Court rejects FCC 30 pct cap on cable market share
Lawyer Blogs
An appeals court on Friday overturned a rule that said a cable TV company could not serve more than 30 percent of the nation's subscribers. The verdict was a victory for the largest cable company, Comcast Corp., which has 26 percent share and sued to block the rule.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the cap, imposed by the Federal Communications Commission, was "arbitrary and capricious," and threw out the restriction.
Fearing a cable monopoly, Congress in 1992 directed the FCC to set limits on how many customers cable TV operators could reach nationwide.
The FCC set the 30 percent limit, but that was thrown out twice before by the courts. Two years ago the cap was reinstated, prompting the new challenge from Comcast.
FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell said he had disagreed with the commission's decision to re-impose the cap in 2007 because he felt the rule was vulnerable to a challenge given that it was already overturned in 2001. He said that the commission's cap was based on "aging data and questionable assumptions" that didn't adequately reflect the entry of new competitors to cable operators.
Related listings
-
Crandall Canyon payouts moving through Utah courts
Lawyer Blogs 08/27/2009Judges have begun approving payouts from a multimillion-dollar settlement stemming from the collapse two years ago of a Utah mine that entombed six miners and led to three rescuers' deaths. Recently released court records show the claims also cover a...
-
Fla. gay adoption ban goes to appeals court
Lawyer Blogs 08/26/2009A Florida appeals court is being urged to affirm a judge's ruling that the state's strict ban on adoptions by gay people is unconstitutional. Attorneys for parent Martin Gill and his two children argued Wednesday in Miami that there's no rational bas...
-
Appeals court to hear sports betting arguments
Lawyer Blogs 08/24/2009A federal appeals court in Philadelphia will decide whether sports betting in Delaware should be put on hold until a legal challenge by professional sports leagues and the NCAA is decided. The court will hear arguments Monday over a judge's denial of...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.