1998=1984?

An interesting little email has cropped up among microradio activists recently.

It stems from the recent bust and arrest of the operators of Black Cat Radio in Memphis, TN. The station ops weren’t arrested for the actual act of unlicensed broadcasting, but rather for jacking into the University of Memphis‘ electrical system to to power their transmitter as they broadcast from a parking garage on campus.

The email allegedly came from the U.S. Department of Justice, and it’s reproduced in its entirety below: Read More

Greasing the Wheel

The following is a report from scouts at the National Lawyer’s Guild’s Committee on Democratic Communications; they went to Washington recently to gauge support for a low power radio legalization effort.

Call To Action

We now have an historic opportunity (ok, its a cheap political phrase) to influence communications policy in the U.S. The window of opportunity is NOW! Believe me– I have talked with a number of people in D.C.– we need to BOMBARD the FCC RIGHT NOW with a massive show of support. We need to show them that the unlicensed micros are serious about wanting a legalized system and we need to show that it has Congressional support. Read More

Controversy in Michigan

Support for low-power broadcasting is growing and gaining some political ground.

The following is a move in the right direction – Michigan’s legislature is considering resolutions in both houses advocating the legalization of a low-power broadcast service. Not surprisingly, the state’s broadcasting association jumped on the defensive. Here’s the texts from everyone involved.

Michigan State House Resolution No. 379

Reps. Freeman, Baade, Ciaramitaro, Kelly, Tesanovich, Profit, Dobronski, Prusi, Gubow, Kukuk, Bodem, Godchaux, Leland, Olshove, Harder, Hale, Brater, Parks, Anthony, Scranton, Schermesser, Martinez, Kilpatrick, Bogardus, Jelinek, Scott, DeHart, Basham, Willard, Baird, Murphy, Birkholz, Richner, LaForge, Quarles, Hanley, Cherry and Varga Read More

Risks and Strategies

By Ted M. Coopman
Rogue Communication

Disclaimer: Broadcasting without a license is a violation of Federal law. Those convicted of illegally broadcasting may face fines of more than $10,000 and up to one year in jail per incident. The author does not encourage any illegal activity nor does he accept any liability for the consequences of the use of the information contained in this article. The reader uses this information at her/his own risk. For more information concerning the penalties for unlicensed broadcasting contact the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

So, You Want to Free the Airwaves?

If you have gotten this far and found this article, I am assuming you know about the Micro Broadcasting Movement and are seriously considering participating. If not, you will want to check out Radio4all for links and detailed information about the Free Communications Movement and micro radio. For deeper background, you may wish to access my master’s thesis on micro radio. This article does not encourage participating in micro radio (although I am on record as supporting the goals of the Free Communications Movement); it simply provides information gathered through researching the Micro Radio Movement and the FCC. I wrote this article to help individuals considering participating in micro radio make informed decisions. Read More

Working the System

There are many that say it’s no use to try to change something from the inside. Maybe it’s because they’re not sure how. Once again, legal experts in the microradio movement have a bright idea for tactics – use the FCC’s regulatory system as a tool! Written by Peter Franck, a member of the legal team defending Stephen Dunifer and Free Radio Berkeley.

This is a report, a proposal, and poses questions to the micro community. Please share this with groups that are not on line.

In the Dunifer case, Dunifer’s primary defense against the U. S. government’s request for a court injunction to stop him from broadcasting was that FCC Regulations barring low-power stations from getting a license were unconstitutional. The Court ruled that Dunifer did not have “standing” to raise this defense because he had not applied and asked for a waiver of the licensing provisions. In other words, the Court refused to consider the constitutionality of the regulations because Dunifer had not asked the FCC to waive those requirements which seem to make it impossible for a low-power broadcaster to get a license to broadcast lawfully. (The same Judge, early in the case, had expressed great doubt about the constitutionality of the FCC regulations. In this ruling she was refusing to consider the issue.) While we think the Judge’s reasoning is terribly wrong, the fact is that the FCC has been filing this Judge’s decision in other Courts around the country with some success. Read More