What is "pretexting?"

"tavenger5" <tavenger5.2okjwc@nospam.cellphoneforums.net> wrote in message
news:tavenger5.2okjwc@nospam.cellphoneforums.net.. .
>
> Larry Wrote:
>> http://tinyurl.com/24xd3u
>>
>> Today, FCC moved to change the landline and wireless privacy rules to
>> "prevent pretexting".
>>
>> The actual report and order is on:
>> http://tinyurl.com/3bgqhb
>> for those of you with S&M tendencies, strong stomachs or students of
>> government lawyer doublespeak Orwell would be proud of. For instance,
>> in
>> the footnotes:
>>
>> "175 See United States v. Southwestern Cable Co., 392 U.S. 157, 177-78
>> (1968) (Southwestern Cable). Southwestern
>> Cable, the lead case on the ancillary jurisdiction doctrine, upheld
>> certain regulations applied to cable television
>> systems at a time before the Commission had an express congressional
>> grant of regulatory authority over that
>> medium. See id. at 170-71. In Midwest Video I, the Supreme Court
>> expanded
>> upon its holding in Southwestern
>> Cable. The plurality stated that "the critical question in this case is
>>
>> whether the Commission has reasonably
>> determined that its origination rule will 'further the achievement of
>> long-established regulatory goals in the field of
>> television broadcasting by increasing the number of outlets for
>> community
>> self-expression and augmenting the
>> public's choice of programs and types of services.'" United States v.
>> Midwest Video Corp., 406 U.S. 649, 667-68
>> (1972) (Midwest Video I) (quoting Amendment of Part 74, Subpart K, of
>> the
>> Commission's Rules and Regulations
>> Relative to Community Antenna Television Systems; and Inquiry into the
>> Development of Communications
>> Technology and Services to Formulate Regulatory Policy and Rulemaking
>> and/or Legislative Proposals, Docket No.
>> 18397, First Report and Order, 20 FCC 2d 201, 202 (1969) (CATV First
>> Report and Order)). The Court later
>> restricted the scope of Midwest Video I by finding that if the basis
>> for
>> jurisdiction over cable is that the authority is
>> ancillary to the regulation of broadcasting, the cable regulation
>> cannot
>> be antithetical to a basic regulatory parameter
>> established for broadcast. See FCC v. Midwest Video Corp., 440 U.S.
>> 689,
>> 700 (1979) (Midwest Video II); see also
>> American Library Ass'n v. FCC, 406 F.3d 689 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (holding
>> that the Commission lacked authority to
>> impose broadcast content redistribution rules on equipment
>> manufacturers
>> using ancillary jurisdiction because the
>> equipment at issue was not subject to the Commission's subject matter
>> jurisdiction over wire and radio
>> communications)."
>>
>> I musta missed something.....(c; I'll reread it again........drunk.
>>
>> Larry
>> --
>> Is it any wonder why cellular is so expensive and Skype is so cheap?
>
> Humm... this explains it a little better: 'FCC imposes rules designed
> to prevent pretexting | CNET News.com' (http://tinyurl.com/2lh5lz)
>
> Love the last line there. haha.
>
>
> --
> tavenger5
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Posted via Cell Phone Forums: http://cellphoneforums.net
> View this thread:
> http://cellphoneforums.net/alt-cellu...s-privacy.html
>