Shareholder Files Appeal Of Sirius XM Merger
As I reported last week here on SiriusBuzz, September 4, 2008 was the final appeal date regarding the merger. It was met with some skepticism to say the least. In fact, I was challenged, as was my credibility when I reported the appeal date. Now it’s my turn.
SiriusBuzz has learned that Mr. Michael Hartlieb, a long time shareholder, has in fact filed a “pro se” appeal of the merger decision. Mr. Hartlieb has named the FCC itself as the defendant, and not Sirius XM with the D.C. Court of Appeals.
An appeal of an FCC decision must challenge the FCC, and not the companies that the decision was made about. I hope to be interviewing Mr. Hartlieb on the matter, and will report further as details continue to be made public.
SiriusBuzz has created a discussion thread to keep you updated on events at SiriusBuzz.com!
Case No./Title | Opening Date | Party | Last Docket Entry | Originating Case No. |
08-1289 Michael Hartleib v. FCC, et al | 09/03/2008 | Michael Hartleib | 09/05/2008 10:08:40 | FCC-07-57 |
General Docket United States Court of Appeals for DC Circuit |
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
|
|
Petition for Review
Petitioner petitions for review of the Commission’s Merger Order on the grounds that:
(1) the Commission violated its obligations under law by excluding from the record evidence directly related to its obligations to determine whether the Merger would serve the public interests;
(2) arbitrarily and capriciously ignored the Applicants’ failure to comply with the Commission’s order mandating the provision of interoperable satellite radios;
(3) arbitrarily and capriciously ignored the Applicants’ disclosures of their active concealment of and misrepresentations about their failure to comply with the Commission’s order mandating the provision of interoperable satellite radios (“Disclosures”);
(4) arbitrarily and capriciously failed to consider whether these Disclosures revealed a conspiracy by the Applicants to violate the antitrust laws by eliminating the opportunity for competition that compliance with the interoperability mandate would have provided;
(5) arbitrarily and capriciously failing to inform the Department of Justice of these Disclosures or to seek its opinion on whether actions described in the Disclosures provided evidence of a conspiracy to violate the antitrust laws;
(6) arbitrarily and capriciously refused to follow its procedures governing petitions for declaratory ruling;
(7) arbitrarily and capriciously denied Petitioner’s Petition for Declaratory Ruling seeking the Commission’s declaration whether the Applicants’ failure to comply with the interoperability mandate required the Commission to determine whether the public interest could be served in light of such failure;
(8) arbitrarily and capriciously adopted consent decrees that excluded consideration of the Applicants’ violations of the interoperability mandate thereby exonerating them for their violations;
(9) arbitrarily and capriciously denied Petitioner his right to be heard on the record;
(10) arbitrarily and capriciously selected facts without reasonable investigation and analysis that favored approval of the Merger while systematically ignoring facts requiring its rejection; and
(11) otherwise acted arbitrarily and capriciously and contrary to law.
Petitioner requests that this Court find the Merger Order and the XM/Sirius Sanctions Orders are unlawful, and vacate, enjoin and set them aside the Commission’s Merger Order and XM/Sirius Consent Decisions and order all such other relief as may be just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________
Michael Hartleib, Pro se
UPDATE – (By Tyler Savery) The challenge of the merger is a natural extension of the litigation that Mr. Hartleib has brought against Sirius and XM. My opinion is that legally speaking, Mr. Hartleib had to file the appeal of the merger in order for his legal suit to proceed. His legal suit, without a merger appeal would have less standing. I am not saying Mr. Hartleib is right or wrong in his actions. I am simply pointing out the legal steps that would seem natural in his litigation. I would recommend that before anyone arrives at a conclusion regarding the appeal, that they look into the suit that was filed. Only by looking at the litigation together with the appeal can anyone even begin to arrive at an informed opinion of these actions.
Position: Long SIRI
For the record I own and control well over 200,000 shares. The clerk will serve the F.C.C.
5) arbitrarily and capriciously failing to inform the Department of Justice of these Disclosures or to seek its opinion on whether actions described in the Disclosures provided evidence of a conspiracy to violate the antitrust laws; OUCH!
yeh, I saw somewhere that you owned shares on that order….you obviously have a significant, although not major, interest in the company. and, much larger than my interest in the company.
while I don’t understand your suit, I can wish the both of us that whatever happens that the PPS of our shares goes up…
have a good weekend.
michael,
give em hell,I would not think it will just get tossed out too quickly. based on the fccs recent track record as its well known they often get things wrong.
Hartleib,
In layman’s terms what do you want?
All said, the appeal means nothing except to a few people that have made their investment in SIRI an obsession, and a bitter investor with a lot more time and money to throw at an already bad investment.
The real money has yet to be made and the pps will not be affected by anything being discussed here, but it is quite entertaining.
If this wacko owned the number of shares that he claims, why would he file a claim that “may” further hurt the pps? I do not believe this wacko and do not know why both Tyler and Brandon would give this wacko one minute of their time.
Scot here. I have similar questions to one posted above: What does the plaintiff want?
Who are the injured parties in the claim?
What injuries have been sustained by the plaintiff?
And finally, has this suit been filed simply because some legal nonsense was not followed to the letter of the law where in a common sense sort of way, no real injury was suffered by anybody as a result of this merger?
And there is one more thing: Please, if there is a response to my questions leave out the legal-speak — I’m not impressed by those who try to prove how smart they are by confounding others in responding to questions with more gibberish; simple sixth grade english will suffice….
Scot’s Slant
IMO as a layman, my first impression of Mr. Harlieb’s suit is that it doesn’t make sense in that being a shareholder who ostensibly should be more concerned with the value of his shares increasing it appears that his case is premised on reversing a merger that in effect would decrease said value under the guise of protecting the consumer from anti-trust violations.
In short, I am not clear whether Mr. Hartlieb is attempting to protect a personal investment in Siri or is acting as an anti-trust lawyer attempting to protect all consumers. The two concepts unfortunately in my mind do not quite unite in concerted logic or execution.
IOW and IMO this sounds like a primate cluster coitus of major proportions.
Siriuslynow
Shareholders deserved the right to a fully informed vote. My quest for answers has gone unfulfilled. It is unconscionable that a shareholder would have to jump through the kind of hoops I have and spend thousands of hours of my time and substantial amounts of personal money to seek answers that should have been answered well over twenty months ago. May I remind those that I began my quest prior to the merger ever being announced as to whether or not the companies were in compliance with their licensing mandate.
I no longer trust management of this company as I know first hand what they attempted to do in the Manhattan Courtroom which was indemnify themselves and strip the rights of every Sirius shareholder. If this case were not withdrawn, thrown out, defeated, there would not be a single shareholder that would have any recourse against this company as the Settlement Stipulation was one of the broadest and most liberal releases which provided complete indemnification for all directors, executives, relations, for any and all misdeeds to date.
This company refused to properly notify you, the shareholder, via the US Mail, and asked the Court to allow a one-day ad in the Wallstreet Journal to be proper notification of the Class. I argued against this and prevailed.
I would also like to state that my holdings were purchased as substantially higher levels and, therefore, may not appear to be substantive enough for me to continue this fight. I can assure you that this is a substantial enough sum that I will and would continue this fight even if my holdings and position were substantially smaller.
In my opinion, the law has been violated. A federal agency is complicit in the conspiracy perpetrated by these two companies. We now have a share price that is $1.30. I ask all of you “How is this merger working out for you thus far?”
I would like to state that Tyler’s comments are in fact, for the most part, correct and that I was one of this company’s biggest proponents and advocates. It has pained me to become an adversary. I was a large fan and had much respect for Mr. Karmazin being a self-made multi-millionaire – or should I say billionaire – and that he has become a “media guru” from the bottom up.
I do hope we will see a substantial increase in price per share for all investors who have stuck by this company through these difficult years and do believe it is quiet possible that Mr. Karmazin has had a substantial ace up his sleeve (ie. Apple). It is possible that Mr. Karmazin has been working with Steve Jobs for a number of years as, in the past, I have been adamant that Apple needs Sirius as much as Sirius needs Apple.
I have information that leads me to believe satellite enabled Apple devices and satellite delivery platforms for Apple could be coming to market sooner rather than later. This is a possibility although not a certainty, and with the share price at $1.30, I sincerely hope it becomes a reality.
I appreciate everyone’s educated comments. The gratuitous ad hominem attacks are expected.
Simply stated: what I seek is to expose the truth, obtain the answers that I have sought for over two years now, to overturn the Consent Decree, return the $20million to Sirius shareholders (which I believe is the largest fine in FCC history – Univision was fined $25milion but I do not believe it was ever paid). I, for one, do not intend to spend a penny of shareholders’ money to reward an inept agency that failed to regulate and enforce its mandates and become a co-conspirator in the conspiracy of these companies to prevent and preclude consumers from having access to or knowledge of interoperable radios.
BFD!!!! We can only hope they overturn it.
Your two frivolous law suits will not help the pps either. Get life Mr. Hartleib. Sell your shares and move on. Your lawsuits are quite clear and motivated by your losses as a SiriusXM shareholder. You are nothing more than a disgruntled investor.
This is such a nonissue,(no offence Michael) it will in the end not effect the mereger. It reminds me of the good old days of FrontMed. When he tried to say that when the FTC filed its appeal to stop the Whole Foods merger with Wild Oats. After its injunction and appeal of that injunction failed, that somehow the courts would now break up the company that has been merged for about a year and has closed various stores. I cant believe this nonissue has had such a debate as it has. It in the end will not effect the workings or what they plain to talk about of SIRIXM going forward.
Off topic
killerkual, What did I say when you asked several months ago, what I thought the company that would be of a possible take over company of ether SIRI or XMSR. When everyone else was talking about it being a MSFT, or a AAPL and still do. I said it would be DTV, or DISH. Check the Forbes article where Joan Lippin is talking to Mel K.
http://www.forbes.com/2008/09/.....r=yahootix
I still think it would be the next choice for the reasons I gave to you before at Seeking Alpha. If such a thing were even still possible in the future.
P.S. killerkual, it is the 6th paragraph down.
Michael with no disrespect intended. ….
Shareholder meetings take place annually and during various other times. How were we not informed about our rights as shareholders. Further, who appointed you as a shareholder advocate? Did we take a vote and I wasn’t properly notified? Are we just too uninformed to understand the complexity of the situation that you are representing and for all of us you decided to know better?
If that is the case, us being too naive (simplistically uninformed or ignorant) then why don’t you try and explain to us why your efforts are in our best interest and not just your own. We all could have filed an individual suit to appeal the decision but we didn’t. During the merger we could have rallied shareholders and informed them of the gross injustices being done to us all. Instead we chose to vote and accept the merger of these two companies as shareholders and insisted that the FCC approve.
Now after 18 months of our waiting, jeopardizing all of our investments, you, alone, are the voice of reason. Please explain how that makes any sense.
Hartleib is asking a court to overturn a merger that will SAVE the combined company hundreds of millions of dollars every year; a merger that could have been contingent on onerous concessions but instead got approved for a pittance in penalties and the least possible concessions imaginable; a merger WITHOUT WHICH, by most accounts, BOTH companies were expected to be DOOMED in the near future. YET we are expected to believe Hartleib is somehow FOR Sirius shareholders???
Hartleib, do your thing. Just PLEASE QUIT saying and/or implying that you’re doing it FOR US.
With advocates like Michael Hartlieb, who needs adversaries?
Cramer’s still at the top of the list of people that SiriusXM stockholders need to sue, but Hartleib’s a close second.
Hartlieb isn’t my voice! nor does he deserve his name spelled right ethier
Wow, I go away for a few days and all hell breaks loose… where do I begin? Well lets just jump right into it…
Appeal deadline
My statement of when I believed the deadline for filing an appeal was based on available information. The FCC announced the merger on a specific date, of which I believed to have been sufficient enough to be an “official” release. Indeed, as COS1000 pointed out, even the FCC had in the past been sued by MCI in 1974 over what constituted an “official” release… my bad for not digging that deep to see that it was based on an actual “release” date and not an “announcement” date. It’s easy to see why the confusion.
That said, I was wrong. It’s not the first time – and unfortunately, will probably not be the last time. We are all wrong at various times… even the contributors to this site have been wrong. Regardless, I am not ashamed, nor embarrassed, nor am I afraid to admit it… nor am I hiding. I made a bad assumption, something all of us do… but it’s over, lets move on. No need wasting time writing blogs, that have an underlying theme – claiming some sort of “vindication” against message board posters… after all, that’s all I am… an anonymous message board poster whom nobody knows or cares about.
Credibility
Here is a classic case of taking outside criticism and suggestions way too seriously. First of all Brandon, I never said you had no credibility – nor did I even question your credibility. Go back and re-read what I said. My statement was simple… in news reporting, you need to be careful in trusting only one source on a statement of fact – because if they are wrong, it hurts you credibility. That is not me questioning your credibility, or putting down your credibility – that is just a simple fact of working in the media. If your source is wrong, then you are wrong and it hurts your credibility. Simple as that.
Seriously dude, you have to grow thicker skin if you’re going to do this. The more popular this site gets – the more challenges and criticisms you’re going to get. If you’re going to take a simple statement like mine (completely out of context) and use it to drive follow up blog entries – then you’re going through way too much grief for nothing… especially over a message board poster like myself. I’m just a nobody. You can’t let stuff like that get under your skin.
Legal shark alias
Insinuating that I need to resort to using different aliases to poster under, doesn’t deserve me to waste much time over. Tyler knows me better than that – as he and I have followed each others posts for the last 5-6 years on numerous boards. That’s a perfect example of jumping to conclusions too easily. You need to slow down, don’t be so quick to form an opinion and make statements that you’ll later regret. It took me a long time to learn this – and am still learning.
Due diligence
The fact is Brandon, you do decent DD and work hard… I give you this. I have followed your entries since you began here at this site. However, sometimes you get some facts wrong and/or post too quickly about them or draw erroneous conclusions about them. As you know, I have made several corrections to your blog postings over the past few months – some little, some not so little. I am not out to get you or anything like that — if I saw something posted by Tyler that I knew wasn’t correct, I’d do the same thing. However, Tyler has a little more restraint in his postings and I just don’t see much that I disagree with when I read them. That is not a knock against you – it’s just different writing styles and research. I unfortunately did not fully research this latest disagreement with you than I should have – that’s going to happen. You should not take it so personally.
Take my suggestions for what they’re worth Brandon – as a message poster or someone who works in the media – you pick… Take your time, don’t jump to conclusions, don’t be so quick to defend everything you say or every criticism of you… but most importantly, don’t trust a single source of something that could be a big story… especially one that has a vested interest in the story. Because again, if they are wrong – then you’ll be wrong – which will hurt your credibility. That’s just a basic fact of working in the media… please remember, I am not questioning your credibility.
Did I miss anything?
Legalshark – I saw you were having problems with posts being edited when using symbols… that is because those symbols are used for inserting HTML code. Some sites allow it, some do not. For example, if you wanted to make a word BOLD, you would place the letter “B” between the symbols before the word, then again after the word, however with / slash before the “/B” – closing out the BOLD lettering. Like this. I work on a website through my work all day and have worked with typing in HTML code quite a bit in the past few months. It’s not editing your posts, it’s just thinks your using HTML code.
Hartlieb – in your last post you stated that you just want to, “expose the truth, obtain the answers that I have sought for over two years now, to overturn the Consent Decree, return the $20million to Sirius shareholders” However I note that you left something out of this – you’re also seeing to have the merger order set aside – thereby causing the merger to become illegal. How do you propose to do that without causing total havoc on the company, its business and the stock of the company? Various management positions (at both companies) have been eliminated – with contracts bought out and staffers dismissed. Are you trying to unring a bell? You cannot cause the merger order to be set aside, without causing the companies to be split back apart – causing total havoc at both companies. Yet you think you’re doing what is best for the shareholders? That is not what is best for the shareholders – that is what you think is best for you. Now it has become a personal and selfish quest by you… that is not what is best for the shareholders anymore. I find it interesting that you mention everything else in your last post, but left out the part about setting aside the merger order?!?!?!
———
For All….
Mr. Hartleib has not sought class status for his litigation. Had he sought such status, it would be only then that he would be a full advocate for all shareholders. It is my belief that he is not going to seek a class status.
Mis actions may or may not benefit shareholders. Only time will tell.
In my opinion, the class action that he was involved in getting withdrawn was a win for all shareholders. That class action would have stripped away any rights or recourse. At least as things stand now, shareholders do have recourse should it be required.
For many, the stance of Mr. Hartleib may seem out of the norm. In fact, I would suggest that he is doing something that 99.9% of the shareholders would not do.
Personally i do not feel that anything will be undone, or that the merger will be unwound. Personally I feel he may see some headway in his other litigation, but again, only time will tell.
Oops, in my second last paragraph where I said this, “I saw you were having problems with posts being edited when using symbols…” The site removed the symbols I was talking about, being this one > and this one <… however this time, I switched them around so the site doesn’t think I’m writing in HTML code. Anything you put between them will not show — and be though of as code, FYI.
Here’s a basic tutorial for using HTML tags:
http://www.web-source.net/html....._chart.htm
——-
Re…..Mr. Hartlieb’s comment above that…..”Shareholders deserved the right to a fully informed vote. My quest for answers has gone unfulfilled. It is unconscionable that a shareholder would have to jump through the kind of hoops I have and spend thousands of hours of my time and substantial amounts of personal money to seek answers that should have been answered well over twenty months ago. May I remind those that I began my quest prior to the merger ever being announced as to whether or not the companies were in compliance with their licensing mandate.”
Mr. Hartlieb, correct me if I’m wrong but did not the companies receive a fine for non-compliance? To wit, had they given YOU the answers you wanted BACK THEN what do you think the FCC would’ve done with that revelation on the table? Fine them? I think so.
So I am at a loss of what you’re trying to accomplish here other than IMO harass the merged companies for their alledged illegal actions in the past which they are being fined for today and which would’ve been fined for yesterday had your request been honored. The bottomline is that fines would’ve been issued either way, no?
Again, it is not clear whether you are playing posthusmous Sargeant at Arms for Siri, posthumous Sargeant at Arms for Hartlieb, or posthumous Sargeant at Arms for fill in the blank. To what end playing self-appointed policeman on behalf of the shareholders at this juncture for their ultimate benefit is beyond me. Neither your nor Tyler’s explanation of what this legal action stands to accomplish that is worth the hassle is nebulous at best at least to me.
I’ll close by saying that you need to clarify better what EXACTLY you expect all this will do for me the common stockholder today and for the future. As of now I am getting a conflicting message that there is no way to support your position because the issue isn’t worth pursuing for the gains attained whatever they may be. And that is the crux of the problem.
Sirouslynow
Homer985, Thanks for the props on doing my homework. Posters like you, shark and the rest here keep me on my toes to better due diligence.
also thanks to Tyler and Brandon, come on now, smile…. and the rest of the folks that keep this blog alive and committed to seeking the truth about what’s going on with this company and all those who threaten it.
homer,
you want a job as a lawyer?
…you write like one.
maybe that is why bm thought we were the same.
As someone who wants answers to unresolved questions, this question is for Charles, Head Honcho. Can you trace that address of shark and Homer above to determine if the have distinctly different IP addresses??? The last post by Shark concerns me.
2 computers, 1 , home(r),cable,.other.,laptop.,broadband.?..this thread is freaking me out.
tyler,brandon,cos.,killer or someone, could you explain whats going on here in simple words for us unsophiscated investors!
Cos…
they are different…and in different states..I was wrong…
So shark,
If I called you Mr. D., would that be an accurate statement? If it is, you could just call me next time and save all the back and forth. Or I could call you.
Mr. Hartlieb, correct me if I’m wrong but did not the companies receive a fine for non-compliance? To wit, had they given YOU the answers you wanted BACK THEN what do you think the FCC would’ve done with that revelation on the table? Fine them? I think so.
Here is part of your answer.
arbitrarily and capriciously adopted consent decrees that excluded consideration of the Applicants’ violations of the interoperability mandate thereby exonerating them for their violations;
Michael…
…adopted consent decrees that excluded consideration of the Applicants’ violations of the interoperability mandate thereby exonerating them for their violations;…
That’s not true. There are six pages regarding the consent decree that deal exclusively with interoperability and the issues relating to it…
Yes but they did not toll or punish the companies for there non-compliance. Also Brandon the FCC is now a coconspirator in restraining free trade. They withheld documents from the public and Dept. of Justice which proves the companies did collude and conspire not to bring interoperable devices to market. This is a direct violation of the Sherman act! Brandon do not put much weight on what the FCC has said regarding the importance of their analysis as they are as guilty as both Xm and Sirius. Also I could not challenge the FCC decision until it was rendered. They refused to give me any info as to my Petition for Declaratory Ruling during the Merger process. They in fact lied about it and underestimated my temerity. They sent the Petition to the Enforcement Bureau which has no jurisdiction over SDARS. This was a violation of their rules of procedure.
Yes they did, that is what the 20 Million Fine could of covered also Hartler
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
heres you go more
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
d. Offer interoperable receivers in the “retail after-market,” i.e., receivers available at retail outlets for installation in consumers’ automobiles or homes, within nine months of consummation of the merger.
Not for the Interoperable Mandate as they could not. How could they fine the companies for not being fit to hold their license and then grant a rule change to allow the transfer of the license to an unfit applicant? They would be totally hypocrites. They could have had their licenses revoked for willfully violating a licensing mandate!
You do realize if you do this, your KILLING the companies your trying to save. DOJ Approved, FCC Approved.
Great going forward but does not address the past violations for the last several years!Good night I need some sleep.
Sure it doesn’t address that but if your appeal is successful, You Killed XM, XM will get bought by comcast, and then Sirius will die. Apple and Sirius will never form a Partnership and all Satrad Radio is dead, I’ll gladly point the 20 million pissed off customers to the person who caused the best merger for the public to die
Hartleib says “[The FCC]…underestimated my temerity.” And that is ALL this is about.
“They could have had their licenses revoked for willfully violating a licensing mandate!”
Michael, this has been part of your problem — you greatly over-estimate things like this. Do you understand that allowing obscene language to go over the airwaves is also a violation of a broadcast license? How many licenses has the FCC revoked over the years for violating this? Do yourself a favor and research this… while you’re at it, why don’t you check out how many radio licenses were revoked by radio stations who allowed phone calls on the air — without notifying the caller that they were on the air (also a violation of a license mandate)… and I could go on.
I told you a long time ago — violating something like this (even though I disagree in your definition of violating it… I believe they bent the rule, but did not break the rule… but that’s another topic and a disagreement between you and I)… anyhow, violating something like this does not necessarily mean the would have their license revoked. That’s not how it works.
Do yourself a favor and research just how many licenses the FCC has revoked — under the definition of “unfit” (as you allege); you’d be surprised at the answer. IMHO, that is a total over exaggeration on your part.
You and I have had our differences in beliefs for a couple of years now… so I’m not going to rehash this. I happen to think that you over exaggerate much and sometimes see things that are just not there. I continue to believe – and have all along – that you have a long road ahead of you… and that there is a high probability that this is a waste of time and money for you.
demonotaku: If for some reason Hartlieb is successful in having the merger order set aside — the merger would be found to be illegal. And if (for some even odder reason) they are forced to split up… it will kill not only XM, but Sirius too. These companies are too far along to easily split them up. Doing so now will cause total havoc in the business, the company and the stock price. And, IMHO, cause them BOTH to go bankrupt.
—-
Merger Supporter Says:
And that is ALL this is about.
MergerSupporter… I agree with you. I believe that this has become personal and therefore selfish on Hartlieb’s part.
Homer says: “….Do you understand that allowing obscene language to go over the airwaves is also a violation of a broadcast license? How many licenses has the FCC revoked over the years for violating this?….”
Yesterday, I was watching Fox News, when they were broadcasting live from Florida huricane area, and someone in the background “mooned” the camera as they were interviewing them about whey they stayed, and the person’s ass, including crack, was visibly displaced. I have Dish DVR, so I replayed it to see if it really happened, and yes, it did!
What’s the point of this post? Things happen…should Fox News have aired that mooning? No, but they did. Get over it.
shark say:
“What’s the point of this post? Things happen…should Fox News have aired that mooning? No, but they did. Get over it.”
Exactly, I agree… however, under current FCC regulations (had this been a broadcast station and not a cable station) — although this would undoubtedly be found to be fleeting — the broadcast station would still be found to be in violation of their broadcast license. They would be liable to be sanctioned by the FCC accordingly. But they wouldn’t take their license. The FCC rarely takes a license. Especially under the definition of being “unfit”. Which has been my point to Hartlieb for quite some time.
—-
BTW shark — this is for you… This is from the CBS vs FCC decision from earlier this year, via the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. CBS filed a “Petition for Review of FCC orders, just like Hartlieb did. This may help shed some light on the process and the Circuit Courts jurisdiction of the case:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Our standard of review of agency decisions is governed by the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, we “hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions” that are found to be “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.”
The scope of review under the “arbitrary and capricious” standard is “narrow, and a court is not to substitute its judgment for that of the agency.” Nevertheless, the agency must reach its decision by “examin[ing] the relevant data,” and it must “articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action including a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’ We generally find agency action arbitrary and capricious where:
The agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise. The reviewing court should not attempt itself to make up for such deficiencies; we may not supply a reasoned basis for the agency’s action that the agency itself has not given.
Hope this helps…
——
In case you missed it.
“…it must “articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action including a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’”
https://siriusbuzz.com/opinion-sirius-xm-merger-appeal.php
Stern factor how much is Karmzin going to give Stern to stay another 5 years. I listen to Stern 95% of the time. Sirius needs to sign Stern but at what cost.STERN IS SIRIUS ….