Communications Act of 1934

Net neutrality has become the Washington equivalent of a Hollywood franchise: As if the sequel to the sequel weren’t enough, another installment of the debate over rules for the internet’s roads arrived this month. This time, however, there’s a plot twist. What, exactly, net neutrality rules look like matters less than that there are meaningful rules for broadband more generally.

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau seeks additional comment on the proposed eligible services list (ESL) for the schools and libraries universal service support mechanism (more commonly known as the E-Rate program) for funding year (FY) 2024. On September 12, 2023, the Bureau released a Public Notice seeking comment on the proposed ESL for FY 2024. Subsequently, on October 19, 2023, the FCC adopted a Declaratory Ruling regarding Wi-Fi on school buses.

There is an easy way to simplify the upcoming battle between the Federal Communications Commission and big internet service providers (ISPs) over Title II regulation and net neutrality. The public expects the government to regulate industries that are essential. That’s the reason we regulate electric companies and drinking water quality. It’s the reason we regulate meat and drug safety.

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau seeks comment on petitions for reconsideration of the Restoring Internet Freedom (RIF) Remand Order filed by Common Cause, INCOMPAS, Public Knowledge, and the County of Santa Clara. The petitioners request that the FCC reconsider its decision in the RIF Remand Order, reverse or vacate that Order, and initiate a rulemaking proceeding to address the concerns raised by the DC Court of Appeals pertaining to the 2018 RIF Order. In addition to the issues raised in the petitions, the FCC invites comment on how the issues under con

Despite vowing to eschew involvement in the latest Network Neutrality drama, I cannot sit back and let stand the resumption of the distorted gospel preached by the anti-network neutrality crowd.  This group has legitimate criticisms, many of which I have tried, via hundreds of law review pages—to analyze, and even endorse, in specific instances. Network neutrality regulation will not create a suffocating Internet rate regulation regime. The Democratic majority has clearly exempted broadband internet access from Title II common rate regulation.

Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel stated, "Today, there is no expert agency ensuring that the internet is fast, open, and fair. And for everyone, everywhere to enjoy the full benefits of the internet age, internet access needs to be more than just accessible and affordable. The internet needs to be open."

NCTA: The Internet & Cable Association President and CEO Michael Powell used an opening session at his industry’s annual tech trade show to launch a full-throated, very libertarian-leaning counter-offensive to the Federal Communications Commission's plan to reinstate net neutrality rules.

The Federal Communications Commission launched a new proceeding on restoring open internet protections for consumers and businesses. The FCC also will seek comment on proposals to ensure broadband services have effective oversight. If the proposals are adopted after the public comment period and review of that record, the FCC would once again be permitted to protect internet openness and competition, protect broadband networks from national security threats, and address public safety needs like internet outages.

1. Broadband is essential: A lot has changed since the previous Federal Communications Commission repealed net neutrality. A devastating pandemic reaffirmed the essential nature of broadband access to protect the health and economic security of all Americans.
2. Abdicated oversight: The 2017 FCC approach was not “light touch.” It was a complete abdication of authority.
3. Targeted approach: Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s approach is targeted, not heavy-handed.

The Federal Communications Commission will begin implementing President Biden’s plan for increasing government control of the Internet. There will be lots of talk about “net neutrality” and virtually none about the core issue before the agency: namely, whether the FCC should claim for itself the freewheeling power to micromanage nearly every aspect of how the Internet functions—from the services that consumers can access to the prices that can be charged. The entire debate over whether Title II regulations are necessary or justified was settled years ago.