FCC: Court Agrees with Protecting Free and Open Internet

The Federal Communications Commission's official response to the DC Circuit Court's decision in the Comcast case: "The FCC is firmly committed to promoting an open Internet and to policies that will bring the enormous benefits of broadband to all Americans. It will rest these policies -- all of which will be designed to foster innovation and investment while protecting and empowering consumers -- on a solid legal foundation. Today's court decision invalidated the prior Commission's approach to preserving an open Internet. But the Court in no way disagreed with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet; nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end."

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps said, "It is time that we stop doing the 'ancillary authority' dance and instead rely on the statute Congress gave us to stand on solid legal ground in safeguarding the benefits of the Internet for American consumers. We should straighten this broadband classification mess out before the first day of summer."

"I am pleased," said FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell, "that today's court order makes clear that Title I of the Communications Act provides the FCC with no authority to regulate the network management practices of an Internet service provider. I hope this decision will provide certainty in the marketplace and will not lead to the unnecessary classification of broadband service as a monopoly phone service under Title II of the Act."

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said, "[W]e now have the kind of guidance that will enable us to develop the most effective and legally sound rules of the road to preserve Internet openness and to achieve other important goals set forth in the National Broadband Plan."

"I am pleased," said FCC Commissioner Meredith Baker, "that the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit emphasizes the limits of the Commission's authority to regulate the Internet. The D.C. Circuit's strong words today remind us that as an independent agency, we must always be constrained by the statute. We stray from it at our peril. With regard to the substantive policy at issue in this case-net neutrality-I would oppose calls to use the court's decision as a pretext to reclassify broadband Internet access services under monopoly-era Title II regulation."