[LINK] CDT.org Policy Post 13.9: Indecency Ruling a Significant Victory for Free Expression

[Robin Whittle]

There is an interesting Policy Post:

  http://www.cdt.org/publications/policyposts/2007/9

regarding a recent US court decision reducing the FCC's ability to
censor radio or TV broadcast material.

  The question is already being addressed in Europe in precisely the
  way that free expression advocates in the U.S. have most feared.
  In a recent move, the EU adopted what is commonly known as the "TV
  without frontiers" directive which seeks to import a wide variety
  of TV-based content restrictions now aimed at child protection on
  television into the Internet in order to create a "level playing
  field" between media.

  Free expression advocates in the United States have argued
  precisely to the contrary, noting that the robust user empowerment
  tools that rendered old-media style censorship completely unnecessary
  on the Internet are increasingly available in all manifestations of
  the converged digital media. The days of passive "viewers" are fast
  coming to an end, replaced by an age of active "users" who can control
  their families' video and other online experiences. In light of these
  profound changes, the courts are right to question whether the FCC's
  censorship authority makes any sense at all.

Broadcasting is fundamentally different from the Internet in that it
involves licenced used of a limited public asset: radio spectrum.

Television without frontiers ...

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=2343

  March press release.


http://www.openrightsgroup.org/orgwiki/index.php/TV_Without_Frontiers_Directive

  Now renamed as the Audio-Visual Services Directive, European
  Commissioner Viviane Reding is determined that there should be a
  "level-playing field" between broadcast and online content, and so
  European regulation of television content should be extended to the
  Internet.


http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=7867  4/03/2007

  The Parliament passed a heavily-changed document which made it clear
  that regulation must apply only to commercial television-like services
  and not to user generated content such as that found on YouTube.

  The proposed Directive says that a heavier regulatory burden must rest
  on material delivered to a schedule, in the style of traditional
  television. On demand services will also be regulated, but
  significantly more lightly, it said.


http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/proposal_2005/index_en.htm
http://ec.europa.eu/avpolicy/docs/reg/modernisation/proposal_2005/avmsd_cons_may07_en.pdf

  May 2007 document.

  (13) The definition of audiovisual media services covers only
       audiovisual media services, whether scheduled or on-demand,
       which are mass media, that is, which are intended for
       reception by, and which could have a clear impact on, a
       significant proportion of the general public. The scope is
       limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore
       covers any form of economic activity, including that of
       public service enterprises, but does not cover activities
       which are primarily non-economic and which are not in
       competition with television broadcasting, such as private
       websites and services consisting of the provision or
       distribution of audiovisual content generated by private
       users for the purposes of sharing and exchange within
       communities of interest.

. . . and several other pages of definitions.


  - Robin