- The Washington Times - Tuesday, February 22, 2005


A U.S. appeals panel yesterday challenged new federal rules requiring certain video devices to have technology to prevent copying digital television programs and distributing them over the Internet.

U.S. Circuit Judge Harry T. Edwards told the Federal Communications Commission it “crossed the line” requiring the new anti-piracy technology in next-generation television devices. But another appeals judge on the panel questioned whether consumers can challenge the FCC’s rules in the courtroom.

The technology, known as a broadcast flag, will be required after July 1 for televisions equipped to receive new digital signals, many personal computers and VCR-type recording devices. It would permit entertainment companies to designate, or flag, programs to prevent viewers from copying shows or distributing them over the Internet.

Judge Edwards, the former chief judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, questioned the FCC’s authority to impose regulations affecting television broadcasts after such programs are beamed into households.

The FCC’s attorney, Jacob M. Lewis, acknowledged the agency never had exercised such ancillary power but maintained it was permitted by Congress because lawmakers didn’t explicitly outlaw it.

“Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world,” Judge Edwards responded.

He said the FCC “crossed the line” of authority approved by Congress. “You’ve gone too far,” he said. “Are washing machines next?”

Another circuit judge, David B. Sentelle, agreed. Judge Sentelle acknowledged that entertainment companies could be reluctant to broadcast high-quality movies or TV shows that can’t be protected against copyright violators, but said that wasn’t the FCC’s problem.

“It’s going to have less content if it’s not protected, but Congress didn’t direct that you have to maximize content,” Judge Sentelle said. “You can’t regulate washing machines. You can’t rule the world.”

Consumers groups, including library associations, have contested the FCC requirements, asserting that the rules will drive up prices of digital television devices and prevent consumers from recording programs in ways permitted under copyright laws.

The lawyer for the consumers groups, Pantelis Michalopoulos, argued that the broadcast flag could preclude libraries from copying television programs for educational purposes.

But Judge Sentelle questioned whether the consumer and library groups can lawfully challenge the FCC decision, because the rules in question affect television viewers broadly. Appeals court procedures require groups to be able to show a particular injury before judges will consider a case; the FCC did not argue this point.

If the appeals panel decides that the consumers groups can’t contest the FCC requirements, it would dismiss the case regardless of any concerns about the anti-piracy technology.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Manage Newsletters

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide