Laserfiche WebLink
4 - <br />are to Pe =rm. In addition, Section 626(c)(1)(B) of <br />the Cable ct specifically identifies "signal quality" <br />as one of the service characteristics to be evaluated <br />in connection with a request for renewal. If franchising <br />authoritie,, are limited to determining just whether <br />an operator satisfied the FCC's outmoded standards, <br />it would be a rather meaningless evaluation. <br />The petitioner's brief is to be filed on April 10, <br />1986. The appeal of the R&O on Technical Standards <br />will probably not be concluded for many months. <br />In the interim, many franchising authorities, <br />an well as NATOA itself, are considering filing a petition <br />with the FCC urging it to establish state-of-the-art <br />technical standards. The R&O on Technical Standards <br />hints that the FCC would entertain such a petition. <br />Many commentators believe that the cable industry would <br />not significantly oppose such an effort, in light of <br />the experience in New York City and other jurisdictions <br />which successfully negotiated state-of-the-art performance <br />standards in connection with the sward of cable <br />franchises. Indeed, after standards were established <br />1n New York City, the NCTA itself published a <br />comprehensive set of "recommended" standards for cable <br />systems which, with taw exceptions, should be acceptable <br />for most jurisdictions. <br />c. Must -carry ReQulremenfs <br />Last summer, the United States Court of Apper.le <br />for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the <br />FCC's long-standing rules requiring cable operators <br />to carry the signals of all local television stations <br />within their area (the "must -carry rules"), declaring <br />that the rules as than formulated violated the First <br />Amendment. Quincy Cable, Inc. v. FCC, 768 F.2d 1434 <br />(D.C. Cir. 1985), Qitition for cert. filed sub nom_, <br />National Association of Broadcasters, et al. v. inc <br />Cable TV, Inc., No. 85-502 (filed Oct. 23, 1985). <br />The Court of Appeals did not hold that all must - <br />carry rules would necessarily violate the Firet Amendmant. <br />Thus, in response to petition@ submitted by the National <br />Association of Broadcasters (and others), as well as <br />to pressure from Congress, the FCC his adopted a Notice <br />of Inquiry and Notice of ProDoaed Rule Making, MM Docket <br />No. 85-349 (reseed November 18, 1985), seeking comments <br />and proposals regarding the mandatory carriage of <br />