Finding that the city of San Jose’s cable franchise renewal requi...
Finding that the city of San Jose’s cable franchise renewal requirements, including providing up to 10 public, educational and governmental (PEG) access channels, were content-neutral and serving important govt. interests, the U.S. Dist. Court, San Jose, denied Comcast’s motion…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
for a preliminary injunction to halt the formal renewal process instituted by the city before a designated hearing officer. Comcast had challenged the proceeding on the grounds that it violated its constitutional right to free speech and process as well as provisions of the Cable Act. Besides arguing that its process adequately safeguarded all of Comcast’s constitutional rights, the city contended that the company’s request for relief under the Act wasn’t ripe since the statute permitted judicial review only after final denial of a renewal application or where a cable operator had been affected adversely by the failure of the local franchising authority to follow the procedural requirements. Comcast said the city’s renewal proposal was illegal because it “demands goods and services which exceed the scope and purpose” of the Act. It said the city had “improperly” demanded 10 PEG channels, noncable services such as Internet access, a full-service telecom network, specific fiber transmission technology and a parental control device at no charge to the subscriber. Comcast contended the city’s requirements on the number, use, location, management of and trigger for the PEG channels violated the First Amendment. The court said those requirements didn’t violate Comcast’s First Amendment rights or “seriously infringe or curtail” its expressive rights. It held that a review of the city’s administrative procedures showed that Comcast’s due process rights were protected.