At the time that radio station WHN in New York City -- the "outlaw broadcaster" referred to in this review -- settled its patent infringement suit with AT&T, it had incorrectly claimed that the agreement would not permit WHN to sell advertising, which had led to charges that AT&T was trying to monopolize broadcasting.
Radio Broadcast, August, 1924, page 300:

Licensing  Broadcast  Stations
IN A recent issue we had a few paragraphs under the caption "Outlaw stations to be closed"--it brought a very polite letter from the A. T. and T. Co., telling us we had not adequately presented their case and a rather more forceful letter from a reader who expresses the sentiment that if we "are paid to send out such propaganda for the telephone company, we should at least mark it so that the reader would know it was a paid advertisement." Well--Roosevelt used to say the only man who never made any mistakes was the man who never did anything, and we suppose he meant it to apply to his writing as well as to his political acts.
    In the article in question it was stated that licensed stations were not allowed to broadcast for profit, one of the outlaw stations so claiming. It appears that this was in error, as the present form of licenses, some of which were sent to us, contain no such agreement.
    The license fees are from $500 to $3,000 depending upon the size of the station. They are paid but once. The fee may be paid in installments if so desired by the licensee. The license forms seem reasonable enough and, at the risk of again being accused of being on the pay roll of the Telephone Company we venture to say that the fee is certainly no more than adequate to cover the various costly developments which the Telephone Company puts at the disposal of the licensee when he is operating one of their equipments.