dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
San Francisco Gives Up Battle Over Cell Phone Warnings
After Losing Key Lawsuit Brought By Wireless Industry
by Karl Bode 04:36PM Wednesday May 08 2013 Tipped by maccur See Profile
In June of 2010, the city of San Francisco approved a new law requiring that all wireless phone retailers post the radiation emission levels for all cellphones right next to the price. In response, the wireless industry first canceled a trade show in the city, then sued the city over the new law, the industry's primary trade group, the CTIA, stating the law has "no scientific basis." After a key court win by the CTIA, the city has now decided to give up on the warning law entirely:
quote:
San Francisco city leaders, after losing a key round in court against the cell phone industry, have agreed to revoke an ordinance that would have been the first in the United States to require retailers to warn consumers about potentially dangerous radiation levels. In a move watched by other U.S. states and cities considering similar measures, the city Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to settle a lawsuit with the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association by accepting a permanent injunction against the right-to-know cell phone ordinance.
The CTIA's legal assault argued that since corporations are considered people in this country, it was a violation of the wireless industry's free speech rights to force them to warn consumers about potential radiation hazards.

view:
topics flat nest 

nonamesleft

join:2011-11-07
Manitowoc, WI

More radiation=more power

Who wouldn't want to know which phone puts out better signal?

Corporations are considered people since when? I bet when they get in trouble, it will want to be that faceless corporation again.

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

2 recommendations

Re: More radiation=more power

said by nonamesleft:

Corporations are considered people since when? I bet when they get in trouble, it will want to be that faceless corporation again.

That's a standard element of all Karl's populist, anti-capitalist rants here. Most readers just skip right over it by this point.

humanfilth

join:2013-02-14
cyber gutter

1 recommendation

said by nonamesleft:

Who wouldn't want to know which phone puts out better signal?

Corporations are considered people since when? I bet when they get in trouble, it will want to be that faceless corporation again.

Corporations became people once enough 'poor' idiots believed what the Rich people told them to believe.

Of course some Rightwing Judges ignoring that to call a corporation a person, that the corporation should be sent to prison for years for breaking the laws that the rest of the little people have to abide by on a daily basis.

But how to put a corporation in prison??? Hmmm. By closing the company down for the time that the prison term is mandated for. And restricting its hours of operation to 2 hours a day during the appeal process and no out of State commerce.

That should get rid of many corrupt corporations and especially those schools in the U.S. Red Zone that send little kids(students) to jail for violation of the "do as you are damned told too law" to keep the private prisons at their contractual 95% occupancy rates.

One law for all and all laws for those who can't afford to bribe Judges and DA's.
A multi-tiered law system is considered to be discrimination when a corporations executives avoid punishment by paying bribes while regular people go to prison.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2

Re: More radiation=more power

Prison?? I would just execute them! Revoke their state charter and bar their directors from starting new businesses or sitting on the boards of others.

If shareholders want to be considered 'owners' then they should share in the liability. That would certainly encourage responsible investing!

WHT

join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5
said by nonamesleft:

Corporations are considered people since when?

The Supreme Court Still Thinks Corporations Are People
»www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc···/259995/
quote:
Three weeks ago, in a decision all but lost in the tumult over the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act, the Justices overturned a century-old Montana law that prohibited corporate spending in that state's elections.

VernonDozier

@comcast.net
Well, AT&T likely has ONE BIG TOWER that covers the entire area. I'm told it's the Sutro tower. As you get further from the tower, the SAR goes up.

Also, Cellular companies have different limits than PCS. This would mean an astute customer, would likely decide to purchase a PCS-band handset. I think the wattage itself is 1.0Watt vs. .8Watt.

MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
kudos:1

Corporations aren't people

While I honestly don't care much about the fact that these cell phone warning got dismissed, because the science on cell phone radiation doesn't really show a reason for major concern, in my opinion. Also it even more inadequately shows that the small differences in SAR values on different phones makes any difference, which mean that people would could possibly actually get a false sense of security and crappy reception by picking low SAR value phones.

But the legal argument, corporations are people so it's an infringement to their legal rights to have to tell customer's the potentials risks of their product, is a very very scary legal precedent.
Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

1 recommendation

Re: Corporations aren't people

A corporation is just a group of people who have come together for a common cause. That cause may range from the profit motive (Verizon Wireless) to political advocacy (the ACLU or NRA). It seems silly to think that humans have free speech on an individual basis but not when they come together in a group to advance a common purpose.
equivocal

join:2008-01-23
USA

Re: Corporations aren't people

Yeah, the Schoolhouse Rock version of corporate personhood.

All those thousands of shell corporations, each endowed with full rights of personhood, consisting of one lawyer and as few as one other person. Two people, a thousand "persons".

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS
Tell that to a newspaper corporation that without that right has no 1st amendment protection. Individual reporters would, but not the news corporation like CBS or the NYT.

If you want to deal with corporations and political corruption, make it a capital crime for any politician to vote on or propose a bill where there is a conflict of interest (such as a political contribution). IOW, effectively outlaw lobbying from receiving side. Corporations and special interests can try and bribe all they want, but no one would take the money.
--
Nocchi rules.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2

Re: Corporations aren't people

said by skeechan:

Tell that to a newspaper corporation that without that right has no 1st amendment protection. Individual reporters would, but not the news corporation like CBS or the NYT.

Why would they really need it? Any particular story would already be covered under the 1st amendment rights of the author(s). A newspaper doesn't have a voice, only the people who write through it.

It is similar to the idea that the Internet needs free speech rights because people post things there or BBR needs free speech rights for its news posts. Without people behind the posts (who already have these rights) there simply are no posts. Should BBR or my ISP be held liable for slander I posted here? Of course not... the media is just a mechanism; the voice is mine.

I highly agree on the corruption issue though, I see it as the root of most of our problems today.
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast
I agree that treating a corporation as a never-dying person is bad precedent, but it's been that way for hundreds of years. So, not a new precedent.

This law should be easy to comply with, they don't have to put it on their advertising. There's not thousands of those places in San Francisco.

I agree it's a stupid requirement, but I don't think it's an illegal requirement. Does this mean that fast-food places can stop listing the calories next to each meal?
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
Yeah, imagine what else it could be applied to. I'm scared to even make a list in my head! That is one bad precedent to set. They should have just forced SF to stop doing it on the grounds that the claims are absurd.

Also, how is that free speech? Forcing someone to disclose a fact about something isn't infringing on their free speech.

Ebolla

join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA

Re: Corporations aren't people

free speech also allows to NOT say something.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: Corporations aren't people

By that logic, no government could require any food manufacturer to disclose what's in anything.

fg8578

join:2009-04-26
Salem, OR
said by BiggA:

Also, how is that free speech? Forcing someone to disclose a fact about something isn't infringing on their free speech.

Of course it is. Forcing someone to say something they don't want to say is just as bad as not allowing the person to say something they do want to say. It's two sides of one coin.

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2

1 recommendation

The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

Since the Sun is certainly a huge source of radiation and cancer and that isn't up to scientific dispute the smelly hippies should be demanding stickers on the inside of every door leading out.
--
Nocchi rules.

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

Re: The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

Psst.... smoking pot causes lung cancer, but don't tell the whackamoles in SF or they'd have to have gigantic labels on the baggies.

workablob

join:2004-06-09
Houston, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

said by jester121:

Psst.... smoking pot causes lung cancer,

If you smoke a pack or two of joints a day I bet it does.

Just as much as cigarettes cause cancer.

Dave
--
I may have been born yesterday. But it wasn't at night.

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2

Re: The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

More so since cigs are at least charcoal filtered.
--
Nocchi rules.

humanfilth

join:2013-02-14
cyber gutter
said by jester121:

Psst.... smoking pot causes lung cancer, but don't tell the whackamoles in SF or they'd have to have gigantic labels on the baggies.

Does smoking Marijuana cause cancer? Science is still researching and the answer at this time is 'No'.

Meanwhile people destroy their bodies and kill other people from drinking alcohol or binging on pharmaceuticals.
The 'bribe the red government' departments of the alcohol and pharmaceuticals industry love to spread derp to keep their profits up.

Coming up next on the show: A 5 year old murders a 2 year old sibling with the rifle the 5 year old owns. Local police call it playtime gone wrong and no charges to file.

firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

Re: The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

said by humanfilth:

said by jester121:

Psst.... smoking pot causes lung cancer, but don't tell the whackamoles in SF or they'd have to have gigantic labels on the baggies.

Does smoking Marijuana cause cancer? Science is still researching and the answer at this time is 'No'.

Meanwhile people destroy their bodies and kill other people from drinking alcohol or binging on pharmaceuticals.
The 'bribe the red government' departments of the alcohol and pharmaceuticals industry love to spread derp to keep their profits up.

Coming up next on the show: A 5 year old murders a 2 year old sibling with the rifle the 5 year old owns. Local police call it playtime gone wrong and no charges to file.

They just want to deride this topic into conspiracies and non facts by making a smart ass quip about a common product that is dangerous and equate the dangers of that to the "smoke" rather than all the added chemicals to the tobacco.

They also started out the comments with a distraction referencing Karl and politics and giving the image that the majority here are against him.

Not that you need this explained, it's just that I don't let stupid stand on it's own and this was a good place to reply. (which will probably get secretly whined about and disappear overnight with a virtual wink and nod).

And wireless is "probably" "safe" so you'll "probably" only get a "little" cancer someday from "something" that happens to be severely underfunded for scientific research like most other highly profitable things.
--
Say no to astroturfing. actions > Ignore Author

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS

Re: The idiots posting warnings on exterior doors?

Don't let facts get in your way.

Unlike wireless, there actually is evidence that smoking weed can cause cancer in addition to making you REALLY stupid.

What we need to do is put warning stickers on all the smelly California hippies that are destroying the state. They are hazardous to everyone with a brain.
--
Nocchi rules.

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
said by skeechan:

Since the Sun is certainly a huge source of radiation and cancer and that isn't up to scientific dispute the smelly hippies should be demanding stickers on the inside of every door leading out.

Post this on every door in San Fran leading to outside:


--
"If you want to anger a conservative lie to him.
If you want to anger a liberal tell him the truth."
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Even though the CTIA is obviously right in this case

That court case's verdict is chilling. And really messed up in the way they got to that conclusion.

IowaCowboy
Iowa native
Premium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Broadban..
·Comcast

Junk Science

Cell phones causing cancer is junk science just like Vaccines and Autism which was also proven junk science.

Cell phones have been mainstream for about 10 years and their is no cancer pandemic involving brain tumors.

There are other substances that are much more dangerous like Tobacco, Asbestos, Lead, and even the sun.

They should crack down on tanning salons and tobacco before cracking down on cell phones. And police radios put out more RF energy than cell phones and cops are not getting cancer at a higher rate than civilians other than skin cancer from directing traffic at construction sites. The biggest hazard to cops are domestic disturbance calls (we lost a cop last year while he was responding to a domestic).

I'll continue using my cell phone until the surgeon general finds them unsafe, then I may consider going back to pay phones.
--
I've experienced ImOn (when they were McLeod USA), Mediacom, Comcast, and Time Warner and I currently have DirecTV. They are much better than broadcast TV.

I have not and will not cut the cord.
clone

join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

Re: Junk Science

Whenever you post it reminds me of this...

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoFlMEl1_h8


Edit: Oh yeah, and the police ARE CIVILIANS. You sound like such a fool most of the time.

thender
Screen tycoon
Premium
join:2009-01-01
Brooklyn, NY
kudos:1
Even if cellphones did cause cancer and kill you, no one would care.

Look at the tobacco industry. Children are educated from an early age that cigarettes kill you. They're shown black lungs, they get to watch their out-of-breath peers. Doesn't stop them from buying them illegally off bootleggers operating out of bathroom stalls on lunchbreak.

If you can't pry a disgusting $350+/mo habit out of someone's hand, you're not going to get a $50/mo device that revolutionized modern communications out of their hand because of half assed studies that are not widely accepted as truth.
--
Macbook Screen Repair



Macbook LCDs for sale.