bill Progress
- Not enactedThe President has not signed this bill
- The senate has not voted
- senate Committees
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation - The house Passed July 23rd, 2018Passed by Voice Vote
- house Committees
Committee on Energy and CommerceCommunications and TechnologyIntroducedMay 8th, 2018
Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
Crime & Police
Public Safety
Consumer Safety
Federal Agencies
Government
Legal Affairs
Science and Technology
Media/Press
Emergency Management
What harm does "pirate" broadcasting cause to justify these penalties?
There are bigger issues facing Americans. This is a bill to help corporate radio stations, not the average citizen.
In case none of you noticed: the FAKE made by Hillary and Democrats, Pee-pee dossier was the ONLY piece of evidence used to substantiate Carter Page as a Russian agent and thus Trump collusion. Page has not been charged. There is no collusion. Put plainly to accept this premise you would have to state: “trump colluded with democrats to steal election for himself.” Ie. HE WON FAIR AND SQUARE. If you can’t handle it, it’s YOUR problem.
I believe this Act is in conflict to the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution.
Isn’t this overkill? Three orders of magnitude? Seriously?
While pirating should be penalized, the proposed increase in the penalty will be far more harmful for small local and regional broadcasters than for corporate broadcasters who can easily pay even the proposed penalty in this act. While piracy is a problem, smaller broadcasting companies shouldn't be penalized for piracy violations to the point it could force them out of business.
Requiring "licenses" in order to operate allows for the FCC to censor stations and individuals they don't agree with. They should move to a system that automatically approves licenses as long as they do not overlap a first responsders channel
Just because you give it an unsavory title doesn’t equate to such harsh penalty. This appears to be a way to justify more government intervention and build revenue.
Laws like this could stifle competition and innovation from upstart radio stations and amateurs that may push the boundaries of legality.
Some pirate radio broadcasts are frequently used to spread fake information and propaganda on the behalf of themselves or other organizations, while others use it to spread alternative true facts and new ideas. The issue is the fact that this methodology hurts businesses, especially small and or new stations. In general because these pirated stations are used sometimes by certain organizations, it can be used for recruitment or to promote ideas that are harmful to mainstream society or certain groups of people. As a result, I don't believe it ignoring the issue and treating it lightly is wise. We need to punish people who use it to harm other people or spread bad ideas based on hatred and lies.
I’ll say yes to this one but not totally agree with this one. It needs to add some help to newcomers and innovators and more!
This is republican governmental silencing to send iut one message only. SWAMP.
Seeing that the internet it is easy to set up a means to broadcast a station this is not a bad bill. To broadcast over the airways possibly over other stations legally owned frequency should be punished hard. There are many more ways to spread your message without disrupting radio frequencies.
Laws like this could stifle competition and innovation from upstart radio stations and amateurs that may push the boundaries of legality.
It isn’t that pirate radio broadcasting is not an issue, but the penalties outlined in this bill appear to be way too harsh. This seems like a bill for our politicians to tout their “tough on crime” credentials rather than being smart on crime.
The airways are owned by the people, right? Make license holders prove detrimental interference before investigating.
This doesn't seem an appropriate thing for congress to spend time on at this point. I wonder about the scope and what it would include; like a very small broadcaster at 1/2 watt or are there limits so we're going after big ones with more than 50,000 watts. In either case, it seems like they are trying to fix something that I've not heard is "broke." (Remember - if it ain't broke don't "fix" it.)