Court case

Texas Cities Sue Streaming Services for Franchise Fees

Two dozen Texas cities have sued streaming giants Netflix, Hulu and Disney Direct-to-Consumer for not paying what the municipalities said are the millions in franchise fees that the streaming services owe them. A favorable decision could lead to millions more from other cities seeking more funds for municipal services. The cities are alleging that the streamers should be paying annual franchise fees back to 2007, as they said is required by the Public Utility Regulatory Act (PURA). Those are the fees that cable/broadband operators provide that go toward city services.

Publishers Battle Internet Archive Over Digital Library

Major book publishers are pressing a judge to rule that an 11-year-old digital lending program established by the nonprofit Internet Archive infringes copyright. “Masquerading as a not-for-profit library, Internet Archive digitizes in-copyright print books on an industrial scale and distributes full-text digital bootlegs for free,” lawyers for Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, John Wiley & Sons, and Penguin Random House write in papers filed with US District Court Judge John Koeltl in the Southern District of New York.

High Court Blunders & Blinders

It’s time to look anew at individual rights and to broaden our discussion of them to include where we have sometimes gone wrong in safeguarding those rights. This demands more than just questioning court nominees about stare decisis, important as that may be. This is a discussion for we, the people to be involved in. As we ponder the inroads the current high court is making into areas where it really has little writ to intervene, let’s wake up to the fact that its actions are tossing real Constitutionalism out the door, on both policy and process. I say this not to disparage.

Does SCOTUS EPA Case Impact Net Neutrality? Here’s Why I Say No.

For most people, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency was about environmental policy and what the Environmental Protection Agency can still do to cut carbon emissions. For a smaller subset, mostly lawyers, W. VA v. EPA was an important (but confusing) administrative law case what we will spend a bunch of time arguing about how to apply to agencies generally.

Ruling could dampen government efforts to rein in Big Tech

The Supreme Court’s latest climate change ruling could dampen efforts by federal agencies to rein in the tech industry, which went largely unregulated for decades as the government tried to catch up to changes wrought by the internet. In the 6-3 decision that was narrowly tailored to the Environmental Protection Agency, the court ruled that the EPA does not have broad authority to reduce power plant emissions that contribute to global warming. The precedent is widely expected to invite challenges of other rules set by government agencies.

Supreme Court Deals Blow to Net Neutrality Rule Fans

The Biden Administration's loss in a Supreme Court ruling involving the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to regulate power plants could be a victory for internet service providers (ISPs)' arguments that the Federal Communications Commission was outside its regulatory lane when it reclassified internet access as a Title II common carrier service subject to open access and other requirements and imposed new neutrality rules.

Ohio Attorney General Can Proceed With Claim That Google Search Is A 'Common Carrier'

A state court judge in Ohio is allowing Attorney General David Yost to proceed with an effort to prohibit Google from prioritizing its services or products in search results. In a ruling issued May 24, Delaware County Common Pleas Court Judge James Schuck declined to dismiss Yost's claim that Google's search engine is a “common carrier.” “The court believes, at this stage of the proceeding, that the state should have the ability to take discovery, develop its case, and present evidence to support its claim,” Schuck wrote.

Federal appeals court reinstates Texas social media law

A federal appeals court has reinstated a Texas state law that bans "censorship" on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, allowing Texas to enforce the law while litigation continues. A US District Court judge had granted a preliminary injunction blocking the law in December 2021, ruling that it violates the social networks' First Amendment right to moderate user-submitted content.

ISPs Drop Challenge to California Net Neutrality Law

Lobbying groups representing broadband internet access service providers—including ACA Connects, NCTA, CTIA and USTelecom—dropped their challenge of a federal district court's ruling upholding California's net neutrality law. The ISPs had already lost a federal district court challenge to the law and two appeals court efforts to block enforcement. The suit was dismissed without prejudice, which means ISPs could refile it if they chose.

The landscape of lawsuits between big and small internet service providers

One thing that is extremely rare in the broadband industry is lawsuits between internet service providers (ISPs) concerning unfair trade practices. Big ISPs bully and compete unfairly against small ISPs all of the time, and yet you don’t hear of many cases where a small ISP sues the big ISP. There are several reasons for this. One is simple to understand – the big ISPs have a flock of in-house lawyers who can overwhelm anybody who sues them. Little ISPs don’t generally have the deep pockets needed to last through a long, protracted lawsuit.

US appeals court will not reconsider California net neutrality ruling

The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals will not reconsider its decision in January to uphold California's net neutrality law. California's 2018 law barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, but it only took effect in 2021.

FCC Announces $13.4 Million Settlement with Major Lifeline Provider

The Federal Communications Commission announced that the FCC and Department of Justice (DOJ) have reached a $13.4 million settlement with TracFone Wireless in connection with violations of FCC Lifeline program rules. Specifically, the settlement resolves allegations that TracFone violated the False Claims Act by signing up more than 175,000 ineligible customers for the Lifeline program during 2012-2015 and that the false claims resulted from TracFone’s lax oversight and monitoring of its Lifeline program.

Can Courts Mandate Better Broadband?

In April 2021, State District Court Judge Matthew Wilson in New Mexico ordered school officials to take steps to provide the needed devices and broadband connections for students who are forced to attend school remotely. This ruling was made during the deepest part of the pandemic when most schools in New Mexico were shut down. His ruling was based upon complaints that The New Mexico Public Education Department was not complying with a court decision in the case of Yazzie/Martinez v.

Meta's antitrust defense: a blizzard of subpoenas

Meta —the parent company for Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — could drag hundreds of competitors into its legal battle, aiming to slow the Federal Trade Commission's prosecution and "bury" its lawyers in paperwork.

Cox Moves to Overturn $1 Billion Music Suit

Lawyers for Cox Communications will begin oral arguments on March 9 in the appeal of a $1 billion copyright infringement award that it says is not only wrong on a legal basis, but could upend the entire broadband industry if it is allowed to stay.

Former Sprint wireless dealers file suit against T-Mobile

Using terms like “predatory” and “anti-competitive,” four retail wireless dealers filed suit against T-Mobile in recent weeks, all saying they were basically run out of business since the operator's merger with Sprint. Absolute Wireless, Maycom, Solutions Center and Wireless Express each named T-Mobile in their complaints. All of them previously sold wireless services for Sprint.

Monitoring of Trump Internet Traffic Sparks New Dispute in Durham Probe

Legal memos filed in recent days in the case against a former lawyer for the 2016 Clinton campaign, Michael Sussmann, reignited disputes over special counsel John Durham’s continuing probe into the origins of the FBI’s investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Durham said in a filing that his office would show at Sussmann’s trial

California Public Utilities Commission denies petition by Dish to stall CDMA network shutdown

In what’s described as a “proposed decision,” California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Administrative Law Judge Karl Bemesderfer has denied a petition by Dish Network that seeks more time in migrating CDMA customers off T-Mobile’s network. In a filing in early February 2022, the CPUC said the decision by ALJ Bemesderfer has no legal effect “until and unless” the commission hears the item and votes to approve it. The item may be heard, at the earliest, at the California commission’s March 17 meeting. But it essentially signals defeat for Dish at the CPUC level on this item.

More states could act after internet service providers lose latest California net neutrality challenge

The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dealt internet service providers (ISP) groups a blow, as a three-judge panel upheld the state of California’s right to implement its own net neutrality rules. Analysts at New Street Research tipped the decision to prompt more state action on the issue; Blair Levin of New Street Research argued the ruling opens the door for states with similar views on net neutrality to pass their own regulations.

Benton Applauds California's Net Neutrality Court Victory

This is the right decision. It will ensure that the people of California will continue to have unfettered internet access, blocks internet providers from discriminating against websites for financial or political gain, and reduces the chance that their customers will be ripped off.

California's net neutrality law upheld

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s net neutrality law, rejecting an attempt by telecommunications industry groups to prevent the state from enforcing it. The court upheld a previous ruling, which means the status quo stays and the state can continue to enforce the law. This means California can continue its ban on internet providers slowing down or blocking access to websites and applications that don’t pay for premium service. California's net neutrality law was signed by former Gov Jerry Brown (D-CA) in 2018.

What Justice Breyer’s departure could mean for tech

During his time on the Supreme Court, Justice Stephen Breyer authored and signed onto a slew of significant antitrust and regulation opinions that loom large over the cases against Facebook and Google today. His departure from the bench will mean the loss of serious antitrust expertise — a development that will sadden some traditionalists and cheer progressive antitrust activists that say change is long overdue. Breyer’s views on corporate power shifted somewhat over the years, but antitrust experts point to his decision to sign onto Justice Antonin Scalia’s 2004 opinion in Verizon v.