Network Neutrality

On March 10, Benton Senior Fellow and Public Advocate Gigi Sohn joined Womble Bond Dickinson’s Womble PRIDE, an affinity group for the firm’s LGBTQ+ team members and allies, and the National LGBT+ Bar Association for an in-depth look at how the Biden administration may reshape the communications landscape. Sohn discussed network neutrality under President Joe Biden, Section 230, and closing the digital divide.

A broad array of advocacy groups, along with 19 attorneys general, other public officials, and tech companies including Mozilla are urging a federal appellate court to uphold California's network neutrality law. The advocacy groups are weighing in on a battle over a California state law that prohibits broadband providers from blocking or throttling traffic, charging higher fees for prioritized delivery, and from exempting certain material from customers' data caps.

One policy issue that has haunted every Federal Communications Commission in the past decade, and then some, is net neutrality. That’s the idea that internet service providers have to treat all content equally and can’t slow down or charge more for certain kinds of content. Rules have ping-ponged between administrations. Obama’s FCC put neutrality rules in place in 2015 and Trump’s appointee repealed them in 2017. New Acting FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel supports net neutrality rules. She said, "I think things are always sturdier when they’re written into law.

This report is the product of an extensive investigation by the New York Office of the Attorney General (OAG) of the parties that sought to influence the Federal Communications Commission’s 2017 proceeding to repeal the agency’s net neutrality rules. In the course of that investigation, the OAG obtained and analyzed tens of thousands of internal emails, planning documents, bank records, invoices, and data comprising hundreds of millions of records. Our investigation confirmed many contemporaneous reports of fraud that dogged that rulemaking process.

California is urging a federal appeals court to leave in place a state net neutrality law that broadly prohibits broadband carriers from blocking or throttling traffic and from charging higher fees for prioritized delivery. “Congress has not established a federal regulatory regime that bars the states from taking steps to safeguard access to something as essential as the Internet,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta argues in papers filed with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

California’s 2018 net neutrality law, SB-822, recently went into effect and concerns have been already raised about the legality of “zero-rating,” the practice by which commercial arrangements and unilateral decisions by network operators are exempted from consumer pricing. Under California’s net neutrality law, zero-rating and sponsored data programs violate the new law because certain content cannot be excluded from consumer data caps, or usage-based pricing. Turner Lee offers the following recommendations to state and federal leaders:

California’s net neutrality law, which a federal district court upheld in February, is already wading into the regulatory morass that brought down past regulatory regimes charged with maintaining neutrality in rail transport and energy.

House Commerce Committee Republicans, led by Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Republican Leader Bob Latta, sent a letter urging Acting Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Rosenworcel not to impose stringent net neutrality regulations, which could result in Americans losing their internet offerings. Almost immediately after California enforced its new net neutrality law, two Internet providers reportedly told the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that the law could force them to end arrangements with US wireless carr

Internet service providers (ISPs) and their defenders are repeatedly claiming that the US did better than other network neutrality countries (specifically, the EU27) when it came to handling the crush of Covid-19 induced traffic. Unsurprisingly, they credit the lack of regulation for this amazing response. Once again, this claim does not hold up to real scrutiny. As with the investment nonsense, this is a highly complicated area and therefore subject to a lot of spin and heated arguments over what the data actually show and how to explain it.

As expected, the Federal Communications Commission has asked the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to hold off on hearing a challenge to its response to the court's remand of its Restoring Internet Freedom net neutrality deregulation order, suggesting that challenge could ultimately be moot depending on how the new FCC deals with multiple petitions to reconsider that response. "Only one of the three Commissioners who voted for the Remand Order remains on the Commission, while two of the remaining Commissioners dissented, and one of those dissenters has since become the Acting Chairwoma