The FCC protecting the criminals - denied FOIA request
“… 3. Edelman sought review of the EB’s decisions, and NCMC and Bridge 21 filed responses. Edelman contends that EB should not have redacted information as to: (1) the amounts that NCMC and Bridge 21 paid to Fax.com for unlawful junk faxing; and (2) the amount and details of the illegal junk faxing ordered. Edelman asserts that Exemption 4 should not be used to “reward” a junk faxer for breaking the law by keeping the extent of its illegal activity confidential. According to Edelman, the law does not protect confidential information produced by the violation of a law, and any evidentiary privilege must give way where it is used in furtherance of illegal activities. Edelman urges that competitors should have a right to know the extent of NCMC’s and Bridge 21’s illegal activities so that they can adjust their marketing strategies. He also submits that disclosure will further the private enforcement of the TCPA and that disclosure may serve to deter others from violating the TCPA. ...”
Why does the government protect the criminals?
Posted by Christine on 01/12/2005 at 03:33 AM
Junk faxes and SPAM • Court - rulings - procedures • (0) Comments • Permalink
