To change the way it is regulated. The ftc [inaudible] , you of this in mind should have received on your way in. We believe that limiting the Data Collected from children and preventing Online Marketing to to under 13 absent her absent parental consent. We also want to ensure businesses comply with the law and protect data on gauging in children. Childrensprotect information rather than ignore data. With that in mind, i will hand over to stephen. And thankou very much you to the team led by emma. Also, as it is probably obvious, cspan is here. We are live, so one questions you could be on broadcast tv. , i will be ceo moderating the panel. Video at cspan will be archived at cspan and will also provide a link. Im going to ask this panel to introduce themselves, starting with you mark. If you could tell us who you are, where you work and a description of your work in this space. Im an assistant director in the Privacy Division and i have been in that job for about 10 years. What the ftc
Hearing on legislation governing retransmission of broadcast Television Content by satellite tv companies. Representatives from the National Association of broadcasters, at t, the cable industry, and the Public Interest group testified at this hearing held by house energy and subcommittee on communications. There we go. Will now come to order. The chair recognizes himself for five minutes. Good morning, id like to welcome everyone to the subcommittees first hearing for stellar and evolving marketplace. Id like to thank our witnesses for appearing before us to address these important issues. Five years ago passed the act, extended authorization for Satellite Television companies to provide broadcast content to unserved households. According to satellite tv industry, this provision enables roughly 870,000 customers in mostly rural to receive broadcast television signals. These customers fall into a few categories, first is households that cant receive content using an antenna. Second is
[inaudible conversations] we will now come to order. The chair now recognizes himself for five minutes. Good morning. Id like to welcome everyone to the subcommittees first hearing of the new congress on the evolving media marketplace. It also like to thank her witnesses for appearing before us today to discuss these important issues. Five years ago this committee passed reauthorization act this spill extended the operation for Satellite Television companies to provide broadcast content to unserved households. According to the satellite tv industry this provision enables roughly 870,000 customers in mostly rural amenities to receive over the air broadcast Television Signals. These customers fall into a few categories per the first is household they cannot receive broadcast content using an antenna for the second as markets where satellite providers do not offer local to local service and the third is short markets where there are no local affiliate stations with any of the records and
Doctrine or keep it. Custice roberts well hear argument first this morning in case 221219, relentless versus the department commerce. Mr. Martinez. Or aument of Roman Martinez on behalf of the petitioners martinez mr. Chief justice, and may it please the court for too long, chevron has distorted the judicialss and undermined statutory interpretation. It should be overror three reasons. First, chevron violates the constitution. Article iii emwe judges to say what the law is. It requires them to interpret federal statutes using their best and iepdent judgment. Chevron undermines that duty. It reallocates ieretive authority from courts to agenciesanit forces courts to adopt inferior agency constructions that aued for political or policy reasons. In so, chevron blocks judges from serving as faithful agents of congress. It mandates judicial bias and enures agency overreach. And by removing key checks o executive power, it threatens individual liber. Chevron also violates the apa. The most s
Doctrine or keep it. Chief Justice Roberts we hear argument first this morning ase 221219, relentless versus the department of commerce. Mr. Martinez. Oral argument of roman marti on behalf of the petitioners martinez mr. Chief e, and may it please the court for too long, chevron has distorted the judicial process and undermined statutory interpretation it should be overruled for three ass. First, chevron violates the constitution article iii empowers judges to what the law is. It requires them to interpret federal ates using their best and independent judgment. Chevron undermines that duty. It reallocates interpretive auory from courts to to adopt inferior agencycourts constructions that are issued fotical or policy reasons. In doing so, chevron blocks judges from serving as faithful agents of cong it mandates judicial bias and encourages agency overreach. And by removing key checks on executive power, it threatens individual liberty. Chevron allates the apa. The most straightforward