107
So IRS cannot fine individual taxpayers without a jury trial? Or does this reasoning only apply to our corporate overlords?
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2026
107 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
5120 readers
329 users here now
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This seems shortsighted by these companies. A jury trial is way more expensive and public with a chance of paying as much or more fines anyway. Sure it takes longer to get a ruling, but that seems like a small win.
This is purely about stripping power from federal agencies.
It doesn't strip power though, it just moves it to something that hits the news cycle multiple times.
The News cycle is washed away every 12 hours. With forced arbitration and our courts corrupt and back logged to hell. Corporations just need to stall until the next republican government throws out the past cases. They don't care about spending more money if it means more power over workers and consumers.
Maybe they're betting that the telcos have more money for their legal departments than the FCC does. I wonder though if it's true that a jury can award damages in excess of the requested amount in the case of regulatory fines the same way juries can when deciding civil suits for damages. Maybe.
They might have better lawyers, but generally the big club of the government is the inevitability factor. Federal departments are basically immortal and have no profit motive to justify the continued budget.
I doubt that we'll see any result that benefits the people.
Honestly, I would support total broadcast anarchy over our current state of affairs.
Without the FCC, whoever has the loudest transmitter wins. But actually look at the state of over-the-air broadcasts today. The radio stations have all been bought up and monopolized by a handful of companies like iHeartMedia. The broadcast TV stations are also similarly consolidated. Look at all the countless Sinclair stations pumping out endless right wing propaganda.
Frankly, I would prefer complete anarchy over this. Fines are how the FCC enforces its rules. Without any enforcement, broadcast regulation effectively ceases to exist. At that point, anyone can broadcast whatever they want, and the loudest transmitter wins. Now, maybe you don't have the budget to build a transmitter that can completely overpower a major commercial radio station. But if that station is several miles away, you could set up a pirate radio station that would drown out a larger commercial station in your local area.
This is a case where deregulation absolutely would help the people. The broadcast network we have is so hopelessly corrupt that burning the whole thing down would be a massive improvement. I'll take total anarchy over media monopolies owned by right-wing billionaires.
The problem is that at the point the FCC isn't enforcing things by fine, if you do set up a broadcast antenna, the stations (or as you aptly said, the conglomerates) can sue you for blocking their signal, because they have a contract that says they "own" those bands. And they'll sue you for loss of income, because if they sell less stuff by way of ads, they get less ads in the future, and then it's all downhill.
The big challenge is, most people now watch TV either through walled-garden streaming platforms (when was the last time you watched an IPTV or IceCast stream?), cable, or satellite.
Radio might have a hope if you can get it out there, but most of that has been captured by Spotify. It's an ongoing point of contention between my fiancee and me, because I like listening to terrestrial radio and believe that shortwave and HAM are the voices of the people, plus I listen to shoutcast / icecast "stations" regularly, and she pays for Spotify. I can't think of the last time she used the radio built into the infotainment deck in her car instead of beaming her phone to it.
How do they identify who owns the antenna to sue them?
Locate the antenna based on signal strength, then trace the power and transmission lines.
Does this mean pirate radio goes though the same process? That could get very interesting.
I've always felt the fcc is a violation of the first amendment. Speech was never meant to be limited to what I can do with my vocal cords.
Not problem if blasting radio waves into the air makes life difficult for profiteers.
You know damn well everything that restricts the individual will remain in place.
not what the article seems to be about?
commission fined the carriers for selling customer location data without their users’ consent