**Before the**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | *  | File No. EB-01-IH-0121       |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Emmis Radio License Corporation  | ** | NAL/Acct. No. 200232080014   |
|                                  |    |                              |
| Licensee of Station WKQX(FM),    | *  | FRN 0001529346               |
|                                  | *) |                              |
| Chicago, Illinois                | ** | Facility ID \# 19525         |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
|                                  |    |                              |
|                                  | *  |                              |
|                                  | *) |                              |
|                                  | ** |                              |
+----------------------------------+----+------------------------------+

**FORFEITURE ORDER**

**Adopted:** February 17, 2004 **Released:** February 18, 2004

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

# INTRODUCTION

1\. In this *Forfeiture Order*, issued pursuant to section 503 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act") and section 1.80 of
the Commission's rules,[^1] we impose a monetary forfeiture of Seven
Thousand Dollars (\$7,000.00) on Emmis FM License Corporation ("Emmis"),
licensee of Station WKQX(FM), Chicago, Illinois, for the willful
broadcast of indecent material over the station during its March 12,
2001, broadcast of the "*Mancow's Morning Madhouse"* ("*Mancow*")
program, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1464 and 47 C.F.R. § 73.3999.

# BACKGROUND

2\. The Commission received a complaint that Station WKQX(FM) broadcast
indecent material on March 12, 2001, between 8:00 and 8:10 a.m. during
the *Mancow* program.[^2] In support of the complaint, the complainant
submitted an audio tape of the broadcast.[^3] The complainant
specifically identified a song, "Smell My Finger," that had been
broadcast during the *Mancow* program.

3\. After reviewing the complaint and the audio tape, we issued a letter
of inquiry to Emmis that included a transcript of the song lyrics
contained on the audio tape submitted by the complainant.[^4] Emmis
responded to the letter of inquiry and stated that it did not retain
tapes or transcripts of the programming aired over Station WKQX(FM), and
thus could not verify the accuracy of the transcript.[^5] Nevertheless,
Emmis argued that, even assuming the accuracy of the transcript, the
program material at issue was not actionably indecent.[^6]

4\. On June 28, 2002, the Bureau issued a *Notice of Apparent Liability*
("*NAL*"), finding that the material broadcast over Station WKQX(FM) on
March 12, 2001 during the "*Mancow*" program apparently violated the
Commission's indecency rules.[^7] First, we found that this material, in
context, was within the subject matter scope of the first fundamental
determination under the indecency definition, which requires a finding
that the material describes or depicts sexual or excretory organs or
activities.[^8] Thus, we found that the material warranted further
scrutiny to determine whether or not it was patently offensive as
measured by contemporary community standards, which is the second
fundamental determination required by the indecency definition.[^9]

5\. We then assessed the full context of the program segment at issue in
the complaint under three principal factors significant to a contextual
analysis of whether material is patently offensive: (1) the explicitness
or graphic nature of the description; (2) whether the material dwells on
or repeats at length descriptions of sexual or excretory organs or
activities; and (3) whether the material appears to pander or is used to
titillate or shock.[^10] In doing so, we found that the material
broadcast during the "*Mancow*" program was patently offensive as
measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium
because it met each factor.[^11] In doing so, we rejected Emmis's
argument that this material was not patently offensive as measured by
contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium based upon the
absence of complaints concerning the *Mancow* programs' content prior to
late 2001, and the fact that the complaint had been initiated by a
single individual or group whose standards did not accurately reflect
those of the national community as a whole.[^12] We concluded that a
monetary sanction in the base forfeiture amount of \$7,000.00 appeared
appropriate in light of the apparent rule violation.[^13]

6\. On July 29, 2002, Emmis filed a response to the *NAL* in accordance
with section 1.80(f) (3) of the Commission's rules.[^14] Emmis argued
that the Commission's definition of "contemporary community standards"
is not sufficiently clear to allow broadcasters to make informed
decisions regarding broadcast material that is entitled to
constitutional protection.[^15] Emmis also argued that the material
broadcast in this case does not fit within the Commission's definition
of indecency.[^16] In light of these arguments, Emmis requested
cancellation of the proposed forfeiture.[^17]

# DISCUSSION

7\. The Commission defines indecent speech as language that, in context,
depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities or organs in terms
patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for
the broadcast medium.[^18]

> Indecency findings involve at least two fundamental determinations.
> First, the material alleged to be indecent must fall within the
> subject matter scope of our indecency definition---that is, the
> material must describe or depict sexual or excretory organs or
> activities. . . . Second, the broadcast must be *patently offensive*
> as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast
> medium.[^19]

The federal courts consistently have upheld Congress's authority to
regulate the broadcast of indecent speech, as well the Commission's
interpretation and implementation of the governing statute.[^20] The
Commission's authority to restrict the broadcast of indecent material
extends to times when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in
the audience.[^21] Under current law, indecent material may not be
broadcast between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.[^22]

8\. Emmis does not dispute that the material was broadcast between 6
a.m. and 10 p.m. or that the material refers to sexual organs and
activities, and thus warrants scrutiny to determine whether or not it
was patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards
for the broadcast medium.[^23] As discussed below, we reject Emmis's
assertion that that the material at issue does not fit within the
Commission's definition of indecency because it is not patently
offensive. We conclude that the broadcast of this material violated the
Commission's indecency rule.

9\. Under the first factor, Emmis argues that the sexual import of the
material is far from inescapable and that the "average" child would
hardly understand that the complained-of material had any sexual meaning
at all. Moreover, Emmis asserts that the *NAL*'s conclusion that the
material at issue contains explicit and graphic sexual references is not
supported by references to specific language in the complained-of
material.

10\. The *NAL* contained a transcript of the material at issue,
including the following excerpt:[^24]

> MR: I've never been bashful, shy, sheepish or chivalrous when asking a
> lady to give me a kiss. So when she lifted up her skirt, I didn't ask
> what is this.
>
> MR: Her box had some cheese so I nicknamed her Swiss. And so like
> Magellan I began to explore. Like Vasco DeGama I cleared the cape and
> went for more. Like Columbus I got lost but still managed to score.
> Like Ponce DeLeon I found the fountain in her core. \[Unintelligible\]
> Like Captain Cook I unearthed her buried treasure. My shot was on
> target like Jesse James the gun slinger. You need proof? Make like
> Sherlock Holmes and smell my finger.

Chorus: Smell my finger. Smell my finger. Smell my finger.

> MR: Smell my finger. Smell that stank finger ya'all. \[female making
> moaning sounds\].

MR2: I like the super models with the low self-esteem, who wear the
tight jeans covering up the g-strings. Tall lanky chicks who grow out
their bangs. They only eat lettuce. They belong to the machine gangs. I
take her to dinner, I buy her some roses and then I part her legs like
the Red Sea cuz I am Moses. We smoke the ganja. We drink from a flask.

The material also contained graphic and explicit references to sexual
activity, including the repeated reference to "smell my finger." In
addition to these references, there were repeated moaning sound effects.
The material relied in part on innuendo, such as "lifting up her skirt,"
"part her legs like the Red Sea," and "God had given her a tongue."[^25]
To the extent that the material included sound effects and innuendo,
these references were nonetheless sufficient to render the material
actionably indecent because the sexual import of the sounds and terms
was "unmistakable."[^26] Emmis argues that indecency enforcement is
aimed at protecting children and that the "average" child would not
understand the sexual import of this material. However, the courts have
held that the Commission is justified in concluding the government's
interest in protecting children from exposure to indecent material
extends to minors of all ages, who are defined as being under the age of
18 years.[^27] Given the explicit references and the graphic manner in
which the material described sexual activity, we are confident that
many, if not most, 17 year-olds would have clearly understood the sexual
meaning.[^28]

11\. We also disagree with Emmis's assertion that the complained-of
material is not as graphic or explicit as a parody of a Britney Spears
song that the staff found not actionably indecent.[^29] Unlike the
material at issue here, the Britney Spears song parody was edited by the
radio station over which it was broadcast, so that it was not possible
for the staff to determine what the omitted terms were or derive from
the surrounding text what meaning was intended. Here, we find that the
material at issue described sexual activity through the use of direct
references, simulation and/or innuendo that were sufficiently explicit
or graphic to be deemed patently offensive as measured by contemporary
community standards for the broadcast medium.

12\. Under the second factor, Emmis argues that the sexual references
are fleeting. We disagree. There are numerous sexual references in the
complained-of material. The sexual references were repeated and not
isolated. Given the overall context, these references cannot be
considered fleeting.[^30] We also disagree with Emmis's argument under
the third factor that the material is not pandering, titillating, or
shocking. The material, in context, includes repetitive sexual
references, some of which are discussed above. In the context presented,
the sexual references were used to pander and to titillate and are
similar to others that the Commission has found to be apparently
indecent.[^31] For these reasons, we find that the material broadcast
over Station WKQX(FM) on March 12, 2001, was patently offensive as
measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium.

13\. Emmis also maintains that the Commission's definition of
"contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium" is not
sufficiently clear to enable broadcasters to make informed decisions
regarding the broadcast of material that is entitled to constitutional
protection. Specifically, Emmis argues that none of the cited cases
discuss the attributes or traits of the average person whose
contemporary community standards are used to evaluate indecency
complaints. We reject this argument. The Commission's interpretation of
the term "contemporary community standards" flows from its analysis of
the definition of that term set forth in the Supreme Court's decision in
*Hamling v. United States*.[^32] The Commission has observed that in
*Hamling*, "the Court explained that the purpose of 'contemporary
community standards' was to ensure that material is judged neither on
the basis of a decision maker's personal opinion, nor by its effect on a
particularly sensitive or insensitive person or group."[^33] The
Commission also relied on the fact that the Court in *Hamling* indicated
that decision makers need not use any precise geographic area in
evaluating material.[^34] Thus, the Commission judges material "by the
standard of the average broadcast viewer or listener"[^35] by drawing on
its "knowledge of the views of the average viewer or listener"[^36] and
its "general expertise in broadcast matters."[^37] Moreover, courts
reviewing this standard have accepted the Commission's determination
that it will apply its general expertise without requiring a definition
of "the average broadcast viewer or listener."[^38]

14\. Under section 503(b)(1) of the Act, any person who is determined by
the Commission to have willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any
provision of the Act or any rule, regulation, or order issued by the
Commission shall be liable to the United States for a monetary
forfeiture penalty.[^39] In order to impose such a forfeiture penalty,
the Commission must issue a notice of apparent liability, the notice
must be received, and the person against whom the notice has been issued
must have an opportunity to show, in writing, why no such forfeiture
penalty should be imposed.[^40] The Commission will then issue a
forfeiture if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the
person has violated the Act or a Commission rule.[^41] As set forth
above, we conclude under this standard that Emmis is liable for a
forfeiture for its willful violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1464 and section
73.3999 of the Commission's rules.

15\. The Commission's *Forfeiture Policy Statement* sets a base
forfeiture amount of \$7,000.00 for transmission of indecent
materials.[^42] The *Forfeiture Policy Statement* also specifies that
the Commission shall adjust a forfeiture based upon consideration of the
factors enumerated in section 503(b)(2)(D) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. §
503(b)(2)(D), such as "the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of
the violation, and, with respect to the violator, the degree of
culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and such
other matters as justice may require."[^43] In this case, taking all of
these factors into consideration, we find that the *NAL* properly
proposed that the base forfeiture amount is the appropriate sanction for
the violation described above. Consequently, Emmis is liable for a
forfeiture of Seven Thousand Dollars (\$7,000.00).

# ORDERING CLAUSES

16\. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 503(b),
and 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.111, 0.311 and 1.80, Emmis Radio License Corporation
FORFEIT to the United States the sum of Seven Thousand Dollars
(\$7,000.00) for willfully violating 18 U.S.C. § 1464 and 47 C.F.R. §
73.3999.

17\. Payment of the forfeiture may be made by mailing a check or similar
instrument, payable to the order of the Federal Communications
Commission, to the Forfeiture Collection Section, Finance Branch,
Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box 73482, Chicago, Illinois
60673-7482, within thirty (30) days of the release of this Forfeiture
Order. *See* 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(h). The payment MUST INCLUDE the FCC
Registration Number (FRN) referenced above, and also should note the
NAL/Acct. No. referenced above. If the forfeiture is not paid within
that time, the case may be referred to the Department of Justice for
collection pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 504(a).

18\. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a copy of this FORFEITURE ORDER shall be
sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Emmis Radio License
Corporation, c/o J. Scott Enright, Vice-President, Associate General
Counsel & Secretary, Emmis Radio License Corporation, One Emmis Plaza,
40 Monument Circle, Suite 700, Indianapolis, IN 46204; with a copy to
Eve Klindera Reed, Wiley, Rein & Fielding LLP, 1776 K Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20006.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

> David H. Solomon
>
> Chief, Enforcement Bureau

**ATTACHMENT A**

Program Transcript

EB-01-IH-0121

Radio Station: WKQX(FM), Chicago, Illinois

Date/Time Broadcast: March 12, 2001, between 8:05 a.m and 8:10 a.m.

Material Broadcast: Mancow's Morning Madhouse

M: Mancow

MV: Male Cast Member

MV2: Male Cast Member

MV3: Male Voice

MR: Male Rapper

MR2: Second Male Rapper

MR3: Third Male Rapper

FV: Female Cast Member

MV3: This is Kobey Dick and we're from Buffa (?) Roach.

MV2: You're listening to Mancow's Morning Madhouse on the Free Speech
Radio Network.

MV3: Piss off. Eat a bowl of fu (bleep).

\[Song: "Smell My Finger" \]

MR: I've never been bashful, shy, sheepish or chivalrous when asking a
lady to give me a kiss. So when she lifted up her skirt, I didn't ask
what is this.

MR: Her box had some cheese so I nicknamed her Swiss. And so like
Magellan I began to explore. Like Vasco DeGama I cleared the cape and
went for more. Like Columbus I got lost but still managed to score. Like
Ponce DeLeon I found the fountain in her core. \[Unintelligible\] Like
Captain Cook I unearthed her buried treasure. My shot was on target like
Jesse James the gun slinger. You need proof? Make like Sherlock Holmes
and smell my finger.

Chorus: Smell my finger. Smell my finger. Smell my finger.

MR: Smell my finger. Smell that stank finger ya'all. \[female making
moaning sounds\].

MR2: I like the super models with the low self-esteem, who wear the
tight jeans covering up the g-strings. Tall lanky chicks who grow out
their bangs. They only eat lettuce. They belong to the machine gangs. I
take her to dinner, I buy her some roses and then I part her legs like
the Red Sea cuz I am Moses. We smoke the ganja. We drink from a flask.
Oops, I left her a gift on her mud mask. Will you chill with super model
dead ringers? Get ready. Folks come from all over to smell your fingers.
\[female making moaning noises\]

Chorus: Smell my finger. Smell my finger. Smell my finger.

MR3: She was definitely young but she was old enough to know what God
had given her a tongue. She got a rock hard body like a statue from
Greece. I didn't catch her name. I don't \[unintelligible\] when I can
reach. She lifted up her skirt when she found I was a rap singer. You
don't believe me go ahead and smell the finger.

Chorus: Smell my finger. Smell my finger. Smell my finger.

MR3: Smell, baby. Inhale.

Chorus: Smell my finger. Smell my finger. Smell my finger.

MR3: Check the smell, baby. Smell my fingers, just don't smell my thumb.
What's that underneath my fingernails?

\[Song fades\]

FV: I don't like that song Mancow.

M: Why?

FV: Because it's horrible, please.

M: Really? \[unintelligible comment by Mancow\].

FV: Yeah.

M: Anyone notice, whoever thinks it's funny, and I imagine it's Turd.
Smell my finger don't smell my thumb. I like that lyric. That's a new
group called "No Time." I don't know if it's in stores or not...

MV: Yeah, it'll be gone in no time...

M: Yeah, there you go. Ah, No Time...

MV: Should have smelled \[unintelligible\] leg.

M: Oh, with your wife?

FV: Oh, geeze...

\*\*\* \*\*\* \*\*\* \*\*\*

[^1]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(2002); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80 (2002).

[^2]: *See* Letter from David Edward Smith, to Norman Goldstein,
    Assistant Chief, Investigations and Hearings Division, Enforcement
    Bureau, dated March 12, 2001.

[^3]: *See* Program Transcript, Attachment A.

[^4]: *See* Letter from Charles W. Kelley, Chief, Investigations and
    Hearings Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
    Commission to Emmis FM License Corp. of Chicago, dated August 6,
    2001.

[^5]: *See* Letter from J. Scott Enright, Vice President, Associate
    General Counsel and Assistant Secretary, Emmis Communications, to
    Magalie Roman Salas, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,
    dated September 5, 2001. ("Emmis Response to Inquiry").

[^6]: *Id*. at 2.

[^7]: *Emmis Radio License Corporation*, Notice of Apparent Liability
    for Monetary Forfeiture, 17 FCC Rcd 11990 (EB 2002).

[^8]: *See Industry Guidance on the Commission's Case Law Interpreting
    18 U.S.C. § 1464 and Enforcement Policies Regarding Broadcast
    Indecency ("Indecency Policy Statement")*, 16 FCC Rcd 7999, 8002, ¶
    7 (2001). *Emmis Radio License Corporation,* 17 FCC Rcd at 11992, ¶
    7.

[^9]: *Indecency Policy Statement,* 16 FCC Rcd at 8002-03, ¶¶8-9. *Emmis
    Radio License Corporation,* 17 FCC Rcd at 11992, ¶7.

[^10]: *Emmis Radio License Corporation,* 17 FCC Rcd at 11992-93, ¶¶
    8-9.

[^11]: *Id*.

[^12]: Emmis Response to Inquiry at 6. *Emmis Radio License
    Corporation,* 17 FCC Rcd at 11992-93, ¶ 9.

[^13]: *Emmis Radio License Corporation,* 17 FCC Rcd at 11993, ¶ 11.

[^14]: Response to Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture of Emmis
    Radio License Corporation ("Emmis *NAL* Response").

[^15]: *Id*. at 1-3.

[^16]: *Id*. at 3-4.

[^17]: *Id.* at 1.

[^18]: *Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of Pennsylvania,* 2 FCC Rcd
    2705 (1987)(subsequent history omitted)(*citing Pacifica
    Foundation*, 56 FCC 2d 94, 98 (1975), *aff'd sub nom. FCC v.
    Pacifica Foundation*, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)).

[^19]: *Industry Guidance on the Commission's Case Law Interpreting 18
    U.S.C. §1464 and Enforcement Policies Regarding Broadcast Indecency
    ("Indecency Policy Statement")*, 16 FCC Rcd 7999, 8002, ¶¶ 7-8
    (2001) *(emphasis in original)*.

[^20]: Title 18 of the United States Code, section 1464 (18 U.S.C. §
    1464), prohibits the utterance of "any obscene, indecent or profane
    language by means of radio communication." *FCC v. Pacifica
    Foundation*, 438 U.S. 726 (1978). *See also Action for Children's
    Television v. FCC*, 852 F.2d 1332, 1339 (D.C. Cir. 1988) ("*ACT
    I*"); *Action for Children's Television v. FCC,* 932 F.2d 1504, 1508
    (D.C. Cir. 1991)*, cert. denied,* 503 U.S. 914 (1992) ("*ACT II*");
    *Action for Children's Television v. FCC ,* 58 F.3d 654 (D.C. Cir.
    1995)*, cert. denied,* 516 U.S. 1043 (1996) *("ACT III").*

[^21]: *ACT I,* 852 F.2d at 1341.

[^22]: *ACT III,* 58 F.3d at 669.

[^23]: The "contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium"
    criterion is that of an average broadcast listener and with respect
    to Commission decisions, does not encompass any particular
    geographic area. *See Indecency Policy Statement,* 16 FCC Rcd at
    8002, ¶ 8 and n. 15.

[^24]: *See* Program transcript, Attachment A at 8-9.

[^25]: *Id.*

[^26]: *See Indecency Policy Statement,* 16 FCC Rcd at 8003-04, ¶ 12.

[^27]: *See ACT III,* 58 F.3d at 664.

[^28]: *See Sagittarius Broadcast Corporation*, Memorandum Opinion and
    Order and Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, Forfeiture Order, 7 FCC
    Rcd 6873, 6874 (1992)(subsequent history omitted).

[^29]: *See* Letter from Charles W. Kelley to Cathy Levin, EB-01-IH-0326
    (May 3, 2002).

[^30]: *See, e.g., Three Eagles of Columbus, Inc. (KROR(FM))*, Notice of
    Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 15 FCC Rcd 13624, 13625,
    *forfeiture reduced*, 15 FCC Rcd 18902 (EB 2000)(forfeiture paid).

[^31]: *See, e.g. WQAM License Limited Partnership (WQAM(AM)),* Apparent
    Liability for Forfeiture, Forfeiture Order, 15 Rcd 2518 (2000)
    (sexual references in the song "Uterus Guy"); *KGB, Inc., (KGB-FM)*,
    Notice of Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 7 FCC Rcd 3207
    (1992), Memorandum Opinion and Order and Apparent Liability for
    Forfeiture, Forfeiture Order, 13 FCC Rcd 16396 (1998)( *forfeiture
    reduced* )("Candy Wrapper" song, which includes lyrics such as "my
    Butterfinger went up her tight little Kit Kat"). *See also Great
    American Television and Radio Company, Inc.* *(WFBQ(FM)/WNDE(AM))*,
    Notice of Apparent Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 6 FCC Rcd 3692
    (MMB 1990); *WIOD, Inc. (WIOD(AM))*, Notice of Apparent Liability
    for Monetary Forfeiture, 6 FCC Rcd 3704 (MMB 1989).

[^32]: *Hamling v. United* States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974), *reh'g denied*,
    419 U.S. 885.

[^33]: *Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of Pennsylvania (WYSP(FM))*, 3
    FCC Rcd 930, 933 (1987)(subsequent history omitted), *citing* 418
    U.S. at 107.

[^34]: *Id.* at 933, *citing* 418 U.S. at 104-05.

[^35]: *WQAM License Limited Partnership (WQAM(AM))*, 15 FCC Rcd at
    2520-2521, *citing* *Infinity Broadcasting Corporation of
    Pennsylvania (WYSP(FM))*, 3 FCC Rcd at 933.

[^36]: *Id.*

[^37]: *Id.*

[^38]: *See, e.g., ACT 1,* 852 F.2d 1332.

[^39]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(B); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(a)(1); s*ee also* 47
    U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(D) (forfeitures for violation of 14 U.S.C. §
    1464). Section 312(f)(1) of the Act defines willful as "the
    conscious and deliberate commission or omission of \[any\] act,
    irrespective of any intent to violate" the law. 47 U.S.C. §
    312(f)(1). The legislative history to section 312(f)(1) of the Act
    clarifies that this definition of willful applies to both sections
    312 and 503(b) of the Act, H.R. Rep. No. 97-765, 97^th^ Cong. 2d
    Sess. 51 (1982), and the Commission has so interpreted the term in
    the section 503(b) context. *See, e.g., Application for Review of
    Southern California Broadcasting Co.*, Memorandum Opinion and Order,
    6 FCC Rcd 4387, 4388 (1991) ("*Southern California Broadcasting
    Co.*"). The Commission may also assess a forfeiture for violations
    that are merely repeated, and not willful. *See, e.g.,* *Callais
    Cablevision, Inc., Grand Isle, Louisiana*, Notice of Apparent
    Liability for Monetary Forfeiture, 16 FCC Rcd 1359 (2001) (issuing a
    Notice of Apparent Liability for, *inter alia*, a cable television
    operator's repeated signal leakage). "Repeated" merely means that
    the act was committed or omitted more than once, or lasts more than
    one day. *Southern California Broadcasting Co.,* 6 FCC Rcd at 4388,
    ¶ 5; *Callais Cablevision, Inc.,* 16 FCC Rcd at 1362, ¶ 9.

[^40]: 47 U.S.C. § 503(b); 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(f).

[^41]: *See, e.g., SBC Communications, Inc.,* Apparent Liability for
    Forfeiture, Forfeiture Order, 17 FCC Rcd 7589, 7591, ¶ 4 (2002)
    (forfeiture paid).

[^42]: *The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement and Amendment of
    Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture Guidelines*,
    12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17113 (1997), *recon. denied* 15 FCC Rcd 303
    (1999) ("*Forfeiture Policy Statement*"*);* 47 C.F.R. § 1.80(b).

[^43]: *Forfeiture Policy Statement*, 12 FCC Rcd at 17100-01, ¶ 27.