a binding obligation rather than merely a congressional preference, and that the interest asserted is sufficiently clear that it may be judicially enforced. Section 605(b) clearly sets forth that individuals who, for their own private viewing, are able to receive unencrypted or non-protected satellite transmissions through their own receive-only antennas are expressly exempted from the civil and criminal penalties otherwise applicable to unauthorized reception of satellite transmission. See 47 U.S.C. § 605(e). The fact that the federal interest enunciated is an “exception” rather than statutorily phrased as a benefit will not defeat its establishing a right or “immunity” under section 1983. See, e.g., Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Public Serv. Comm’n of Puerto Rico, 906 F.2d 25 (1st Cir.) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 111 S.Ct. 388, 112
holding that because federal regulations have the force of law they may create enforceable rights under  1983 recognizing that under texas law governmental immunity embraces two principles immunity from liability and immunity from suit holding that the protection from liability for cable operators under the cable act created an immunity enforceable under section 1983 holding that plaintiff had failed to state a claim for relief under section 1983 holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional