[521] in libertarians
Re: Free Radio Berkeley
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adam Dershowitz)
Wed Dec 21 11:03:37 1994
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 94 11:02:05 EST
To: Magnus Nilsson <magnusn@algonet.se>
From: dersh@MIT.EDU (Adam Dershowitz)
Cc: Kevin THEOBALD <theobald@duke.cs.mcgill.ca>, libertarians@MIT.EDU
At 4:38 PM 12/21/94, Magnus Nilsson wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Dec 1994, Adam Dershowitz wrote:
>
>> At 4:23 PM 12/20/94, Kevin THEOBALD wrote:
>> >In your message [Free Radio Berkeley]
>> >+------------------------------
>> >| Dunifer acknowledges his transmissions are illegal under current
>> >laws, but
>> >| maintains the Constitution guarantees him the right to free speech -
>> >even over
>> >| the airwaves - under the First Amendment. Moreover, he maintians the
>>soaring
>> >| costs of licensing and operating a legal radio station have made radio
>> >elitist.
>> >| The result is that most stations are run by corporations and wealthy
>> >| individuals, leaving many segements of the community without an outlet,
>> >he says.
>> >|
>> >| Peter Franck, an attourney with the Committee on Democratic
>> >Communications
>> >| in San Francisco, which filed court papers in support of Dunifer, said the
>> >| FCC has set up a system that would be equivalent of charging money for
>> >someone
>> >| to get up on a soap box.
>> >|
>> >| "The structure of the FCC's regulations bans anybody who hasn't
>> >got huge
>> >| amounts of money from broadcasting, which disenfranchises minority
>> >| communities and the poor," Franck said.
>> >
>> >It's hard to know whether or not to support this guy. Some of his
>> >rhetoric, such as equating FCC licenses with charging money to set up a
>> >soap box, makes me wonder how he would act if radio frequencies were
>> >allocated by a free market. Since radio frequencies would still cost
>> >money, would he still complain about how only the wealthy have access?
>> >
>> > Kevin
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't allocating them by free markey really mean no licenses at all?
>> Anyone can transmit where and when they want. No cost except to buy your
>> transmitter.
>>
>> --Adam
>>
>>
>>
>It would still be a cost for uphoulding the rights to the frequencies, I
>suppose. The important thing is that the frequence you got is really
>owned by you, so you acn lend money on it, sell it or peel of parts of it
>by using better techniqe. I think that a person named Glen Whtiman has
>wrote a study on the topic for CATO institute.
>
>magnus
Not necessarily. It is possible to not have anyone own a frequency. You
can just transmit where and when you want. You can set up a soap box and
speak where and when you want. If someone else is talking then go find
another soap box, or try to talk loader than them. Set up a bigger
transmitter, or go find a free frequency.
I am not saying this is best way. I am just saying that it would be
possible and would be the true free market way to do things, in my opinion.
--Adam
