodologies employed and includes >appendices containing the >underlying data sets. The authors are now supplementing the published >study with an additional appendix >identifying those programs that were categorized as public affairs >programming in the study. These >categorizations relate to the section of the study assessing the quantity >of local news and public affairs >programming on different types of local television stations. This new >appendix is intended to facilitate >review of this section of the study by identifying those programs that >were categorized as public affairs >programs. >Consumer Survey on Media Usage, Nielsen Media Research. >The study methodology and the responses to each of the questions are >contained in the published study. >Radio Market Structure and Music Diversity, George Williams, Keith Brown >and Peter Alexander, >Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission. >The data set compiled by the authors for this study is available beginning >today on the Commission's >website at www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. >On the Substitutability of Local Newspaper, Radio and Television >Advertising in Local Business Sales, >C. Anthony Bush, Administrative Law Division, Office of the General >Counsel, Federal Communications >Commission. >The author of this study has added information about the methodology >employed in the text of the paper >and in a new appendix to the study. The revised version of the paper is >available at >www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. In addition, the author created a dataset >for this study based on >proprietary data. That data set will be made available for review and >inspection by interested parties >consistent with the protective order today. Due to the complexity of the >software used to run these >datasets, parties are encouraged to obtain the assistance of the author in >initiating their review of these >datasets. Parties wishing to make such arrangements should contact Linda >Senecal at 202-418-7044. In >addition, two econometric papers by Phoebus Dhrymes that are referred to >in this study are now available >in the Commission's public reference room. >6 >Radio Industry Review 2002: Trends in Ownership, Format and Finance, >George Williams and Scott >Roberts, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications >Commission. >The authors of this study created a dataset based on proprietary data. >That data set will be made available >for review and inspection interested parties consistent with the >protective order today. Parties wishing to >make arrangements to review this data with the assistance of the authors >should contact Linda Senecal at >202-418-7044. >Broadcast Television: Survivors in a Sea of Competition (Federal >Communications Commission, Office >of Policy and Plans Working Paper), Jonathan Levy and Marcelino >Ford-Livene, Office of Policy and >Plans, Federal Communications Commission; Anne Levine, Industry Analysis >Division, Media Bureau, >Federal Communications Commission. >The data sources for this study are now available in the FCC's public >reference room. A revised version >of this study has been posted on the FCC's website at >www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. The revisions >correct typographical errors and clarify several of the paper's citations. >Media Bureau contacts: Paul Gallant (202) 418-7200 and Judith Herman (202) >418-2330. >News Media contact: Michelle Russo (202) 418-2358. >--FCC-- > --=====================_4696196==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322
DA 02-2980
Released: November 5, 2002
FCC'S MEDIA BUREAU ADOPTS PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC ACCESS
TO DATA UNDERLYING MEDIA OWNERSHIP STUDIES AND EXTENDS
COMMENT DEADLINES FOR 2002 BIENNIAL REGULATORY REVIEW
OF COMMISSION'S MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES
MB Docket No. 02-277
MM Docket Nos. 01-235, 01-317, 00-244
Comment Date: January 2, 2003
Reply Comment Date: February 3, 2003
The Federal Communications Commission's Media Bureau and the Media Ownership Working Group
(MOWG) took three actions today regarding the ongoing biennial review proceeding examining media
ownership rules. First, the Bureau issued an order extending the deadline for submitting comments and
reply comments. The new comment deadlines are January 2, 2003, for initial comments and February 2,
2003, for reply comments. Second, the MOWG released certain additional information relating to the
media studies that the Commission issued on October 1, 2002. Third, the Bureau adopted a protective
order establishing procedures to facilitate public review of the proprietary portions of that data.
The Commission initiated its biennial review on September 12, 2002, with its adoption of a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.1 As an accommodation to interested parties, the Commission adopted a 60 day
comment period and a 30 day reply comment period. As a further accommodation, the Commission
delayed commencement of the comment cycle until release of twelve MOWG studies, which occurred on
October 1st. Accordingly, comments initially were due December 2, 2002, and reply comments were due
January 2, 2003. In view of the six petitions requesting extension of those deadlines, and given the
importance of public comment on the issues raised in the NPRM, the Media Bureau today extended the
initial comment period through January 2, 2003, and the reply comment period through February 3,
2003.2
1 In the Matter of 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review - Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and
Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, MM Docket No. 02-277, (rel. Sept. 23, 2002).
2 Parties are reminded to follow the filing provisions set forth in paragraphs 169-178 of the Biennial Review NPRM,
including the requirement that the Media Bureau's Industry Analysis Division be copied on all filings in this
proceeding made electronically or by paper.
2
Separately, the MOWG also made available additional information pertaining to several of the twelve
media studies released on October 1, 2002. This additional information falls into two categories: (1)
additional information about the methodology of the studies; and (2) underlying data or source material
for the studies. The 12 media ownership studies are listed below along with a description of the
additional information being released for eight of the studies. For four of those eight studies, the authors
created data sets using proprietary information licensed to the author and/or the author's employer for
purposes excluding public dissemination. Interested parties may review and analyze these data sets in the
public reference room at the FCC's headquarters (Room CY-A251, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington,
D.C.) consistent with the Protective Order adopted today by the Media Bureau. The procedures
established in that order track the manner in which public access was permitted to proprietary information
in other Commission proceedings. Outside parties also may obtain licenses from any or all licensors of
the underlying data to evaluate the results of the studies and/or to develop other studies that will
contribute to the record in this proceeding.
In conducting on-site evaluation of the underlying data sets, outside parties are invited to arrange for the
study author(s) to be present to facilitate the review of the underlying data sets released today. Parties
wishing to make these arrangements should contact Linda Senecal of the Media Bureau at 202-418-7044.
Interested parties are encouraged to request these meetings with reasonable advance notice. With respect
to the study entitled "Consumer Substitution Among Media," Dr. Joel Waldfogel of the University to
Pennsylvania will be available in the Commission's public reference room from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on
Tuesday, November 19, 2002 to facilitate review and assessment of the data sets underlying his study.
3
MEDIA OWNERSHIP WORKING GROUP STUDIES
Below is a listing of the MOWG studies released on October 1st and any additional information being
released today.
A Comparison of Media Outlets and Owners for Ten Selected Markets: 1960, 1980, 2000, Scott Roberts,
Jane Frenette and Dione Stearns, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications
Commission.
This report contains a count of the number of broadcast outlets, cable systems, direct broadcast satellite
systems and daily newspapers located in ten selected Arbitron radio Metro markets3 for 1960, 1980 and
2000. The report also includes the collective number of unique owners of these outlets in each city.
Compilation of data: All commercial and non-commercial television stations in each Designated Market
Area 4 studied and all commercial and non-commercial radio stations licensed to communities in the radio
Metro market were counted. If cable was available within the radio Metro, it counted as one outlet and
one owner regardless of the number of separately-owned systems serving a single metropolitan area.
Direct Broadcast Satellite was counted as two available outlets and two owners for all ten markets for the
year 2000 only. Daily newspapers published in the radio Metro principal city were also tallied. All data
were cross-checked for common ownership. The data sources for the outlet measurement are available in
the FCC's public reference room.
Following is a list of the ten Arbitron radio Metro markets measured and the counties therein for which
the data were compiled. The same counties were used for 1960, 1980, and 2000.
New York: Bronx, NY; Kings, NY; Nassau, NY; New York, NY; Putnam, NY; Queens, NY; Richmond,
NY; Rockland, NY; Suffolk, NY; Westchester, NY; Fairfield, CT (partial)
Kansas City: Johnson, KS; Leavenworth, KS; Miami, KS; Wyandotte, KS; Cass, MO; Clay, MO;
Jackson, MO; Lafayette, MO; Platte, MO; Ray, MO
Birmingham: Blount, AL, Jefferson, AL; St. Clair, AL; Shelby, AL; Walker, AL.
Little Rock: Faulkner, AR; Lonoke, AR; Pulaski, AR; Saline, AR
Lancaster: Lancaster, PA
3 An Arbitron radio Metro market is a specific geographic area consisting of one or more contiguous counties that
generally coincide with a Metropolitan Statistical Area as specified by OMB.
4 A Designated Market Area (DMA) is the television market specified by Nielsen Media Research. For this study,
we assume all television stations located in the DMA are receivable in the radio market. We did not count lowpower
television stations.
4
Burlington, VT-Plattsburg, NY: Clinton, NY; Essex, NY; Addison, VT, Chittenden, VT; Franklin, VT;
Grande Isle, VT
Myrtle Beach: Georgetown, SC; Horry, SC
Terre Haute: Clay, IN; Sullivan, IN; Vermillion, IN: Vigo, IN; Clark, IL; Edgar, IL.
Charlottesville: Albemarle, VA; Charlottesville City, VA, Fluvanna, VA; Greene, VA
Altoona: Blair, PA
Viewpoint Diversity in Cross-Owned Newspapers and Television Stations: A Study of News Coverage of
the 2000 Presidential Campaign, David Pritchard, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Source material for four of the markets studied are available for review in the designated reference room
at the Commission. These materials include videotapes of the local newscasts and copies of the
newspaper articles comprising for four of the markets studied. In addition, spreadsheets showing the
coding of the news coverage for those markets is available on the Commission's website at
www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies.
Consumer Substitution Among Media, Joel Waldfogel, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
The data sets for this study rely on proprietary information and will be available for public inspection at
the FCC headquarters. Persons complying with the protective order may review and analyze these
underlying data sets. To facilitate review and assessment of the data sets, Dr. Waldfogel will be available
at the agency on Tuesday, November 19, 2002, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. in the public reference room at the
FCC's headquarters (445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC) to assist outside parties in evaluating the data
sets and regression analysis. Parties wishing to participate should contact Linda Senecal of the FCC's
Media Bureau at 418-7044 in advance of that date.
Consolidation and Advertising Prices in Local Radio Markets, Keith Brown and George Williams,
Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.
The data sets underlying this study are based on proprietary data. These data sets will be made available
for review and inspection who comply with the protective order in this proceeding. Parties wishing to
make arrangements to review this data with the assistance of the author should contact Linda Senecal at
202-418-7044. In addition, the authors have corrected several data entry errors since the study was
released. The initial results indicated that 3-4% of the 68% increase in real advertising rates between
1996-2001 was attributable to concentration in local radio markets. The revised analysis finds a real
advertising rate increase of 60%, and that 3-4% of that 60% is attributable to concentration in local radio
markets. The authors have also compiled additional information regarding the methodology employed in
this study. This discussion of methodology is available as a separate document on the FCC's website at
www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies.
Program Diversity and the Program Selection Process on Broadcast Network Television, Mara Einstein,
Department of Media Studies, Queens College, City University of New York.
5
The study methodologies and underlying data are contained in the study and at the website denoted in the
study.
A Theory of Broadcast Media Concentration and Commercial Advertising, Brendan M. Cunningham,
Department of Economics, U.S. Naval Academy, and Peter J. Alexander, Industry Analysis Division,
Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.
The methodology is contained in the published study. The study did not rely on empirical data.
The Measurement of Local Television News and Public Affairs Programs, Thomas Spavins, Technical
and Public Safety Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications Commission; Loretta
Dennison (Legal Intern), Jane Frenette, Scott Roberts, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal
Communications Commission.
The published study describes the methodologies employed and includes appendices containing the
underlying data sets. The authors are now supplementing the published study with an additional appendix
identifying those programs that were categorized as public affairs programming in the study. These
categorizations relate to the section of the study assessing the quantity of local news and public affairs
programming on different types of local television stations. This new appendix is intended to facilitate
review of this section of the study by identifying those programs that were categorized as public affairs
programs.
Consumer Survey on Media Usage, Nielsen Media Research.
The study methodology and the responses to each of the questions are contained in the published study.
Radio Market Structure and Music Diversity, George Williams, Keith Brown and Peter Alexander,
Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.
The data set compiled by the authors for this study is available beginning today on the Commission's
website at www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies.
On the Substitutability of Local Newspaper, Radio and Television Advertising in Local Business Sales,
C. Anthony Bush, Administrative Law Division, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Communications
Commission.
The author of this study has added information about the methodology employed in the text of the paper
and in a new appendix to the study. The revised version of the paper is available at
www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. In addition, the author created a dataset for this study based on
proprietary data. That data set will be made available for review and inspection by interested parties
consistent with the protective order today. Due to the complexity of the software used to run these
datasets, parties are encouraged to obtain the assistance of the author in initiating their review of these
datasets. Parties wishing to make such arrangements should contact Linda Senecal at 202-418-7044. In
addition, two econometric papers by Phoebus Dhrymes that are referred to in this study are now available
in the Commission's public reference room.
6
Radio Industry Review 2002: Trends in Ownership, Format and Finance, George Williams and Scott
Roberts, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.
The authors of this study created a dataset based on proprietary data. That data set will be made available
for review and inspection interested parties consistent with the protective order today. Parties wishing to
make arrangements to review this data with the assistance of the authors should contact Linda Senecal at
202-418-7044.
Broadcast Television: Survivors in a Sea of Competition (Federal Communications Commission, Office
of Policy and Plans Working Paper), Jonathan Levy and Marcelino Ford-Livene, Office of Policy and
Plans, Federal Communications Commission; Anne Levine, Industry Analysis Division, Media Bureau,
Federal Communications Commission.
The data sources for this study are now available in the FCC's public reference room. A revised version
of this study has been posted on the FCC's website at www.fcc.gov/ownership/studies. The revisions
correct typographical errors and clarify several of the paper's citations.
Media Bureau contacts: Paul Gallant (202) 418-7200 and Judith Herman (202) 418-2330.
News Media contact: Michelle Russo (202) 418-2358.
--FCC--
</blockquote></x-html>
--=====================_4696196==_.ALT-- From nlgcdc-admin Tue Dec 3 12:04:14 2002 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id gB3K4CrQ043990 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 12:04:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from Alan.igc.org (adsl-64-165-108-202.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.165.108.202]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gB3K4BAR417838 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 15:04:11 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20021203120455.021b7e60@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:05:11 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [nlgcdc] Nat'l Lawyers Guild on Dem. Comm. Challenges Collection Of New LPFMs Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: >Delivered-To: microradio-outgoing@lists.tao.ca >X-Sender: mhz@mail.bitstream.net >Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 01:33:03 -0800 >To: microradio@lists.tao.ca >From: Alan Freed >Subject: [MRN] Nat'l Lawyers Guild on Dem. Comm. Challenges Collection Of New > LPFMs >Sender: worker-microradio@lists.tao.ca >Reply-To: microradio@lists.tao.ca > >rronline.com 12/3/02: > >Legal Action Group Challenges Collection Of New LPFMs > >The National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications has filed >informal objections against 32 new low-power FM stations, located >throughout Arkansas, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North >Carolina and Guam. The group says it works to ensure that independent >media organizations and various forms of communication - including >"micro-radio," public access television and grass-roots cyberspace >resources - can function "free from government or big business control." >In an objection filed against St. Anne Educational Association's >application for an LPFM in Tucumcari, NM, the group points out it has >filed previous objections to St. Anne applications on the grounds that St. >Anne was using the names of parties without their knowledge. In an >objection to Byron Eggers' application for an LPFM in Delray Beach, FL, >the group says Eggers isn't qualified to hold and LPFM since his address >is in North Carolina, thus violating an FCC rule mandating that stations >may only be awarded to "local applicants." > > > >Alan Freed >Beat Radio >Minneapolis >http://www.beatworld.com > > >========================================= >The Microradio Network >--- >To unsubscribe send a message to: majordomo@lists.tao.ca >In the message body, type: unsubscribe microradio >========================================= From nlgcdc-admin Thu Jan 9 14:16:19 2003 Received: from pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (pimout3-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.102]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h09MGJNQ035239 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 14:16:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from aakorn@igc.org) Received: from Alan.igc.org (adsl-64-165-108-202.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.165.108.202]) by pimout3-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h09MGHkE047472 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2003 17:16:17 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20030109141700.01de71c0@pop.igc.org> X-Sender: aakorn@pop.igc.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 14:17:26 -0800 To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Alan Korn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by agora.rdrop.com id h09MGJNQ035253 Subject: [nlgcdc] Fwd: FCC Advisory Committee Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: >DA 02-3606 > Released: December 31, 2002 >FCC ANNOUNCES RECHARTERING OF CONSUMER ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC), FORMERLY >KNOWN AS THE CONSUMER/DISABILITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMITTEE >(C/DTAC); REQUESTS APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP ON CAC > >In this Public Notice, the Federal Communications Commission ("Commission") >seeks nominations for membership on its Consumer Advisory Committee >("Committee"), a federal advisory committee that addresses consumer issues >within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Applications should be >submitted in accordance with the procedures outlined below. > >MISSION >The Commission established the Committee in November 2000 for the purpose >of making recommendations regarding consumer issues within the jurisdiction >of the Commission and to facilitate the participation of consumers >(including people with disabilities and underserved populations, such as >American Indians and persons living in rural areas) in proceedings before >the Commission. See Public Notice (rel. Nov. 30, 2000), 15 FCC Rcd 23798, >as published in the Federal Register (65 FR 76265, Dec. 6, 2000). On >November 20, 2002, the initial Charter of the Committee terminated. The >Charter was renewed for another two (2) year term, and the name of the >Committee was changed to the Consumer Advisory Committee to better reflect >its mandate and activities. The Committee is organized under, and will >operate in accordance with, the provisions of the Federal Advisory >Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 (1988). > >FUNCTIONS >The Committee will address a number of topics including, but not limited >to, the following areas: > >… Consumer protection and education (e.g., cramming, slamming, consumer >friendly billing, detariffing, bundling of services, Lifeline/Linkup >programs, customer service, privacy, telemarketing abuses, and outreach to >underserved populations, such as American Indians and persons living in >rural areas). > >… Access by people with disabilities (e.g., telecommunications relay >services, closed captioning, accessible billing, and access to >telecommunications products and services). > >… Impact upon consumers of new and emerging technologies (e.g., >availability of broadband, digital television, cable, satellite, low power >FM, and the convergence of these and emerging technologies). > >… Implementation of Commission rules and consumer participation in the FCC >rulemaking process. > >During calendar year 2003, it is anticipated that the Committee will meet >in Washington, D.C. for three one-day meetings on April 11, June 27, and >November 14. In addition, as needed, working groups will be established to >facilitate the Committee's work between meetings of the full Committee. >Meetings will be fully accessible to individuals with disabilities. > >Each full Committee meeting will be open to the public. Notice of each >meeting will be published in the Federal Register at least fifteen (15) >days in advance of the meeting. Records will be maintained of each meeting >and made available for public inspection. > >MEMBERSHIP >The Commission seeks applications from interested organizations, from both >the public and private sectors, that wish to be considered for membership >on the Committee. Selections will be made on the basis of factors such as >expertise and diversity of viewpoints that are necessary to address >effectively the questions before the Committee. > >Applicants should be recognized experts in their fields, including, but not >limited to, consumer advocacy, disabilities, underserved populations (e.g., >persons living in rural areas and tribal communities), telecommunications >infrastructure and equipment, telecommunications services (including >wireless), and broadcast/cable services. > >The number of Committee members will be established to effectively >accomplish the Committee's work. Organizations with similar interests are >encouraged to nominate one person to represent their interests. > >Members must be willing to commit to a two-year term of service, should be >willing and able to attend three (3) one-day meetings per year in >Washington, D.C., and are also expected to participate in deliberations of >at least one working group. The Commission is unable to pay per diem or >travel costs. > >APPLICATIONS FOR MEMBERSHIP/ DEADLINE >Applications should be received by the Commission no later than January 31, >2003, and should be sent to the Federal Communications Commission, Consumer >& Governmental Affairs Bureau, Attn.: Scott Marshall, via e-mail at >cac@fcc.gov, via facsimile at 202-418-6509, or via U.S. mail at 445 12th >Street, S.W., Room 5A824, Washington, D.C. 20554. > >Due to the extensive security screening of incoming mail since September >11, 2001, delivery of mail sent to the FCC may be delayed. Therefore, we >encourage submission by email or fax. If an application is sent via U.S. >mail, we encourage applicants to follow up with a phone call to Scott >Marshall, 202-418-2809, or 202-418-0179 (TTY), to confirm receipt. > >A specified application form is not required. However, applications should >include the name of the organization, the representative's name, the name >of an alternate representative, title, address and telephone number, a >statement of the interests represented and the issues of interest to the >applicant, and a detailed description of the applicant's knowledge and >qualifications to serve on the Committee. The application should further be >supported by a statement indicating a willingness to serve on the Committee >for a two year period of time; a commitment to attend three (3) one-day >meetings per year in Washington, D.C. at the applicant's own expense; and a >commitment to work on at least one working group. Members will have an >initial and continuing obligation to disclose any interests in, or >connections to, persons or entities that are, or will be, regulated by or >have interests before the Commission. > >After the applications have been reviewed, the Commission will publish a >notice in the Federal Register announcing the appointment of the Committee >members and the first meeting date of the Committee. It is anticipated >that the first Committee meeting will take place on April 11, 2003. > >FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Marshall, Consumer & Governmental >Affairs Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 202-418-2809 (voice) or >202-418-0179 (TTY), smarshal@fcc.gov (e-mail). > >- FCC - > > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >You are subscribed to the Media Activist email discussion list, hosted by >Media Tank. For more information about Media Tank, check out www.mediatank.org. > >To unsubscribe from this list, email majordomo@serve.com with the word >"unsubscribe" in the subject line and "unsubscribe activist" in the body >(make sure not to add your signature). >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ From nlgcdc-admin Thu Feb 13 18:52:18 2003 Received: from out002.tpca.net (out002.tpca.net [66.180.244.22]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h1E2qIpi098565 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:52:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from support_bounce@boing.topica.com) To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Pacifica Diversity Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 18:52:08 -0800 Message-ID: <549561358-1463747838-1045191128@topica.com> Reply-To: PacificaDiversity-optin-conf-469497673.54606827@topica.com X-Topica-Id: <1045191125.svcgdb001.23557.1009795> Subject: [nlgcdc] RESPONSE REQUIRED: Subscription to PacificaDiversity@topica.com offered Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Hello! Pacifica Diversity of the email list PacificaDiversity@topica.com is inviting you to join this list, hosted at Topica.com. -------------------------------------------------- ONE-CLICK CONFIRMATION! Just click this link (or cut and paste it into your browser) and we'll immediately begin your new subscription! It's quick and easy: http://www.topica.com/sysmsg/?cid=1.EGeEeiGib.nEGTGNMi&p=ConfSub011 Or, if you prefer, reply to this message. No need to type anything into the subject line. -------------------------------------------------- MORE ABOUT THIS LIST (Message from the List Owner) Pacifica Diversity is a newsletter directed to members of the Pacifica Radio community who are working to ensure that oppressed racial, ethnic and national groups, and women, gain increased influence over the governance and programming of the Pacifica network. Pacifica is currently involved in creating a new set of bylaws, which will define a process for electing Pacifica's local and national boards. A great debate is now occurring over whether a certain percentage of the seats on these boards should be reserved for women and people of color. Strong support exists for such diversity requirements, but a small but influential group, including the chair of the interim Pacifica National Board's Bylaws Revision Committee, is opposed to their implementation. The Pacifica Diversity newsletter will keep you informed about what is being done to ensure that the strongest possible diversity requirements are included in Pacifica's bylaws. As the situation develops, it will also make you aware of things that you can do that will have a positive influence on the outcome of this debate. To subscribe to this newsletter, simply reply to this message. Additional information on this campaign can be found at http://truthandreconciliation.home.mindspring.com. Also, if your friends want to subscribe to the newsletter they can easily do so at this site. -------------------------------------------------- DON'T WANT TO SUBSCRIBE? If you do not want to subscribe to this list, simply ignore this message and you will not be added. -------------------------------------------------- MANAGE YOUR TOPICA EMAIL WITH MyTopica Easy subscribe, unsubscribe, vacation hold, message archives and more. Register now for MyTopica: http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/register Thanks, and enjoy! ------------------------------------------------- If you have questions on this subscription, please visit the Topica Help section at http://www.topica.com Or email Topica Customer Support at support@get.topica.com If possible, please include the name of this list in your email. From nlgcdc-admin Sat Feb 15 03:24:08 2003 Received: from out002.tpca.net (out002.tpca.net [66.180.244.22]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h1FBO8pi063623 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2003 03:24:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tdsyst-errors.0.0.0.0.0.4@b.list-email.net) To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Topica Support Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 03:19:47 -0800 Message-ID: <2012643930-1463792638-1045307987@topica.com> X-Topica-Id: <1045307959.svc003.3349.1000278> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0.232436894943145.0.952579996855096.0.957415666055994" Subject: [nlgcdc] Reminder! Your invitation has not been confirmed! Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: --0.232436894943145.0.952579996855096.0.957415666055994 Content-Type: text/plain Dear nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com, This is a reminder that you have not yet responded to the invitation to join the following list hosted at Topica: Pacifica Diversity Confirm your subscription now! All it takes is one click: http://www.topica.com/sysmsg/?cid=1.469497673.54606827&c=1&p=CONFSUB-REM-O (Or, if you prefer, you may cut and paste this link into your browser.) -------------------------------------------------- DON'T WANT TO SUBSCRIBE? We provide this one-time reminder as a service. Should you decide not to subscribe to the list(s) above, you may disregard this message. -------------------------------------------------- CONTACTING TOPICA For other questions about your Topica account, please contact our Customer Support Department: support@get.topica.com If you did not register with Topica and feel we have sent this email in error, please forward this email to our abuse team for further review: abuse@get.topica.com Sincerely, Topica Customer Support -------------------------------------------------- T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register --0.232436894943145.0.952579996855096.0.957415666055994 Content-Type: text/html 
Dear nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com,

This is a reminder that you have not yet 
responded to the invitation to join the 
following list hosted at Topica: 

Pacifica Diversity

Confirm your subscription now! All it 
takes is one click:

http://www.topica.com/sysmsg/?cid=1.469497673.54606827&c=1&p=CONFSUB-REM-O

(Or, if you prefer, you may cut and paste this 
link into your browser.)


--------------------------------------------------
DON'T WANT TO SUBSCRIBE?

We provide this one-time reminder as a service. 
Should you decide not to subscribe to the list(s) 
above, you may disregard this message.


--------------------------------------------------
CONTACTING TOPICA

For other questions about your Topica account, 
please contact our Customer Support Department: 
support@get.topica.com

If you did not register with Topica and feel we 
have sent this email in error, please forward this 
email to our abuse team for further review:
abuse@get.topica.com



Sincerely,

Topica Customer Support

--------------------------------------------------
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
--0.232436894943145.0.952579996855096.0.957415666055994-- From nlgcdc-admin Sat Feb 15 21:35:19 2003 Received: from out001.tpca.net (out001.tpca.net [66.180.244.21]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h1G5ZIpi053971 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:35:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from support_bounce@boing.topica.com) To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Topica Support Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:35:12 -0800 Message-ID: <822274451-1463792638-1045373712@topica.com> Reply-To: support@get.topica.com X-Topica-Id: <1045373711.web001.6716.1000000> Subject: [nlgcdc] Welcome to Diversity! Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Hi, You have been successfully added to the email list "Diversity" at Topica. If you would like more information about this list, you can find the list's information page at: http://www.topica.com/lists/PacificaDiversity If you feel that someone has used your email address without your consent, please let us know by contacting abuse@get.topica.com. If you have any questions, please visit our help system at http://www.topica.com/ (click on "help" on the bottom of the screen) or email our Customer Support Department at support@get.topica.com Here is a welcome message from Pacifica Diversity: ----------------------------- Thanks for joining this list. Here's what it's all about: Pacifica Diversity is a newsletter directed at members of the Pacifica Radio community who are working to ensure that oppressed racial, ethnic and national groups gain increased influence over the governance and programming of the Pacifica network. To read this list on the web, please visit: http://www.topica.com/lists/PacificaDiversity Pacifica Diversity truthandreconciliation@mindspring.com ----------------------------- Thanks, and we hope you enjoy this list! Topica Customer Support From nlgcdc-admin Sat Feb 15 21:36:50 2003 Received: from out002.tpca.net (out002.tpca.net [66.180.244.22]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h1G5aopi054211 for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:36:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from support_bounce@boing.topica.com) To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Topica Support Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:36:41 -0800 Message-ID: <924556044-1463792126-1045373801@topica.com> Reply-To: support@get.topica.com X-Topica-Id: <1045373801.web002.16464.1000001> Subject: [nlgcdc] Your Topica Registration is Complete! Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Hello, and welcome! Thanks for signing up. Be sure to visit the links below to take advantage of the benefits of your new membership at Topica. -------------------------------------------------- * Organize your subscriptions with My Topica. Put messages on hold, search or browse back issues, manage your Topica email easily, and more! Log in now to learn more: http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/my Don't remember your password? http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/login.html ------------------------------------------------- * Save money with Top Offers. Find great deals that match your interests--travel, books, music, electronics, computers and more. Sign up here: http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/channels/offers -------------------------------------------------- * Share your passion with others. Start your own newsletter. Launch a discussion group. Or move your email list to Topica. Free. Log in to start your own list: http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/services/index.html -------------------------------------------------- CONTACTING TOPICA To unsubscribe from a list, log in to your My Topica account at: http://www.topica.com/partner/sysmes1/my For other questions about your Topica account, please contact our Customer Support Department: support@get.topica.com ----------------------------------------------- Topica - Learn More. Surf Less. The best place to find newsletters and discussions on the topics you love. From nlgcdc-admin Thu Feb 20 08:07:11 2003 Received: from pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (pimout4-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.103]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1KG7Api082553 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:07:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from pfranck@culturelaw.com) Received: from Tecra.culturelaw.com (ppp-67-119-190-187.dialup.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.119.190.187]) by pimout4-ext.prodigy.net (8.12.3 da nor stuldap/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h1KG6vSY084044; Thu, 20 Feb 2003 11:07:07 -0500 Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20030220075938.020c9ba0@mail.culturelaw.com> X-Sender: cul00001@mail.culturelaw.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 08:04:18 -0800 To: abuse@get.topica.com From: Peter Franck Subject: Fwd: [nlgcdc] Welcome to Diversity! Cc: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: This is completely inappropriate, apparently the people at the Diversity list have managed to put the whole nlgcdc list on their list. I am one of the people responsible for the nlgcdc list. It is a list of the National Lawyers Guild Center on Democratic Communications. While we are sympathetic to the concerns of people involved in the rebuilding of Pacifica Radio (and this diversity list represents probably a small faction of that group) it is completely inappropriate to involuntarily subscribe our whole list to theirs. Please remove us and take appropriate action so they don't repeat this with others. I will appreciate it if you let me know what action you have taken. Thank you. >To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com >From: Topica Support >Reply-To: support@get.topica.com >Subject: [nlgcdc] Welcome to Diversity! >Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 21:35:12 -0800 > > >Hi, > >You have been successfully added to the email list >"Diversity" at Topica. > >If you would like more information about this list, you can find >the list's information page at: > > http://www.topica.com/lists/PacificaDiversity > >If you feel that someone has used your email address without your >consent, please let us know by contacting abuse@get.topica.com. > >If you have any questions, please visit our help system at > http://www.topica.com/ >(click on "help" on the bottom of the screen) >or email our Customer Support Department at >support@get.topica.com > >Here is a welcome message from Pacifica Diversity: >----------------------------- >Thanks for joining this list. Here's what it's all about: > >Pacifica Diversity is a newsletter directed at members of the Pacifica >Radio community who are working to ensure that oppressed racial, ethnic >and national groups gain increased influence over the governance and >programming of the Pacifica network. > > >To read this list on the web, please visit: > http://www.topica.com/lists/PacificaDiversity > > >Pacifica Diversity >truthandreconciliation@mindspring.com > >----------------------------- > > >Thanks, and we hope you enjoy this list! > > >Topica Customer Support > > >_______________________________________________ >nlgcdc mailing list >nlgcdc@rdrop.com >http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/nlgcdc From nlgcdc-admin Fri Mar 14 14:45:17 2003 Received: from att.net (CacheFlowServer@[211.138.91.21]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h2EMj6oU083013 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 14:45:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from inkjetvvov@att.net) Message-ID: <97861bbbaf73$7d57fd2e$c7f16d8e@eomytoclgatk.tyl> From: To: Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 00:41:24 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_EF4_ACAE_E713A168.AC5A09CF" X-Priority: 1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Subject: [nlgcdc] -80% off ink - FREE shipping! Al Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: ------=_NextPart_EF4_ACAE_E713A168.AC5A09CF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ------=_NextPart_EF4_ACAE_E713A168.AC5A09CF Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQoNCjxoZWFkPjxUSVRMRT5GcmVlIFNoaXBwaW5nIC0gR3JlYXQg UHJpY2VzIC0gNzdDb2xvcnMuY29tPC9USVRMRT4NCg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1l cXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJz ZXQ9aXNvLTg4NTktMSI+DQoNCjxNRVRBIG5hbWU9IkdFTkVSQVRPUiIgY29u dGVudD0iSUJNIE5ldE9iamVjdHMgVG9wUGFnZSBWNC4wLjQgZm9yIFdpbmRv d3MiPg0KDQo8L2hlYWQ+PGJvZHkgYmdjb2xvcj0iI2ZmZmZmZiIgTEVGVE1B UkdJTj0iMCIgVE9QTUFSR0lOPSIwIj4NCg0KPFAgYWxpZ249ImNlbnRlciI+ VGhpcyBlbWFpbCBpcyBzZW50IGJ5IFpPZmZlcnMgdG8gYmUgZXhjbHVkZWQN Cg0KZnJvbSBsaXN0IHBsZWFzZSBzZWUgcmVtb3ZhbCBpbnN0cnVjdGlvbnMN Cg0KYmVsb3cuPEJSPg0KDQo8L1A+DQoNCjxNQVAgTkFNRT0icHJpbnRlcnMi Pg0KDQo8QVJFQSBTSEFQRT0icmVjdCIgQ09PUkRTPSIxNSwzLDEyMCwyNyIg SFJFRj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5jaGFsbGVuZ2Vyb25lLmNvbS90L2wuYXNwP2Np ZD0yNTE3JmxwPWhwMS5hc3AmY3A9Z3I0MzB2IiBBTFQ9IkhQIiB0YXJnZXQ9 Il9uZXciPg0KDQo8QVJFQSBTSEFQRT0icmVjdCIgQ09PUkRTPSIxNSw0MSwx MjAsNjYiIEhSRUY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2hhbGxlbmdlcm9uZS5jb20vdC9s LmFzcD9jaWQ9MjUxNyZscD1lcHNvbjEuYXNwJmNwPWdyNDMwdiIgQUxUPSJF cHNvbiIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfbmV3Ij4NCg0KPEFSRUEgU0hBUEU9InJlY3QiIENP T1JEUz0iMTUsODEsMTIwLDEwNyIgSFJFRj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5jaGFsbGVu Z2Vyb25lLmNvbS90L2wuYXNwP2NpZD0yNTE3JmxwPWNhbm9uMS5hc3AmY3A9 Z3I0MzB2IiBBTFQ9IkNhbm9uIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9uZXciPg0KDQo8QVJFQSBT SEFQRT0icmVjdCIgQ09PUkRTPSIxNSwxMjEsMTIwLDE0NyIgSFJFRj0iaHR0 cDovL3d3dy5jaGFsbGVuZ2Vyb25lLmNvbS90L2wuYXNwP2NpZD0yNTE3Jmxw PWxleG1hcmsxLmFzcCZjcD1ncjQzMHYiIEFMVD0iTGV4bWFyayIgdGFyZ2V0 PSJfbmV3Ij4NCg0KPEFSRUEgU0hBUEU9InJlY3QiIENPT1JEUz0iMTUsMTYw LDEyMCwxODciIEhSRUY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2hhbGxlbmdlcm9uZS5jb20v dC9sLmFzcD9jaWQ9MjUxNyZscD1jb21wYXExLmFzcCZjcD1ncjQzMHYiIEFM VD0iQ29tcGFxIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9uZXciPg0KDQo8QVJFQSBTSEFQRT0icmVj dCIgQ09PUkRTPSIxNSwyMDAsMTIwLDIyNSIgSFJFRj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5j aGFsbGVuZ2Vyb25lLmNvbS90L2wuYXNwP2NpZD0yNTE3JmxwPW90aGVyLmFz cCZjcD1ncjQzMHYiIEFMVD0iT3RoZXIgSW5ramV0IFByaW50ZXJzIj4NCg0K PC9NQVA+DQoNCjxDRU5URVI+DQoNCjxUQUJMRSBXSURUSD02MDAgQk9SREVS PTAgQ0VMTFBBRERJTkc9MCBDRUxMU1BBQ0lORz0wIGhlaWdodD0iNDU3Ij4N Cg0KDQo8VFI+DQoNCjxURCBDT0xTUEFOPTU+DQoNCjxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRw Oi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29sb3JzLmNvbS9lbWFpbHMvaW1hZ2VzL2dyZWVuXzAxLmdp ZiIgV0lEVEg9NjAwIEhFSUdIVD00NCBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjxU RD4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWls cy9pbWFnZXMvc3BhY2VyLmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9MSBIRUlHSFQ9NDQgQk9SREVS PSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQo8VFI+DQoNCjxURCBDT0xTUEFOPTU+ DQoNCjxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29sb3JzLmNvbS9lbWFpbHMv aW1hZ2VzL2dyZWVuXzAyLmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9NjAwIEhFSUdIVD0zOCBCT1JE RVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjxURD4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cu Nzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvc3BhY2VyLmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9 MSBIRUlHSFQ9MzggQk9SREVSPSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQo8VFI+ DQoNCjxURD4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29t L2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvZ3JlZW5fMDMuZ2lmIiBXSURUSD0xMzggSEVJR0hU PTY4IEJPUkRFUj0iMCI+PC9URD4NCg0KPFREIFJPV1NQQU49NCBWQUxJR049 InRvcCI+DQoNCjxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29sb3JzLmNvbS9l bWFpbHMvaW1hZ2VzL2dyZWVuXzA0LmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9MjUgSEVJR0hUPTM1 NiBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjxURCBDT0xTUEFOPTIgVkFMSUdOPSJ0 b3AiPg0KDQo8SU1HIFNSQz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy43N2NvbG9ycy5jb20vZW1h aWxzL2ltYWdlcy9ncmVlbl8wNS5naWYiIFdJRFRIPTQxMiBIRUlHSFQ9Njgg Qk9SREVSPSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8VEQgUk9XU1BBTj01IFZBTElHTj0idG9w Ij4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWls cy9pbWFnZXMvZ3JlZW5fMDYuanBnIiBXSURUSD0yNSBIRUlHSFQ9NDE2IEJP UkRFUj0iMCI+PC9URD4NCg0KPFREPg0KDQo8SU1HIFNSQz0iaHR0cDovL3d3 dy43N2NvbG9ycy5jb20vZW1haWxzL2ltYWdlcy9zcGFjZXIuZ2lmIiBXSURU SD0xIEhFSUdIVD02OCBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjwvVFI+DQoNCjxU Uj4NCg0KPFREIFJPV1NQQU49Mj4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cu Nzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvZ3JlZW5fMDcuZ2lmIiBXSURU SD0xMzggSEVJR0hUPTIyOCBCT1JERVI9IjAiIFVTRU1BUD0iI3ByaW50ZXJz Ij48L1REPg0KDQo8VEQ+DQoNCjxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29s b3JzLmNvbS9lbWFpbHMvaW1hZ2VzL2dyZWVuXzA4LmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9Mjc5 IEhFSUdIVD03OSBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjxURD4NCg0KPElNRyBT UkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvZ3Jl ZW5fMDkuZ2lmIiBXSURUSD0xMzMgSEVJR0hUPTc5IEJPUkRFUj0iMCI+PC9U RD4NCg0KPFREPg0KDQo8SU1HIFNSQz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy43N2NvbG9ycy5j b20vZW1haWxzL2ltYWdlcy9zcGFjZXIuZ2lmIiBXSURUSD0xIEhFSUdIVD03 OSBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjwvVFI+DQoNCjxUUj4NCg0KPFREIENP TFNQQU49MiBST1dTUEFOPTMgQUxJR049ImNlbnRlciIgVkFMSUdOPSJ0b3Ai Pg0KDQo8VEFCTEUgV0lEVEg9IjQxMiI+DQoNCg0KPFRSPg0KDQo8VEQgQkdD T0xPUj0iIzAwMDA2NiIgQUxJR049ImNlbnRlciIgQ09MU1BBTj0iMiI+PEZP TlQgRkFDRT0iQXJpYWwsSGVsdmV0aWNhLHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiIFNJWkU9IjIi IENPTE9SPSIjRkZGRkZGIj48Qj5IZXJlJ3Mgd2hhdCBhIGZldyBvZiBvdXIg c2F0aXNmaWVkIGN1c3RvbWVycw0KDQpoYXZlIHRvIHNheTo8L0I+PC9GT05U PjwvVEQ+DQoNCjwvVFI+DQoNCjxUUj4NCg0KPFREPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjwvVFI+ DQoNCjxUUj4NCg0KPFREIFdJRFRIPSIzNzciIEFMSUdOPSJjZW50ZXIiPjxG T05UIEZBQ0U9IkFyaWFsLEhlbHZldGljYSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIiBTSVpFPSIz IiBDT0xPUj0iI0ZGMDAwMCI+PEI+IA0KDQomcXVvdDtFeGNlbGxlbnQgd2Vi c2l0ZSB3aXRoDQoNCmdyZWF0IHNhdmluZ3MuPEJSPg0KDQpJIGxvdmUgdGhl IGZyZWUgc2hpcHBpbmcuJnF1b3Q7DQoNCjwvQj48L0ZPTlQ+PEJSPg0KDQo8 Rk9OVCBGQUNFPSJBcmlhbCxIZWx2ZXRpY2Esc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgU0laRT0i MiIgQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAwNjYiPg0KDQotIEN1c3RvbWVyICM3MTMxDQoNCjwv Rk9OVD4NCg0KPC9URD4NCg0KPFREIFdJRFRIPSIzNSI+PElNRyBTUkM9Imh0 dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvd29tYW4xLmpw ZyIgV0lEVEg9IjM1IiBIRUlHSFQ9IjQzIiBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoN CjwvVFI+DQoNCjxUUj4NCg0KPFREIENPTFNQQU49IjIiPg0KDQo8SFIgQ09M T1I9IiNGRjAwMDAiIFNJWkU9IjEiPg0KDQo8L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQo8 VFI+DQoNCjxURCBXSURUSD0iMzc3IiBBTElHTj0iY2VudGVyIj48Rk9OVCBG QUNFPSJBcmlhbCxIZWx2ZXRpY2Esc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgU0laRT0iMyIgQ09M T1I9IiNGRjAwMDAiPjxCPiANCg0KJnF1b3Q7RWFzeSBvcmRlcmluZyBhbmQg ZXh0cmVtZWx5DQoNCmZhc3QgZGVsaXZlcnkuJnF1b3Q7IDwvQj48L0ZPTlQ+ PEJSPg0KDQo8Rk9OVCBGQUNFPSJBcmlhbCxIZWx2ZXRpY2Esc2Fucy1zZXJp ZiIgU0laRT0iMiIgQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAwNjYiPg0KDQotIEN1c3RvbWVyICMz Nzk5DQoNCjwvRk9OVD4NCg0KPC9URD4NCg0KPFREIFdJRFRIPSIzNSI+PElN RyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdjb2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMv d29tYW4yLmpwZyIgV0lEVEg9IjM2IiBIRUlHSFQ9IjQ1IiBBTFQ9IiIgQk9S REVSPSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQo8VFI+DQoNCjxURCBDT0xTUEFO PSIyIj4NCg0KPEhSIENPTE9SPSIjRkYwMDAwIiBTSVpFPSIxIj4NCg0KPC9U RD4NCg0KPC9UUj4NCg0KPFRSPg0KDQo8VEQgV0lEVEg9IjM3NyIgQUxJR049 ImNlbnRlciI+PEZPTlQgRkFDRT0iQXJpYWwsSGVsdmV0aWNhLHNhbnMtc2Vy aWYiIFNJWkU9IjMiIENPTE9SPSIjRkYwMDAwIj48Qj4gDQoNCiZxdW90O1Jl c3VsdHMgYXJlIGFzIGdvb2QgYXMNCg0KdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIGluay4mcXVv dDsgPC9CPjwvRk9OVD48QlI+DQoNCjxGT05UIEZBQ0U9IkFyaWFsLEhlbHZl dGljYSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIiBTSVpFPSIyIiBDT0xPUj0iIzAwMDA2NiI+DQoN Ci0gQ3VzdG9tZXIgIzY4NzYNCg0KPC9GT05UPg0KDQo8L1REPg0KDQo8VEQg V0lEVEg9IjM1Ij48SU1HIFNSQz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy43N2NvbG9ycy5jb20v ZW1haWxzL2ltYWdlcy9tYW4xLmpwZyIgV0lEVEg9IjM2IiBIRUlHSFQ9IjQ0 IiBBTFQ9IiIgQk9SREVSPSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQoNCjwvVEFC TEU+DQoNCjxGT05UIEZBQ0U9IkFyaWFsLEhlbHZldGljYSxzYW5zLXNlcmlm IiBTSVpFPSIxIj4NCg0KUGhvdG9zIGFyZSBub3QgYWN0dWFsIGN1c3RvbWVy cy4gVGhlIHN0b3JpZXMNCg0KYW5kIHNhdmluZ3MgYXJlIHJlYWwuDQoNCjwv Rk9OVD48aW1nIHNyYz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5teWlua3MuY29tL2ltYWdlcy9w eGMuYXNwP2NpZD0yNTE3IiBoZWlnaHQ9MSB3aWR0aD0xIGJvcmRlcj0wPg0K DQo8L1REPg0KDQo8VEQ+DQoNCjxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29s b3JzLmNvbS9lbWFpbHMvaW1hZ2VzL3NwYWNlci5naWYiIFdJRFRIPTEgSEVJ R0hUPTE0OSBCT1JERVI9IjAiPjwvVEQ+DQoNCjwvVFI+DQoNCjxUUj4NCg0K PFREIEFMSUdOPSJjZW50ZXIiIEJHQ09MT1I9IiMwMDAwNjYiPg0KDQo8Rk9O VCBGQUNFPSJBcmlhbCxIZWx2ZXRpY2Esc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgU0laRT0iMSIg Q09MT1I9IiNGRkZGRkYiPg0KDQo8QlI+DQoNCi0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS08QlI+DQoNCjxCUj4NCg0KMTAlIHdpbGwgYXV0b21hdGljYWxs eSBiZTxCUj4NCg0KdGFrZW4gb2ZmIHlvdXIgb3JkZXIgYXQ8QlI+DQoNCmNo ZWNrb3V0IHVudGlsIDA0LzMwLzAzLjxCUj4NCg0KPEJSPg0KDQo8L0ZPTlQ+ DQoNCjwvVEQ+DQoNCjxURD4NCg0KPElNRyBTUkM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuNzdj b2xvcnMuY29tL2VtYWlscy9pbWFnZXMvc3BhY2VyLmdpZiIgV0lEVEg9MSBI RUlHSFQ9NjAgQk9SREVSPSIwIj48L1REPg0KDQo8L1RSPg0KDQo8VFI+DQoN CjxURCBDT0xTUEFOPTIgaGVpZ2h0PSI4Ij4mbmJzcDsgPC9URD4NCg0KPFRE IGhlaWdodD0iOCI+IDxJTUcgU1JDPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3Ljc3Y29sb3JzLmNv bS9lbWFpbHMvaW1hZ2VzL3NwYWNlci5naWYiIFdJRFRIPTEgSEVJR0hUPTYw IEJPUkRFUj0iMCI+PC9URD4NCg0KPC9UUj4NCg0KDQo8L1RBQkxFPg0KDQo8 L0NFTlRFUj4NCg0KPENFTlRFUj4NCg0KPHRhYmxlIHdpZHRoPSI2MDUiIGJv cmRlcj0iMCIgY2VsbHNwYWNpbmc9IjAiIGNlbGxwYWRkaW5nPSI1Ij4NCg0K DQo8dHI+DQoNCjx0ZD4NCg0KPHA+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iQXJpYWwsIEhlbHZl dGljYSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZiIgc2l6ZT0iLTMiPk5vdGU6IEJyYW5kIG5hbWVz IA0KDQphcmUgdXNlZCBmb3IgZGVzY3JpcHRpdmUgcHVycG9zZXMNCg0Kb25s eSBhbmQgcmVtYWluIHRoZSBwcm9wZXJ0eSBvZiB0aGVpciANCg0KcmVzcGVj dGl2ZSBvd25lcnMuIFRoZWlyIHVzZSBkb2VzDQoNCm5vdCBpbXBseSBlbmRv cnNlbWVudCBieSBvciBhc3NvY2lhdGlvbiANCg0Kd2l0aCB0aGUgb3duZXIg Y29tcGFuaWVzLjwvZm9udD48L3A+DQoNCjxwPjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkFyaWFs LCBIZWx2ZXRpY2EsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiIHNpemU9Ii0zIj5Ob3RlIGZyb20g dGhlIEFkdmVydGlzZXI6IA0KDQpXZSBhcmUgc3Ryb25nbHkgYWdhaW5zdCBz ZW5kaW5nIHVuc29saWNpdGVkDQoNCmVtYWlscyB0byB0aG9zZSB3aG8gZG8g bm90IA0KDQp3aXNoIHRvIHJlY2VpdmUgb3VyIHNwZWNpYWwgbWFpbGluZ3Mu DQoNClRoaXMgc2VuZGVyIGhhcyBhc3N1cmVkIHVzIHRoYXQgDQoNCml0cyBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgaXMgY29tcHJpc2VkIG9mDQoNCmluZGl2aWR1YWxzIHdo byBoYXZlIG9wdGVkIGluIHRvIHJlY2VpdmUNCg0KDQpzdWNoIG1haWxpbmdz LiBUaGlzIGlzIE5PVCB1bnNvbGljaXRlZA0KDQplbWFpbC4gSWYgeW91IGRv IG5vdCB3aXNoIHRvIHJlY2VpdmUgDQoNCmZ1cnRoZXIgbWFpbGluZ3MsIHBs ZWFzZSBmb2xsb3cgdGhlDQoNCmluc3RydWN0aW9ucyBiZWxvdyB0byBiZSBy ZW1vdmVkIGZyb20gDQoNCnRoZWlyIGxpc3QuIFRoaXMgc2VuZGVyIGhvbm9y cyBhbGwNCg0KcmVtb3ZlIHJlcXVlc3RzLjwvZm9udD48L3A+DQoNCjwvdGQ+ DQoNCjwvdHI+DQoNCg0KPC90YWJsZT4NCg0KPC9DRU5URVI+DQoNCjxQIGFs aWduPSJjZW50ZXIiPlRvIGJlIHJlbW92ZWQgZnJvbSB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGxp c3QgPEEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmdyZW05OTlAaG90cG9wLmNvbT9TdWJqZWN0 PXJlbW92ZSI+Y2xpY2sgaGVyZTwvQT4uPC9wPg0KDQo8UD48QlI+DQoNCjwv UD4NCg0KPC9CT0RZPg0KDQo8L0hUTUw+DQo= ------=_NextPart_EF4_ACAE_E713A168.AC5A09CF-- From nlgcdc-admin Wed Mar 26 23:48:27 2003 Received: from email2538.com (node-c-0dd5.a2000.nl [62.194.13.213]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.7/8.12.5) with SMTP id h2R7mOcR099459 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:48:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from muzensimon@email.com) Message-Id: <200303270748.h2R7mOcR099459@agora.rdrop.com> From: Simon Muzenda To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Reply-To: simonmuzen@email.com Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:48:40 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="76814760-64ba-4417-83bd-85d9e2b6f667" Subject: [nlgcdc] Urgent Assistance Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: This is a multi-part message in MIME format --76814760-64ba-4417-83bd-85d9e2b6f667 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +31 630-359-505 CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL You may be surprised to receive this letter from me since you do not know me = personally.The purpose of my introduction is that I am Simon Muzenda,the son = of Paul Muzenda a farmer in Zimbabwe who was recently murdered in the land = dispute in my country.I got your contact through network online hence decided = to write you.Before the death of my father,he had taken me to Johannesburg to = deposit the sum of US8.5 million (Eight million,Five Hundred thousand United = States dollars),in one of the private security company, as he foresaw the = looming danger in Zimbabwe this money was deposited in a box as gem stones to = avoid much demurrage from security company.This amount was meant for the = purchase of new machines and chemicals for the Farms and establishment of new = farms in Swaziland. This land problem came when Zimbabwean President Mr.Robert Mugabe introduced = a new Land Act Reform wholly affecting the rich white farmers and some few = black farmers,and this resulted to the killing and mob action by Zimbabwean = war veterans and some lunatics in the society.In fact a lot of people were = killed because of this Land reform Act for which my father was one of the = victims. It is against this background that,I and my family fled Zimbabwe for = fear of our lives and are currently staying in the Netherlands where we are = seeking political asylum and moreso have decided to transfer my father's = money to a more reliable foreign account.since the law of Netherlands = prohibits a refugee (asylum seeker) to open any bank account or to be = involved in any financial transaction throughout the territorial zone of = Netherlands,As the eldest son of my father,I am saddled with the = responsibility of seeking a genuine foreign account where this money could be = transferred without the knowledge of my government who are bent on taking = everything we have got. The South African government seems to be playing = along with them. I am faced with the dilemma of moving this amount of money out of South = Africa for fear of going through the same experience in future,both countries = have similar political history.As a businessman,I am seeking for a partner = who I have to entrust my future and that of my family in his hands,I must = let you know that this transaction is risk free.If you accept to assist me = and my family all I want you to do for me,is to make an arrangements with the = security company to clear the consignment(funds) from their afiliate office = here in the Netherlands as i have already given directives for the = consignment to be brought to the Netherlands from South Africa.But before = then all modalities will have to be put in place like change of ownership to = the consignment and more importantly this money I intend to use for = investment. I have two options for you. Firstly you can choose to have certain percentage = of the money for nominating your account for this transaction. Or you can go = into partnership with me for the proper profitable investment of the money in = your country.Whichever the option you want,feel free to notify me.I have also = mapped out 5% of this money for all kinds of expenses incurred in the process = of this transaction.If you do not prefer a partnership I am willing to give = you 10% of the money while the remaining 85% will be for my investment in = your country.Contact me with the above e-mail address while I implore you to = maintain the absolute secrecy required in this transaction. Thanks,GOD BLESS YOU Yours Faithfully, Simon Muzenda. --76814760-64ba-4417-83bd-85d9e2b6f667-- From nlgcdc-admin Fri Apr 18 18:17:56 2003 Received: from out001.tpctex.com (out001.tpctex.com [69.24.236.21]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.9/8.12.5) with SMTP id h3J1HtCq001454 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:17:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from support_bounce@boing.topica.com) To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com From: Topica Support Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:17:45 -0700 Message-ID: <1323884989-1463792382-1050715065@boing.topica.com> Reply-To: support@get.topica.com X-Topica-Id: <1050715065.web004.8887.1000006> Subject: [nlgcdc] Goodbye from Diversity Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Hi, You have been removed from the mailing list 'Diversity'. Thank you for participating. Please visit Topica at http://www.topica.com/ and browse our Directory to find another list that may be of interest to you. If you have any questions, please visit our help system at http://www.topica.com/ (click on "help" on the bottom of the screen) or email our Customer Support Department at support@get.topica.com. Thank you, Topica Customer Support From nlgcdc-admin Sat Apr 26 21:37:14 2003 Received: from mail5.etransmail5.com ([207.67.131.70]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.12.9/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h3R4bAhl086965 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:37:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from HowardM@garnett.etransmail4.com) Received: from mailxch (mfs.neovi.com [207.67.131.2]) by mail5.etransmail5.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Mail5 LX 0.6) with ESMTP id h3R4ZRO7014532 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:35:27 -0700 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 21:35:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20157367.1051418820828.JavaMail.mmsadmin@neovi.com> From: Howard Michelson To: nlgcdc@agora.rdrop.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [nlgcdc] Interested in Cash for Empties? Sender: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com Errors-To: nlgcdc-admin@rdrop.com X-BeenThere: nlgcdc@rdrop.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: G7 Recycle For Dollars!
www.recycle4dollars.com
Earn Cash or Credit for your Empty Inkjet and Toner Cartridges
Quickly generate your
FREE shipping label during this session!
Recycle for dollars. Use our simple online system to specify which items you will be returning.
 Your reward* per empty cartridge:
 Laser toner: $5.00
 Inkjet cartridge: $2.50