US v PLAYBOY, No. 98-1682, 2000

From Driscollwiki

Contents 1 United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. 2 Who wrote it? 3 Facts 4 Legally important facts 5 Prior procedural posture 6 Issue to be decided 7 Law that applies 8 Court's holding 9 Dissent/joining opinion

United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc.

• US District Court for the District of Delaware
• No. 98-1682
• Decided May 22, 2000

Who wrote it?

• Justice Kennedy

Facts

• Analog cable TV systems may not entirely prevent "signal bleed"
  • Porn may appear semi-scrambled from time-to-time
  • Also, audio might be discernible
• Cable enables house-by-house blocking, empowering parental control

Legally important facts

• s505 requires not only signal scrambling
• but that porn is not available to any customers except during the safe harbor hours
• Playboy content may offend but is protected, adults have a right to see it
  • Gov't has interest in protecting children except where parents allow

Prior procedural posture

Issue to be decided

• Does s505 of the Telecomm Act of 96 violate First Amendment by restricting access to Playboy Channel to adults all-day in the interest of protecting children who might see "signal bleed" (scrambled porn)?

Law that applies

Court's holding

• s505 is content-based and is not the "least restrictive means for addressing a real problem"
• It violates the first amendment

Dissent/joining opinion