Gary,
As I understand it, the nfb currently has resolutions which support DVS on
television. They stress the emergency warning aspects of dvs, and
minimize the visual descriptive features of Descriptive Video
Services. The leadership, as I understand it, has chosen to take this
action which would effectively eliminate even the warning emergency
messages features which they, supposedly support. I'm no lawyer, but I am
suspecting that if they get a ruling which says the fcc went beyond their
legal bounds in this matter, the nfb would then be in a position to
request the emergency aspects of DVS, stating that they would be for clear
public benefit, and at the same time argue that describing scenery and
costumes was beyond the purview of the service as determined by the
courts. They would then get, reluctantly, the kind of dvs which they as a
organization can tolerate, but help to eliminate the possibility of it
spreading generally.
Steve
On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Gary Bowers wrote:
Kelly and everyone:
The NFB seems interested in securing its own future with the
industrial community. I wonder if a handful of NFB personnel would
use their influence for the benefit of a few -- at the expense of
many.
In my opinion, this recent action by the NFB will give their
organization the type of publicity from which they see themselves as
the short-term beneficiary.
I'd be interested to know if the majority of their members are given
a real chance to express their own feelings. Does anyone know if
these lawsuits the result of NFB membership referenda?
Gary Bowers
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelly Pierce" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 7:03 PM
Subject: NFB, Industry File Lawsuits On Video Description
The National Federation of the Blind along with several large
industry
associations filed lawsuits last week challenging a new order by the
Federal Communications Commission that requires the biggest TV and
cable
networks to describe about four hours a week of video programming.
The
suits were filed last week in Washington, DC at the 11th circuit
court of
appeals. The NFB called the rules "arbitrary and capricious." All
of the
lawsuits seek to have the court throw out the rules and find that
the
commission exceeded its authority by mandating audio description.
The
actions by the NFB are significant. It represents one of the few
times a
disability organization has entered the federal courts to stop
implementation of policy or regulation that would increase
accessibility
for people with disabilities. it is also significant that a
disability
organization has joined with industry to block an expansion of
disability
access.
The full text of the lawsuits filed with the court follow. the
lawsuits
were filed in paper form. Electronic copies were not
available from the court. Any typographical errors are likely a
result of
scanning and not that of the filers. The documents are quite brief.
I am
told that this provides those filing the lawsuits with the maximum
flexibility in making any number of arguments later.
Kelly
Text of NFB complaint.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND, Petitioner
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent
Case No.: 01-1155
Filed: 4/2/01
PETITION FOR REVIEW
The National Federation of the Blind hereby petitions the Court for
review
of the Order of the Federal Communications Commission in
Implementation of
Video Description of Video Programming, MM Docket No 99-339,
Memorandum
Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, FCC 01-7, adopted on January
18,
2001.
In this proceeding, the Commission adopted and revised rules
requiring the largest broadcasters and multichannel video
programming
distributors to provide video description of television programming
in
specified amounts. The new rules codified at 47 C.F.R. 79.2, 79.3,
are
arbitrary and capricious and otherwise not in accordance with law.
This Petition for Review is filed pursuant to Section 402(a) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 402(a). This
Court has
jurisdiction over these matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2342(1) &
2344. Venue lies in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2343.
Respectfully submitted,
Daniel F. Goldstein Joshua N. Auerbach Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP
300 Maryland Center 520
West Fayette Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201
Attorneys for Petitioner
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 27th day of March, 2001, copies of the
foregoing Petition for Review were sent by certified mail, postage
prepaid,
return receipt requested, to:
Hon. Jane E. Mago Interim General Counsel Federal Communications
Commission
445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20554
Joshua N. Auerbach
Text of Second papers
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
MOTION PICTURE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
BROADCASTERS, and NATIONAL CABLE TELEVISION ASSOCIATION,
Petitioners,
v.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Respondent.
Case No. 01-1149
PETITION FOR REVIEW
The Motion Picture Association of America, the National Association
of Broadcasters, and the National Cable Television Association
("Petitioners"),
hereby petition this Court for review of the final order of the
Federal Communications Commission in Implementation of Video
Description of Video
Programming, MM Docket No 99-339, Memorandum Opinion and Order on
Reconsideration, FCC 01-7 (adopted Jan. 18, 2001) ("MO&O"). The
final order
in this proceeding was published in the Federal Register on February
1, 2001. 66 Fed. Reg 8521 (Feb. 1 2001). In this rulemaking
proceeding the
Commission adopted and revised rules requiring broadcasters and
multichannel
video programming distributors, i.e., cable and satellite television
operators ("MVPDs"), to provide "video descriptions" of television
programming. The new rules are codified at Sections 79.2 and 79.3
of the
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. 79.2, 79.3. A true and correct copy
of the MO&O is annexed hereto.
Jurisdiction and Venue
This Petition for Review is filed pursuant to Section 402(a) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended. 47 U.S.C 402(a). This
Court has
jurisdiction over the matters in this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
2342(1)
& 2344. Venue lies in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2343.
Nature of the Claims
As aggrieved parties who participated in the rulemaking proceedings
below in
MM Docket No 99-339, and associations whose members will be
adversely affected by implementation of the rules adopted therein,
each of the Petitioners is properly a party in the instant review
proceeding before the
Court. Relief is sought on grounds that the Commission's order
adopting the
video description rules, and the rules themselves, are inconsistent
with the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C 151 et seq., and
are otherwise not in accordance with the law. The rules also impose
a scheme of
compelled speech on Petitioners' members, and are inconsistent with
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Petitioners
ask that
this Court hold unlawful, set aside, enjoin, annul, and vacate the
Commission's video description rules and the orders adopting them.
Respectfully submitted,
By: Robert Corn-Revere Ronald G London
HOGAN & HARTSON L.L.P 555 13th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004
(202) 637-5600
Counsel for Petitioners Motion Picture Association of America,
National Association of Broadcasters and National Cable Television
Association
Dated: March 28, 2001
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply
type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
--
+----------------------------+
| Steve Zielinski (N8UJS) |
| [log in to unmask] |
+----------------------------+
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|
