Regulatory classification

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.

Public interest commenters, including public safety officials, overwhelmingly agreed with Free Press’s assessment that the Federal Communications Commission’s misguided repeal of Net Neutrality and its authority over broadband internet access service (“BIAS”) harms the Lifeline program, pole attachment regulation, and public safety. These commenters also overwhelmingly agreed that the best remedy for such harms would be for the Commission to once again correctly classify broadband as a Title II service protected by strong open internet rules.

The Federal Communications Commission's Net Neutrality remand proceeding, INCOMPAS highlights several important points:

On April 24, 2020, Senators Kamala Harris (D-CA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai about how multiple local governments from California and New York asked for, yet were denied, a further 60-day extension of the comment period over the DC Circuit Court of Appeals remand in the FCC's net neutrality repeal (Mozilla Corp. v. FCC). The senators asked the FCC to reconsider this position and further extend the comment period given the crisis created by the COVID-19 worldwide pandemic.

Hulu has been hit with a class action lawsuit that claims it deliberately throttles its service on web browsers. The suit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on April 16, contends that Hulu is trying to force subscribers to use its app, so that it can more easily collect and sell their data.

The Federal Communications Commission has made efforts to keep Americans connected to the internet during the coronavirus pandemic, but experts say its controversial decision to repeal net neutrality rules has handicapped the agency from doing more. The most high-profile action has been having internet service providers (ISPs) and telephone providers sign a pledge to keep people connected. The FCC’s pledge serves as a good example of what position the agency’s net neutrality repeal has put them in during the coronavirus pandemic, experts say.

Rather than rendering network neutrality obsolete, the Covid-19 crisis reminds us why it’s such an important principle. The crisis shows that even in dire circumstances, internet companies can provide a neutral network. In Dec 2017, Net neutrality opponents claimed that regulating internet providers like telephone companies had hurt broadband infrastructure investment and that dropping the rules would spur more investment. Other critics warned that broadband providers needed to be able to prioritize certain types of content to prevent internet slowdowns.

Senators Kamala Harris (D-CA), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) on sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai demanding an extension on the comment period for the issues that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals recently remanded in the commission’s net neutrality repeal. Local governments in California and New York requested a 60-day extension of the comment period, yet the commission refused to give these first responders more time while they are fighting on the frontlines of a global pandemic. “While that comment period clo