翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ Hush Records ・ Hush the Many ・ Hush! ・ Hush! (film) ・ Hush!! Full Band Festival ・ Hush'd Be the Camps To-Day ・ Hush, Hamadan ・ Hush, Hush ・ Hush, Hush (series) ・ Hush, Hush, Hush, Here Comes the Bogeyman ・ Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte (album) ・ Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte (song) ・ Hush, Little Baby ・ Hush, Lorestan ・ Hush-A-Phone ・ Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States ・ Husha Sorkh ・ Hushab Aluk ・ Hushabye ・ Hushabye (album) ・ Hushabye Mountain ・ Hushai ・ Hushakert ・ Husham (Edomite king) ・ Husham Al-Husainy ・ Hushan Great Wall ・ Hushan mine ・ Hushang ・ Hushang (name) ・ Hushang Ansary Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States ： ウィキペディア英語版 Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States ''Hush-A-Phone v. United States'', 238 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1956) was a seminal ruling in United States telecommunications law decided by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Hush-A-Phone Corporation marketed a small, cup-like device which mounted on the speaking party's microphone, reducing the risk of conversations being overheard and increasing sound fidelity for the listening party. AT&T, citing the Communications Act of 1934, which stated in part that the company had the right to make charges and dictate "the classifications, practices, and regulations affecting such charges," claimed the right to "forbid attachment to the telephone of any device 'not furnished by the telephone company. During this era, the phones were leased from the phone company, not owned by the consumer. Initially, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) found in AT&T's favor; it found that the device was a "foreign attachment" subject to AT&T control and that unrestricted use of the device could, in the commission's opinion, result in a general deterioration of the quality of telephone service.〔"Phone Company Upheld in Ban on Hush-A-Phone," ''The New York Times,'' February 17, 1951, p. 29〕 == Finding == The court's decision, which exonerated Hush-A-Phone and prohibited further interference by AT&T toward Hush-A-Phone users, stated that AT&T's prohibition of the device was not "just, fair, and reasonable," as required under the Communications Act of 1934, as the device "does not physically impair any of the facilities of the telephone companies," nor did it "affect more than the conversation of the user." This victory for Hush-A-Phone was widely considered a watershed moment in the development of a secondary market for terminal equipment, in addition to contributing to the breakup of the Bell System. It and the related Carterfone decision were seen as precursors to the entry of MCI Communications and the development of more pervasive telecom competition. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.