Court case

The nonprofit has said its National Emergency Library was a public service to people unable to access libraries during the pandemic, but publishers and authors accused it of theft.

The Federal Communications Commission told the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that Huawei is wrong on all counts in its challenge to the FCC's decision to exclude suspect tech in general from its Universal Service Fund subsidies and, tentatively, Huawei in particular. Even if the FCC had not moved to exclude technology deemed a national security threat from the Universal Service Fund dollars, Congress seconded that with legislation that required it.  The FCC filed in court with Huawei's appeal of the FCC decision, saying the court can make its decision based on those briefs but t

The Center for Democracy & Technology filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s “Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship,” signed May 28, 2020. The suit argues that the Executive Order violates the First Amendment by curtailing and chilling the constitutionally protected speech of online platforms and individuals. 

In a censorship case filed against YouTube by LGBTQ content creators, the US Justice Department is defending the law that protects internet companies from lawsuits -- the same statute President Donald Trump has threatened to revoke.

A group of publishers sued Internet Archive, saying that the nonprofit group’s trove of free electronic copies of books is robbing authors and publishers of revenue at a moment when it is desperately needed. Internet Archive has made more than 1.3 million books available for free online, according to the complaint, which were scanned and available to one borrower at a time for a period of 14 days.

Private parties have a right to challenge a merger after it has been completed, the Justice Department (DOJ) told an appeals court, in a case with big implications for future antitrust break-ups. Jeld-Wen, one of the country’s biggest manufacturers of doors, is seeking to overturn a court order that would unwind its 2012 merger with rival Craftmaster International and require it to pay $176 million in lost profits to Steves & Sons, a customer who sued over the deal.

The US Court of Appeals in Washington rejected claims that social media giants conspired to suppress conservative views online. The court affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit by the nonprofit group Freedom Watch and the right-wing YouTube personality Laura Loomer, who accused the companies of violating antitrust laws and the First Amendment. The organization didn’t provide enough evidence of an antitrust violation, and the companies aren’t state entities that can violate free speech rights, a three-judge panel held in a decision only four pages long.

The Lifeline program and pole attachment rights are inextricably linked to the Federal Communications Commission’s Title II authority. The FCC's decision to reclassify broadband internet access service (BIAS) as an “information service” removes BIAS-only providers from the statutory scheme that governs pole attachments. If a portion of those who would provide broadband-only services are unable to attach, that will limit the FCC’s ability to promote broadband build-out.

The Mozilla court remanded to the Federal Communications Commission for further consideration the impact of the Restoring Internet Freedom Order on broadband providers’ ability to obtain pole attachments.

In Mozilla v FCC, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reviewed the Federal Communications Commission’s 2018 “Restoring Internet Freedom” Order, in which it reclassified broadband internet access service (“BIAS”) as an “information service” and attempted to preempt state laws addressing net neutrality.