This HTML5 document contains 11 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

PrefixNamespace IRI
n8http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/p2py0XzJgTIowwfmPEbnMA==
n9http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/ontology/
n14http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/8q5OZCcu_kfqXNOAKmosPw==
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n10http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/TaMeLNX-xA6ERx5Nhb9VQg==
n5http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/-f_anXj0vjSK9PDcotU71w==
n2http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/pfOjW-HjUtqsPaYUn4gfsQ==
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n6http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/PJ7cq0qODy1XchSJ5ddVQw==
n4http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/l35lGZRlMicPu0YF_K4KSg==
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/
n7http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/kTmlFCZfLLqnQbj9Rvkbsw==
Subject Item
n2:
rdfs:label
Hush-a-phone
rdfs:comment
The Hush-a-phone was a device that snapped on to a telephone and made it possible for the user to speak in a whisper. The FCC banned the device, following a long-standing policy of prohibiting any device that attached to the telephone system to which AT&T objected. This decision has been identified by many as the first step in the dissolution of AT&T's telephone monopoly.
owl:sameAs
dbr:Hush-A-Phone
dcterms:subject
n4: n5: n6: n7: n8: n10: n14:
n9:abstract
The Hush-a-phone was a device that snapped on to a telephone and made it possible for the user to speak in a whisper. The FCC banned the device, following a long-standing policy of prohibiting any device that attached to the telephone system to which AT&T objected. Tom Carter, the developer of the Hush-a-phone took the ban to court, and in 1956 the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overruled the FCC and held that the device could to be sold and used. The court found that AT&T's prohibition of the device was not "just, fair, and reasonable," as required under the Communications Act of 1934, since 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 decision has been identified by many as the first step in the dissolution of AT&T's telephone monopoly.