The “door is open” for states to adopt campaign finance laws similar to those upheld Wed. by the U.S. Supreme Court, a campaign finance attorney told the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) on Thurs. Glen Shor, of the Campaign Legal Center (CLC), told NCSL that states could follow the lead set by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) and limit certain types of political ads. Specifically, Shor said the Supreme Court ruling would allow states to prevent certain types of funding from corporations and unions. The CLC helped Sen. McCain (R-Ariz.) and other proponents defend the law before the Supreme Court. The court ruled that corporations and unions couldn’t fund so- called “nonexpress advocacy” ads before 60 days before an election. They still could fund such ads, but the money couldn’t come from a company or union treasury and had to be from the entity’s Political Action Committee (PAC). Many states have passed campaign finance laws similar to federal laws, some of which have been struck down, Shor said. Some of the BCRA will have effects on state candidates and issues as well, he said, as regulations that apply to national entities and parties still can be in play for local elections. Shor said other issues involving political speech would be reviewed, including the scope of the press exemption. After one state legislature asked about the National Rifle Assn.’s plan to purchase TV stations, Shor said the issue was likely to raise questions about the press exemption. The CLC said Wed. that the Supreme Court decision would “give new momentum to the push to ensure that stations meet their public interest obligations.” The CLC said the ruling upheld BCRA provisions that required broadcasters to keep public files on candidate requests for ad time. CLC said the requirement would go toward strengthening localism. “The Supreme Court’s language arguably supports the push to keep a watchful eye on what broadcasters are doing -- or failing to do -- to serve their local communities,” said Amy Wolverton, CLC media program dir. “There’s a real public and congressional move afoot to take license renewal hearings seriously, and the Court seems to support the idea that public interest obligations still exist.”

Responding to weeks of protest from the Haitian community, Take-Two Interactive said it will remove dialog in its hit videogame Grand Theft Auto: Vice City that had been denounced as offensive. The publisher and its Rockstar Games division that created the violent Grand Theft series apologized “to the Haitian people and government of Haiti for any offense that may have been caused by statements made in the videogame.” But the Brooklyn- based Haitian Centers Council (HCC) said Take-Two’s steps didn’t go far enough and it still was planning to protest outside the publisher’s Manhattan hq 10 a.m. Mon.

TV and radio broadcasters, cable and satellite companies and programmers could lose millions of dollars in ad revenue normally generated in the federal election season as a result of a 300-page Supreme Court decision Wed. In a 5-4 ruling, the court upheld key provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (BCRA), commonly known as “McCain- Feingold” for proponents Sens. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Feingold (D-Wis.) Broadcasters were intervenors in the case, fighting BCRA on First Amendment grounds. But some industry insiders said the political ad dollars would continue to flow to the media, just in different ways.

Federal spectrum users stressed to an NTIA forum Tues. the delicate balance between creating incentives for more efficient govt. spectrum use and protecting existing systems such as GPS. Several spectrum experts told the daylong forum at the Commerce Dept. that while secondary markets might have some applications for govt. spectrum, congressional budget and other policies didn’t always create incentives for more efficient use. “It’s harder than you might think to get the incentives right,” Treasury Dept. economist Adele Morris said.

Raising broad questions about how the FCC interpreted federal historic protection legislation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) objected to an FCC finding that 2 proposed wireless towers in N.Y. would have “no adverse effect.” Besides objecting to an FCC ruling on the proposed tower projects, the ACHP raised concerns about the FCC’s possibly overstepping its authority in that area. “A far-reaching determination such as the Commission proposes seriously impinges upon the ACHP’s recognized authority and responsibility to guide the government-wide implementation and interpretation of Section 106,” it said. The ACHP objection, filed directly with Chmn. Powell Fri., came as House Resources Committee Chmn. Pombo (R-Cal.) was raising concerns about the expanded reach that ACHP had given to parts of the National Historic Preservation Act that addressed the siting of wireless towers and other facilities (CD Nov 3 p1). The letter to Powell from ACHP Chmn. John Nau involves 2 towers in Dutchess County, N.Y., and the impact on the Taconic State Parkway, which ACHP said was eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The tower companies, Independent Wireless One and American Tower, were unable to reach agreement with the N.Y. State Historic Preservation Officer on how the tower projects should be treated under ACHP rules protecting historic properties as part of the Sec. 106 review process of the NHPA. As a result, the FCC became involved in the Sec. 106 review to resolve the disagreement and produce an official agency finding. The FCC last month sided with the tower companies’ findings that the proposed construction of the 2 sites wouldn’t have an impact on the Taconic Parkway. “After careful review of the [FCC] submission, the ACHP must object to the Commission’s effect finding,” Nau wrote. “Our objection is based in part upon the Commission’s own acknowledgment that the tower will introduce visual elements that, while sympathetic to the parkway and its modern uses, would alter views… in a manner that may diminish the historic integrity of this designed landscape,” Nau said. Nau said the FCC staff analysis, which had solicited ACHP feedback on its conclusion, also didn’t take into account the “cumulative impact” of telecom towers along the parkway. More broadly, Nau said the FCC’s proposed finding “raises serious questions of general interpretation of Section 106 and its application to historic transportation facilities and, by analogy, a broad range of other historic properties.” Nau cautioned that such interpretations “must not be made unilaterally by a single federal agency but rather require the involvement of the ACHP.” He told Powell he was bringing the ACHP’s objections to his attention “because of their precedential nature and because of their impact on the current negotiations under way among the Commission, the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, Indian tribes, industry and the ACHP” to draft a national program agreement on tower siting.

As parental watchdog groups and politicians continue to rally against violent videogames (CED Dec 3 p5, Nov 28 p4), Sen. Lieberman (D-Conn.) and the Entertainment Software Assn. (ESA) -- in a rare occurrence -- found themselves praising the same thing: A new retail initiative designed to prevent the sale of M-rated games to kids.

Public TV favors mandatory cable carriage of all free multicast digital programming, but if the FCC is so inclined, it would be within its authority to tailor digital cable carriage rules to the “unique statutory, factual, economic and historical circumstances of public television,” public broadcasters said in a letter to FCC Chmn. Powell. The Assn. of Public TV Stations (APTS), CPB and PBS said in the joint letter that carriage rules tailored to PTV’s unique position also would be consistent with current law and congressional intent and would be constitutionally permissive.

Regional coding is “a mistake” that DVD pirates are exploiting at the expense of European retailers and should be abandoned, Blockbuster Video COO Nigel Travis told the 12th Perspectives de l'Edition Video Europeenne (PEVE) Conference in Marseilles last week. His comments underscored a preoccupation with commercial piracy, casual home copying and Internet file sharing evident throughout the Dec. 4-5 summit.

A group of 13 associations and service providers led by CompTel/Ascent Alliance, urged N.Y. Attorney Gen. Eliot Spitzer to investigate if any state antitrust laws were broken when USTA and Bell companies met with equipment vendors earlier this year. The USTA in Oct. hosted a closed dinner with high-tech companies’ top executives in Washington to discuss a possible lobbying alliance and seek funding from the suppliers (CD Nov 3 p1). In a letter to Spitzer, competitors called for an investigation to determine whether the “joint $40 million effort to end competition laws and ‘raise prices’ at the state and federal levels” had “crossed the line of permissible activity by the monopolies.” They said such a “collusive” effort could violate state antitrust laws and damage the N.Y. telecom economy: “The companies that the Bells monopolies [had] apparently sought to pressure in the regard include Corning and Siemens, which are either headquartered or have a significant presence in New York.” Competitors said N.Y. antitrust law, under the Donnelly Act, which was patterned by the courts upon the federal Sherman Act, forbade any agreement among competitors to restrain competition: “In this regard, any agreement, implied or expressed, on the part of the Bell monopolies to ‘boycott’ or otherwise punish non-participating supplier companies, or any agreement involving market division or other competition- suppressing activity, would clearly run afoul of New York antitrust law.” Competitors also claimed the Bells’ invitation to suppliers, over whom they exerted “considerable power, would suggest the possibility of an implied boycott should these suppliers exercise their prerogative to decline participation, as we believe many suppliers will do… This campaign to leverage economic power through a collective effort ‘requesting’ uniform rebates suggests, at a minimum, the possibility of illegally collusive behavior.” A CompTel/Ascent Alliance spokeswoman said N.Y. was “a good place to go” with a request for investigation because, she said Spitzer had a “history of taking a strong initiative in issues that impact consumers.” USTA Senior Vp Thomas Amontree called the allegations “baseless” and “malicious.” “This was a meeting of public policy and nothing more,” he said. The Noerr-Pennington doctrine, as enunciated by the U.S. Supreme Court, allows competitors to work cooperatively on public policy matters. However, competitors argued the doctrine did “not allow competitors to hide behind a thin veil of public advocacy in order to engage in unlawful competitive behavior.” Amontree criticized the letter: “What you have here is a group of companies who are afraid of a real competition and consumer choice, not to mention the recipients of more than a billion dollars in corporate welfare, organizing in a desperate attempt to change the focus of today’s telecommunication debate because they know they can’t win on the substance.” The CompTel/Ascent Alliance spokeswoman didn’t say whether the alliance planned to send more letters to other state AGs, but said other groups had done so. For example, she said a coalition of Cal. telecom companies had asked state AG Bill Lockyer to investigate the Bells’ plans discussed at the Oct. meeting that they said could “harm competition in the state’s telecommunications market and cost California consumers and businesses hundreds of millions of dollars.” Also, 26 competitive carriers plus ALTS and CompTel earlier this year sent a letter to key congressional committees raising similar issues.

The Assn. of Public Safety Communications Officials (APCO) told the FCC it had “grave concerns” about the impact leasing would have on already scarce public safety spectrum. APCO submitted comments on a further notice on secondary markets the FCC adopted in May that would extend more flexible leasing policies to most wireless services in which licensees held exclusive rights. Meanwhile, several wireless carriers and Bell companies urged the FCC to not impose additional reporting requirements on spectrum leases.