Judges Hear Arguments on Rules for Internet

In a momentous battle over whether the Web should remain free and open, members of a federal appeals court expressed doubt over a government requirement that Internet service providers treat all traffic equally.

The Federal Communications Commission and Verizon, one of the largest Internet service providers, squared off in a two-hour session of oral arguments — three times as long as was scheduled. As Verizon pushed for the authority to manage its own pipes, the government argued that creators of legal content should have equal access to Internet users, lest big players gain an unfair advantage. But two judges appeared deeply skeptical that the FCC had the authority to regulate the Internet in that manner. The two jurists, Judge Laurence H. Silberman and Judge David S. Tatel, said that the agency’s anti-discrimination rule — which requires an Internet service provider to give all traffic that travels through its pipes the same priority — illegally imposed rules meant for telephones on the infrastructure of the Web. The FCC itself disallowed the telephone-type regulation a decade ago. The third judge, Judith W. Rogers, did not ask as many questions but appeared to accept much of the FCC’s position. The Wall Street Journal reports that by the end of the hearing, however, the question appeared to be whether the FCC's Open Internet Rules would be invalidated in their entirety, or whether only some of them would be thrown out.