"I was worried sick about my grandkids having to pay for all the current nonsense.. But no more... I see this girls going to be paying for all of it plus all us old farts social security. Hopefully she keeps racking up the days of violations. Ka'ching Ka'ching."
Ha! I love this...
There's a ton of stuff on the web regarding the LD Brewer thing; and yeah - it's the same as the one who sells electronics.
As for Radio Free Brattleboro (The Vermont Thing), they were on the air for years, and did a really good job. They had some battles with the fcc, then an lpfm was granted to someone "serving the town", so rfb stopped fighting.
I couldn't find that much about it. Maybe it's just too old now, and since the LPFM station took over those duties, the majority of web blurbs has gone.
Having read over what I found, it looks like RFB had plenty of time and should have known the consequences well in advance of the action. They even knew about the FCC's end-run tactic in advance. It also looks like they may have gotten poor legal advice. Still, sending in Federal Marshals (presumably with guns), looks like it was trying to stop some sort of terrorist activity rather than shutting down a radio station.
Maybe it shows a chink in the FCC armor, i.e., they must've either feared they might lose in court, or else simply lost patience with the station's failure to comply, and decided to flex muscles. Either way, it was bad enough press that it certainly didn't hurt the effort to get the LPFM station which apparently 'replaced' it on the air.
I'll look up the LPFM station in the registry.
OK ... it's WVEW: http://www.wvew.org/
... can't get any sound from their internet radio connection until 4:00 pm EST. I'll try then.
When I launch (it's getting close enough I can feel it), I'll probably use a combo of community activity lists, Marine weather, affiliate stuff from other NW stations, ect., just to stay on air.
Here is the FCC Forfeiture Order for the Deborah Stevens case:
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2010/DA-10-15A1.html
The FCC answers Stevens's argument that the FCC has no juristiction over her FM station because her signals propagate entirely within the borders of the State of Texas. The FCC counters that the Communications Act of 1934 gives the FCC the authority to regulate all radio communications within the U.S., D.C., and U.S. Territories.
The fine is $10,000.
A novel argument by another pirate who had used the same frequency as Mrs. Stevens in Austin, was that he was a citizen of the independent nation of Texas, and the United States government had no juristiction over him. I researched this claim a bit, and found that Texas declared its indepencence from the United States in March 2, 1861, and was readmitted to the Union by an act of Congress on March 30, 1870. However, there was no action by Texas itself to declare itself to be a State of the United States once again. It appears to be about the same situation with the other former Confederate States. Mrs. Stevens, however (who is a lawyer), does not make the claim that the U.S. government has no juristiction in Texas.
"Believing in ones own importance (and intelligence)..." is a phrase that has been used for a long time. In this case, the law degree and being overcome with a personal political agenda got in the way of seeing the obvious. They appear to be way too smart for their own good. And the out come of the Civil War has been decided for over a hundred years. And just in case no one has said it, welcome back to the union. These folks are using the same dead argument tried by several violators of the rules over the years. None of them, to my knowledge, have ever succeeded in convincing the FCC or the courts that the federal government doesn't have jurisdiction over the radio spectrum.
The Communications Act of 1934 establishes the authority of the FCC and makes radio spectrum in ANY part or parcel of the United States property of the government; period. ANY radio license in the U.S. is the property of the government. In fact, commercial radio a license can NEVER be used an as a citizen owned intangible asset for loan collateral; it's illegal. It belongs to the government.
This is what purposeful and repeated violation of the rules produces. Thumb your nose at the Feds and they will do more than suggest where to put your thumb. Under federal law, the violators can have all of their station equipment confiscated to be sold by the government at auction or destroyed.
The only question I have; What does this course of action produce in the way of a positive result? The answer to most of us is obvious.
If these folks have 10 thousand bucks to burn, I think I'll hit them up for a bailout.
Wars sometimes take a long time to be decided. The war between the Cherchnya and Russia began in the 1830s (and maybe even earlier). It is still being fought today. I first learned about Cherchnya while reading some stories by Leo Tolstoy. He was involed in the Cherchen War as a young officer in the Imperial Russian Army in the 1850s.
When former Confederate General Fightin' Joe Wheeler had put on the blue uniform once again after a "furlough" of some 37 years, he helped bring about more national unity. He was the commander of U.S. land forces in the Santiago de Cuba campaign in 1898. Even so, there is a lot of controversy related to the Civil War even today.
In nearly every conflict in human history the issues and passions of those conflicts persist, in many cases, to modern times. However, the military conflict is long past and the winners and losers have been decided or a stalemate has been agreed to and accepted. In modern parlance we call this, "conflict resolution" or peace.
I have walked the halls of the Texas capitol building in Austin and walked the ground of The Alamo in San Antonio and touched the barrels of the cannons used in the conflicts that led to the Republic of Texas and eventually the state of Texas. I mention this so that it is understood that I think I understand the fervor involved in the historic pride brought about by those who call a nation or state, home.
Should you talk to nearly any veteran, who will engage in conversation about their war-time experiences, about how they still feel about the war or conflict they were involved with and you will find deep seated emotions and passions. And this maybe several decades after the war. I call this an example of the human condition.
People who clearly understand the constitutional aspects of our Republic should also understand the responsibilities inherent in the participation in that process. The constitution of this country allows for peaceful discussion and resolution of conflicts, based on laws, rather than armed conflict or outright rebellion. Attorneys being officers of the court are charged with protecting and preserving this process, not using it to their individual benefit.
Passions aside, the folks in Austin find themselves between their principles and beliefs and the law. And it appears this conflict will end with a deduction from their bank account.