首页> 外文期刊>Telecommunications Reports >Call for Comments Resumes On Chicago Dish Ordinance
【24h】

Call for Comments Resumes On Chicago Dish Ordinance

机译:呼吁评论依据芝加哥菜单条例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The FCC's Media Bureau has resumed seeking comment on a petition for declaratory ruling filed by the Satellite Broadcasting & Communications Association, Directv LLC, and Dish Network LLC in 2012, challenging Chicago's satellite dish antenna restrictions. In May 2012, "SBCA and the City of Chicago filed a joint motion with the Commission to stay the public comment period" set for the petition "until after the Commission renders a decision in the proceeding involving SBCA's challenge to a similar ordinance enacted by the City of Philadelphia," and the bureau granted that request. In 2018, the bureau found that the Philadelphia ordinance violated the FCC's over-the-air reception devices (OTARD) rules, which is aimed at ensuring competitive choice for consumers with respect to video services. "Since then, the Bureau contacted the parties to this Petition, to ascertain whether a dispute over the Chicago Ordinance still exists," the bureau said in a public notice released Sept. 1 in MB docket 20-284 and CSR-8624-O. "Because the parties have indicated that the issues raised in the Petition require resolution, we now resume seeking comment on the Petition. We note that while not identical, the Philadelphia and Chicago Ordinances are similar. We ask that commenters opposing the Petition be mindful of the Bureau's Philadelphia Declaratory Ruling and address why the Chicago Ordinance should be distinguished from the Philadelphia Ordinance, and why the Chicago Ordinance does not similarly violate the OTARD Rule."
机译:FCC的媒体局恢复了关于卫星广播和通信协会,Directv LLC和Dish Network LLC提交的宣言申请的提出评论,挑战了芝加哥卫星天线限制。 2012年5月,“芝加哥·芝加哥市向委员会提起了委员会的联合议案”为申请留下“,直到委员会在涉及SBCA对其颁布的类似条例的挑战的诉讼方面的决定中举行决定费城市“,局授予该请求。 2018年,主席团发现费城条例违反了FCC的超空中接收设备(OTARD)规则,旨在确保消费者对视频服务的竞争选择。 “从那时起,局联系了本份的缔约方,确定芝加哥条例仍然存在争议,”在9月1日在MB局部局部发布的公告中表示,在MB Docket 20-284和CSR-8624-O中发布。 “由于各方表示,请愿书提出的问题需要解决,我们现在恢复寻求对请愿书的评论。我们注意到,虽然不是相同的,但费城和芝加哥条例类似。我们要求对反对请愿书的评论者注意到这一点局的费城宣言宣誓裁决和地址为什么芝加哥条例应与费城条例有所不同,为什么芝加哥条例不同样违反OTARD规则。“

著录项

  • 来源
    《Telecommunications Reports》 |2020年第16期|21-21|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号