Regulatory classification

Free Press condemned the Federal Communications Commission’s abandonment of its authority to safeguard internet users and promote universal access to an open and affordable internet. The filing was in response to an Oct 2019 US Court of Appeals decision to remand for further consideration by the FCC three key issues related to the agency’s 2017 network neutrality repeal, which also rolled back other vital protections under Title II of the Communications Act.

NCTA-The Internet & Television Association had some simple answers for the Federal Communications Commission, which is seeking input on the impact of its Restoring Internet Freedom (RIF) order.

INCOMPAS — the internet and competitive networks association — led the court challenge opposing the Federal Communications Commission decision to end network neutrality provisions that help first responders, main street businesses and the streaming revolution. The INCOMPAS comments argue net neutrality impacts:

By this Order, the Federal Communications Commission denies a further extension of time for filing comments and reply comments on the Public Notice seeking to refresh the record in the above-captioned Restoring Internet Freedom and Lifeline proceedings. On April 16, 2020, the City of Los Angeles, the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara

The court in Mozilla required the Federal Communications Commission to address how its Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which repealed the agency’s net neutrality rules and removed FCC jurisdiction over broadband, impacted public safety, pole attachments, and the Lifeline program. Instead of opening a new rulemaking proceeding, the FCC issued a Public Notice that fails to explain how the agency ultimately intends to proceed on this matter.

The future of competition in high-speed broadband access looks bleak. A vast majority of homes only have their cable monopoly as their choice for speeds in excess of 100 mbps and small ISPs and local governments are carrying the heavy load of deploying fiber networks that surpass gigabit cable networks. Research now shows that these new monopolies have striking similarities to the telephone monopolies of old.

The European Union has embraced a heavy-handed regulatory scheme designed to allocate access to the existing network, while the US has emphasized private investment to expand network capacity. As the internet emerged and developed, the work of European regulators was guided by the legal system developed to govern traditional telephone service largely built with taxpayer funds. This approach presumed that significant parts of the phone network were likely to remain monopolies.

According to the DC Circuit’s logic, the Federal Communications Commission’s jurisdiction over broadband Internet access services now resides in some sort of regulatory purgatory.

Generous actions from internet service providers during the coronavirus pandemic prove that broad, now-repealed net neutrality rules were always unnecessary, said Roslyn Layton, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Layton said that service providers’ offers to waive cancellations and fees while many Americans are struggling financially demonstrate that ISPs are acting with customers’ best interests in mind and do not require close government oversight.