D.C. Court hears ownership case

December 1999
Multichannel News;12/06/99, Vol. 20 Issue 50, p5
Reports that Time Warner Entertainment has told the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that a 1992 law capping cable-system ownership violated the company's First Amendment rights of free speech.


Related Articles

  • US West overpowers cross-ownership ban. O'Shea, Dan // Telephony;6/20/94, Vol. 226 Issue 25, p1 

    Reports that US West has become the second Bell regional holding company (RHC) to win a lawsuit overruling the telecommunication/cable cross-ownership ban of the 1984 Cable Act. US West's ownership of 25% of Time Warner Entertainment which will help the cable operator build broadband facilities...

  • DOJ: Don't Review Subowner Regs. Hearn, Ted // Multichannel News;01/29/2001, Vol. 22 Issue 5, p34 

    Reports that the United States Department of Justice is calling on the U.S. Supreme Court not to review federal laws affecting the cable television industry as of January 29, 2001. Provisions of the cable television rules; Cable operator Time Warner Entertainment's protest against the rules.

  • MMDS (wireless cable): A capital ideal. Brown, Rich // Broadcasting & Cable;5/1/95, Vol. 125 Issue 18, p16 

    Reports on the financial prospects for multichannel, multipoint distribution service (MMDS) wireless cable companies in the United States. Merger plans between wireless cable companies; Wave of public offerings in industry; Impact of Cable Act of 1992; Comparative data on industry's growth. ...

  • Loss of must carry doesn't worry broadcasters. McAvoy, Kim // Broadcasting & Cable;5/23/94, Vol. 124 Issue 21, p58 

    Reports on the reaction of television broadcasters on the possible rejection of the must-carry provisions of the 1992 Cable Act by the Supreme Court. Use of retransmission consent to gain long-term carriage agreement; Types of broadcasters that will be affected by the rejection of the...

  • Twice the fun. Dempsey, John // Variety;5/2/94, Vol. 355 Issue 1, p104 

    Focuses on the Cable Act of 1992 which allows television (TV) stations to bargain for cash payments from their local cable systems for carriage of station's signal. Clarification of the cable operators that they have no interest in ponying up cash; Resulting negotiations of TV stations for an...

  • Nudity clause gives cable operators pause. Stern, Christopher // Broadcasting & Cable;4/17/95, Vol. 125 Issue 16, p55 

    Reports that the amendment to the US Senate's telecommunications reform bill will put cable operators in the watchdog position. Prohibition of obscenity, indecency and nudity; Skepticism about the amendment; Opposition to the amendment.

  • Cable's take on S.652: Good news, but... Brown, Rich // Broadcasting & Cable;6/26/95, Vol. 125 Issue 26, p38 

    Reports on the impact of telecommunications reform to the cable industry. Increase in competition for cable operators; Overall positive attitude from industry; Support from Time Warner; Comcast Corp.; National Cable Television Association president Decker Anstrom.

  • Number please.  // Broadcasting & Cable;4/5/93, Vol. 123 Issue 14, p32 

    Reports that the Educational Foundation of NATPE International has slated a `tele-workshop' satellite conference on April 12, 1993 to discuss the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) pending implementation of the Cable Reregulation Act of 1992. The interactive element of the teleconference;...

  • Cable faces life with must carry. Flint, Joe // Broadcasting & Cable;4/19/93, Vol. 123 Issue 16, p66 

    Summarizes the series of court appeals and decisions which decided on making cable systems carry local broadcast signals. Provisions of must carry rules; Cable programers' arguments; Supreme Court as the final step; Judge Stephen Williams' opinion.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics