NEW YORK — A federal appeals court on Tuesday tossed out a government policy that can lead to broadcasters being fined for allowing even a single curse word on live television, concluding that the rule was unconstitutionally vague and had a chilling effect on broadcasters.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan struck down the 2004 Federal Communications Commission policy, which said that profanity referring to sex or excrement is always indecent.
"By prohibiting all `patently offensive' references to sex, sexual organs and excretion without giving adequate guidance as to what `patently offensive' means, the FCC effectively chills speech, because broadcasters have no way of knowing what the FCC will find offensive," the appeals court wrote.
I guess the fallout of this leads to the FCC explicitly defining what "patently offensive" means. But for now, that's a nice kick to the FCC's gonads.
MD: You have to win, no matter what. SC: Why didn't you try that this year?
any table that does not include Holy F**ing Sh** is not complete.
May I inquire as to the meaning of "prat"?
We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.
That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy - Swift
You know, it's telling that Bush is looking at a guy who's not even a judge yet for "the first Hispanic Supreme Court nomination," which seems to be the GOP ration d'etre for why the Dems don't like this guy. Jr.