Court Fully Upholds FCC's Net Neutrality Rules The United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has fully upheld the FCC's net neutrality rules, dismantling multiple lawsuits filed by broadband providers in the hopes of killing the rules -- and FCC authority over them. In the full ruling (pdf), the court sided with the FCC not only in terms of the rules, but fully supported the FCC's decision to classify ISPs as common carriers under the Communications Act.

That's of particular note as it puts the FCC on solid footing as it pursues other pro-consumer initiatives, including the agency's plan to craft new privacy rules for broadband subscribers. The court's ruling repeatedly shoots down AT&T, US Telecom, and industry-allied groups' claims across numerous fronts, including claims that the rules would demolish sector investment -- and claims that the rules should only be applied to fixed-line services. That the courts would issue a split ruling -- exempting wireless from the rules -- had been a concern of many net neutrality advocates. "Today's ruling is a victory for consumer and innovators who deserve unfettered access to the entire web, and it ensures the internet remains a platform for unparalleled innovation, free expression and economic growth," FCC boss Tom Wheeler said in a statement. "After a decade of debate and legal battles, today's ruling confirms the commission's ability to enforce the strongest possible internet protections -- both on fixed and mobile networks -- that will ensure the internet remains open, now and in the future." Granted net neutrality isn't out of the woods yet, and frankly may never be. While not common for this type of appeal, the entire battle could still head to the Supreme Court. The next election could also result in a President eager to reshuffle the agency's staff, repopulating it with commissioners with an eye toward rolling back the rules and hamstringing numerous other FCC initiatives (like privacy rules, set top box reform, the bumped 25 Mbps classification of broadband, or the agency's assault on state protectionist laws hindering public/private broadband partnerships). As we've noted numerous times, the FCC's rules as written also don't specifically address potential anti-competitive issues like usage caps or "zero rating" (exempting some content from usage caps). That's something the FCC's expected to more fully address now that the agency's over-arching reclassification of ISPs as common carriers rests on more sound legal footing. Still, there's little doubt the ruling is a resounding win for those supporting net neutrality and a relatively open internet. »twitter.com/TomWheelerFC ··· 38223616









News Jump California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news AT&T's CEO Has A Familiar $olution To US Broadband Woes; EarthLink Files Suit Against Charter; + more news 5G Doesn't Live Up To Hype, AT&T's 5G Slower Than Its 4G; Cord-Cutting Now In 37% of Broadband Households; + more news FCC Cited False Broadband Data Despite Warnings; ZTE, Huawei Replacement Cost Is $1.87B, But Only $1B Allocated; + more Cogeco Rejects Altice USA's Atlantic Broadband Bid; AT&T Is Astroturfing The FCC In Support Of Trump Attack; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 82 comments

ke4pym

Premium Member

join:2004-07-24

Charlotte, NC 40 recommendations ke4pym Premium Member HA HA! tired_runner

Premium Member

join:2000-08-25

New York 230.4 37.3

·callwithus

21 recommendations tired_runner Premium Member My vision probably fails me quote: The Commission also exercised its

statutory authority to forbear from applying many of Title IIs

provisions to broadband service and promulgated five rules to

promote internet openness. Three separate groups of

petitioners, consisting primarily of broadband providers and

their associations, challenge the Order, arguing that the

Commission lacks statutory authority to reclassify broadband

as a telecommunications service, that even if the Commission

has such authority its decision was arbitrary and capricious,

that the Commission impermissibly classified mobile

broadband as a commercial mobile service, that the

Commission impermissibly forbore from certain provisions of

Title II, and that some of the rules violate the First

Amendment. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we

deny the petitions for review.....



.....Finally, we explained that although some record evidence

supported Verizons insistence that the order would have a\

detrimental effect on broadband deployment, other record

evidence suggested the opposite. Id. at 649. The case was

thus one where the available data do not settle a regulatory

issue and the agency must then exercise its judgment in

moving from the facts and probabilities on the record to a

policy conclusion. Holy shit.... I'm I seeing this right? Customer is for once winning here?? Holy shit.... I'm I seeing this right? Customer is for once winning here??

KaylaIT

FTTB

Premium Member

join:2012-07-26

Calgary, AB 18 recommendations KaylaIT Premium Member Take that! YES! I might be north of the border but this is excellent news!

Rob

Premium Member

join:2001-08-25

Miami, FL 16 recommendations Rob Premium Member This pretty much sums it up... quote: We also determined that the Commission had adequately supported and explained its conclusion that, absent rules such as those set forth in the [2010 Open Internet Order], broadband providers represent[ed]a threat to Internet openness and could act in ways that would ultimately inhibit the speed and extent of future broadband deployment. Id.at 645.

For example, the Commission noted that broadband providers like AT&T and Time Warner have acknowledged that online video aggregators such as Netflix and Hulu compete directly with their own core video subscription service, id.(internal quotation marks omitted),and that, even absent direct competition, [b]roadband providers... have powerful incentives to accept fees from edge providers, either in return for excluding their competitors or for granting them prioritized access to end users, id.at 64546.

Importantly, moreover, the Commission found that broadband providers have the technical...ability to impose such restrictions, noting that there was little dispute that broadband providers have the technological ability to distinguish between and discriminate against certain types of Internet traffic. Id.at 646.

The Commission also convincingly detailed how broadband providers [gatekeeper] position in the market gives them the economic power to restrict edge-provider traffic and charge for the services they furnish edge providers. Id. Although the providers gatekeeper position would have brought them little benefit if end users could have easily switched providers, we [saw] no basis for questioning the Commissions conclusion that end users [were] unlikely to react in this fashion. Id.

The Commission detailed...thoroughly...the costs of switching, and found that many end users may have no option to switch, or at least face very limited options. Id.at 647.

Can't get any more specific here. My congrats to the FCC for a victory for the American people! Can't get any more specific here. My congrats to the FCC for a victory for the American people!

rebus9

join:2002-03-26

Tampa Bay 12 recommendations rebus9 Member I'm Stunned The courts actually ruled in favor of the PEOPLE, for once. I never thought that would happen and that ISPs, with the help of their lobbyists and pet politicians, would squeeze out another win for big corporate.

WHT

join:2010-03-26

Rosston, TX 6 recommendations WHT Member The Turf War Has Just Begun



Quoting from techdirt's dysfunction-junction dept...

»www.techdirt.com/article ··· er.shtml



Pathway #1 - The latest example is the House Appropriations Committee's 29-17 vote to approve an FCC appropriations bill (pdf), part of a larger Financial Services Bill determining the 2017 budgets for multiple agencies. The bill was passed last week with amendment language intended to hobble the FCC's net neutrality rules As we've noted a few times, there's really only two ways the telecom sector can successfully destroy U.S. net neutrality rules. Broadband providers could prevail on part or all of their multi-headed lawsuit against the FCC, a decision on which is expected any day now. [Note: The lawsuit failed as per this topic] Or the rules could be dismantled by the next President, who could repopulate the FCC with the usual assortment of revolving-door sector sycophants, reverting the agency back to its more consistent, historical role as a dumbly nodding enabler of broadband sector dysfunction. The Court of Appeals made a decision based on current law. This can all be reversed.Quoting from techdirt's dysfunction-junction dept...Pathway #1 -Pathway #2 -

maartena

Elmo

Premium Member

join:2002-05-10

Orange, CA 6 recommendations maartena Premium Member Meanwhile, at the GOP headquarters.....





Meanwhile, at the GOP headquarters.....

TIGERON

join:2008-03-11

Boston, MA 5 recommendations TIGERON Member Now comes the issue of data caps AT&T, Comcast, Suddenlink, CenturyLink-the extortion days are coming to an end.

battleop

join:2005-09-28

00000 4 recommendations battleop Member It's not over... That's not how our legal system works. Some DC judge can't dismantle the lawsuits just like that. What he can do is rule in the FCC's favor forcing them to appeal to the next level. This guy isn't the US Supreme Court so he can't put a stop to it just like that. shmerl

join:2013-10-21 4 recommendations shmerl Member Good. What about the court case about repealing monopolistic state bans on municipal broadband? Wasn't there one hearing already? How did it go? DarkSithPro (banned)

join:2005-02-12

Tempe, AZ 2 recommendations DarkSithPro (banned) Member We have to keep those corrupt politicians from sneaking in earmarks Such a disingenuous practice.