Electronic Frontier Foundation

In the US, we need better internet. We need oversight over Big Tech, ISPs, and other large companies. We need the federal agencies with the powers to advance competition, protect privacy, and empower consumers to be fully staffed and working. New infrastructure legislation aimed at ending the digital divide gives new responsibilities to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and Congress relies on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to reign in Big Tech and others.

Public investments in open-access fiber networks, instead of more subsidies for broadband carriers, will bring high-speed internet on a more cost-efficient basis to millions of Americans and create an infrastructure that can handle internet growth for decades, according to a new report.

California's legislative session has ended and Governor Newsom is expected to sign into law S.B.4 and A.B.14, the final pieces of the state’s new broadband infrastructure program. With a now-estimated $7.5 billion assembled between federal and state funds, the state has the resources it needs to largely close its digital divide in the coming years.

In 2017, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai announced his intention to dismantle the FCC’s hard-won network neutrality regulation. The 2015 net neutrality order owed its existence to the millions who submitted comments to the FCC demanding commonsense protection from predatory internet service providers (ISPs). After Pai’s announcement, those same millions flooded the FCC’s comment portal, actually overwhelming the FCC’s servers and shutting them down.

The US Senate is on the cusp of approving an infrastructure package, which passed a critical first vote last night by 67-32. There is a lot to like in it, some of which will depend on decisions by the state governments and the Federal Communications Commission. Negotiations on the final bill are ongoing, but the draft broadband provisions have been released.

Despite being one of the world’s largest economies, the state of California was long without a broadband plan for universal, affordable, high-speed access. It is clear that access that meets their needs requires fiber optic infrastructure, yet most Californians were stuck with slow broadband monopolies due to laws supported by the cable monopolies providing terrible service. But all of that is finally coming to an end.

Congress is about to make critical decisions about the future of internet access and speed in the United States. It has a potentially once-in-a-lifetime amount of funding to spend on broadband infrastructure, and at the heart of this debate is the minimum speed requirement for taxpayer-funded internet. It’s easy to get overwhelmed by the granularity of this debate, but ultimately it boils down to this: cable companies want a definition that requires them to do and give less, one that will not meet our needs in the future.

In going after internet service providers (ISPs) for the actions of just a few of their users, Sony Music, other major record labels, and music publishing companies have found a way to cut people off of the internet based on mere accusations of copyright infringement. When these music companies sued Cox Communications, an ISP, the court got the law wrong. It effectively decided that the only way for an ISP to avoid being liable for infringement by its users is to terminate a household or business’s account after a small number of accusations—perhaps only two.