Less than a month after the European Union instituted rules to protect the privacy of its citizens, the United States Supreme Court took an important step to protect Americans against unwarranted government intrusion in criminal investigations.
Network neutrality may be dead, but questions remain about how seriously the Federal Communications Commission considered comments from the public.
T-Mobile and Sprint are small players in a wireless market where being small makes it hard to survive. One expert told me that if the deal is framed as a pairing of two of the four national wireless carriers, it has little chance of making it past
Conservative groups, borrowing and building on arguments developed by liberals, have used the First Amendment to justify unlimited campaign spending, discrimination against gay couples, and attacks on the regulation of tobacco, pharmaceuticals and
In the wake of the government’s setback in the AT&T/Time Warner case, it’s natural enough to ask: what will be that case’s impact on the government’s ability to challenge vertical mergers in the future?
According to figures provided by media analytics company Newswhip, The Washington Post published 10,580 individual things in May of this year, including wire stories, graphics, and other miscellania.
The Trump Federal Communications Commission has been working diligently since its first moments in office to help Sinclair expand its political messaging.
The Supreme Court’s recent ruling that police must get a warrant to access the vast trove of location information wireless carriers collect on their customers marks a breakthrough for privacy rights. But the majority in Carpenter v.
On April 29, 2018, T-Mobile US and Sprint announced that the companies would merge. In the telecom world, an announcement like this always means at least one thing: a really long engagement.