Thread: Net Neutrality Prevails in Historic FCC Vote

Dana Liebelson

Net Neutrality Prevails in Historic FCC Vote

Posted: 02/26/2015 1:02 pm EST Updated: 5 minutes ago



WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to approve strong net neutrality rules in a stunning decision that defies vocal, months-long opposition by telecom and cable companies and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Democratic Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn joined Chairman Tom Wheeler to approve a rule that reclassifies consumer broadband as a utility under Title II of the Communications Act.

The FCC intends to use this new authority to ban "paid prioritization," a practice whereby Internet service providers can charge content producers a premium for giving users more reliable access to that content. The FCC also intends to ban blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. These regulations also apply to mobile access. More details about the plan are expected after vote.

"The Internet is simply too important to allow broadband providers to be the ones making the rules," Wheeler said prior to the vote.

At the vote, Clyburn pointed out that "absent the rules we adopt today," ISPs would be "free to block, throttle, favor or discriminate ... for any user, for any reason, or for no reason at all."

A few months ago, such rules were considered a pipe dream of net neutrality advocates. Last fall, Wheeler was reportedly still considering a "hybrid" approach to net neutrality that would have made major concessions to telecom and cable companies, who contend that strong regulations will hinder investment and innovation.

But President Barack Obama came out in support of Title II and tough net neutrality rules in November, and Wheeler had to contend with that position as well as millions of comments from the general public in support of net neutrality. Tech start-ups like Tumblr, as well as Silicon Valley giants like Google, also advocated for strong net neutrality rules.

The FCC decision is a major loss for Verizon, the company that initially sued the FCC in 2011 over rules that were considerably weaker than the new regulations. The new rules are also likely to be challenged in court.

Michael Powell, president and CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, a trade association, said in a statement that, "The FCC has taken us in a distressing direction. We must now look to other branches of government for a more balanced resolution."

The FCC's two Republican commissioners attacked the vote.

Commissioner Ajit Pai called the decision an "about-face" and stoked conservative fears by claiming, "We are flip-flopping for one reason and one reason only: President Obama told us to do so."

Those gathered in one FCC viewing room gasped and burst into laughter upon hearing Pai's remark.

Republicans have launched investigations into whether the White House unfairly influenced the FCC's decision, and are expected to pursue legislation, already introduced, that would gut the FCC's new authority. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) has said he plans to hold off-the-record meetings with stakeholders in early March in an attempt to drum up support from Democrats for his bill.

"Popular victories like today's are so unusual that three Congressional committees are investigating how this happened," said David Segal, executive director of Demand Progress, a group that supports net neutrality. He added in a statement, "If the net neutrality effort had followed the usual playbook, if Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T had defeated the American people, nobody would be wondering why."

Wheeler denounced as "nonsense" the claims that the FCC has a secret plan to regulate the Internet. He added, "This is no more a plan to regulate the Internet than the First Amendment is a plan to regulate free speech. They both stand for the same concept."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_6761702.html

F.C.C. Newsroom

Headlines

More Headlines »

February 26, 2015 - News Release
FCC Adopts Strong, Sustainable Rules to Protect the Open Internet
- Wheeler Statement

February 26, 2015 - News Release
FCC Preempts Laws Restricting Community Broadband in NC/TN

February 25, 2015 - Sunshine
Schedule Change- FCC February 26 Open Meeting to Begin at 10:30 a.m.

February 25, 2015 - Public Notice
Invitation to Technology Manufacturers and Service Providers

February 25, 2015 - Speech
Commissioner Pai's Remarks at 12th Annual NG9-1-1 Honor Awards Gala

February 25, 2015 - Speech
Commissioner O'Rielly's Remarks Before WISPAmerica 2015

February 24, 2015 - Public Notice
Nomination for the Chairman's AAA

February 24, 2015 - Speech
Commissioner Mignon Clyburn's Remarks, CompTel's Policy Summit

Fact Sheet: Chairman Wheeler Proposes New Rulesfor Protecting the Open Internet

Chairman Wheeler is proposing clear, sustainable, enforceable rules to preserve and protect the open Internet as a place for innovation and free expression.

His common-sense proposal would replace,strengthen and supplement FCC rules struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District ofColumbia Circuit more than one year ago.

The draft Order supports these new rules with a firm legalfoundation built to withstand future challenges.

The Chairman’s comprehensive proposal will be voted onthe FCC’s February 26 open meeting.Consumers and Innovators Need an Open InternetAn open Internet allows consumers to access the legal content and applications that they choose online,without interference from their broadband network provider.

It fosters innovation and competition byensuring that new products and services developed by entrepreneurs aren’t blocked or throttled byInternet service providers putting their own profits above the public interest.

An open Internet allows freeexpression to blossom without fear of an Internet provider acting as a gatekeeper.

And it gives innovatorspredictable rules of the road to deliver new products and services online.Legal Authority:

Reclassifying Broadband Internet Access under Title II

The Chairman’s proposal provides the strongest legal foundation for the Open Internet rules by relying onmultiple sources of authority:

Title II of the Communications Act and Section 706 of theTelecommunications Act of 1996.

In doing so, the proposal provides the broad legal certainty requiredfor rules guaranteeing an open Internet, while refraining (or “forbearing”) from enforcing provisions ofTitle II that are not relevant to modern broadband service.

Together Title II and Section 706 support clearrules of the road, providing the certainty needed for innovators and investors, and the competitive choicesand freedom demanded by consumers.

First, the Chairman’s proposal would reclassify “broadband Internet access service”—that’s theretail broadband service Americans buy from cable, phone, and wireless providers—as atelecommunications service under Title II.

We believe that this step addresses any limitations thatpast classification decisions placed on our ability to adopt strong Open Internet rules, asinterpreted by the D.C. Circuit in the Verizon case last year.

But just in case, we also make clearthat if a court finds that it is necessary to classify the service that broadband providers makeavailable to “edge providers,” it too is a Title II telecommunications service. (To be clear, this isnot a “hybrid”— both the service to the end user and to the edge provider are classified underTitle II.)

Second, the proposal finds further grounding in Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of1996.

Notably, the Verizon court held that Section 706 is an independent grant of authority to theCommission that supports adoption of Open Internet rules.

Using it here—without the limitationsof the common carriage prohibition that flowed from earlier classification decisions—bolsters theCommission’s authority.

Third, provisions on mobile broadband also rest on Title III of the Communications Act. Amongother things, the draft Order persuasively rebuts claims that Title III does not allow classificationof mobile broadband as a telecommunications service.

Finally, Title II’s “just and reasonable” standard and the Verizon court’s finding that Section 706authorizes the FCC to protect the “virtuous circle” of network innovation and infrastructuredevelopment provide standards for the FCC to protect Internet openness against new tactics thatwould close the Internet.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Rele...C-331869A1.pdf

FCC’s Net-Neutrality Rules Upheld by Appeals Court

Industry appeals to Supreme Court are likely

ENLARGE
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler at a hearing on the agency’s net-neutrality rules in Washington, D.C., in March 2015. PHOTO: ANDREW HARRER/BLOOMBERG NEWS



By JOHN D. MCKINNON and
BRENT KENDALL
Updated June 14, 2016 1:03 p.m. ET
91 COMMENTS

WASHINGTON—A panel of federal judges upheld the government’s net-neutrality rules Tuesday, handing a major victory to the Obama administration in its efforts to step up oversight of cable and telephone companies that provide broadband service.
The divided decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit represents a big win for internet companies that favor the net-neutrality rules.
The court’s majority rejected a wide range of telecommunications-industry challenges to the rules, which were put in place in 2015. The same appeals court had twice rejected earlier efforts by the Federal Communications Commission to impose net-neutrality rules on internet-service providers.
RELATED

• Judges Challenge Both Sides in Net Neutrality Case (Dec. 6, 2015)
• Net Neutrality Verdict Could Be Near(April 15)
• Netflix Throttles Its Videos on AT&T, Verizon Networks (March 24)
• FCC Proposes Privacy Rules for Internet Providers (March 10)
• Senate Panel Slams ‘Net Neutrality’ Ruling (Feb 29)
• FCC Seeks Information From Firms on Practices and Net Neutrality (Dec. 17, 2015)
• Net-Neutrality Proponents Warn of Loopholes (Dec. 13, 2015)

Aimed at ensuring a level playing field for the internet, the rules require internet-access providers, such as Comcast Corp. or Verizon Communications Inc., to treat all content coming across their networks equally, without blocking or slowing competitors or speeding up the content of those who pay.
Industry appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court appear likely.
In the core decision, the D.C. circuit court ruled the FCC had sufficient basis to impose utility-style regulation on broadband service, because consumers no longer look to internet-service providers to provide the online content they are seeking.
“Over the past two decades, this content has transformed nearly every aspect of our lives, from profound actions like choosing a leader, building a career and falling in love to more quotidian ones like hailing a cab and watching a movie,” the court wrote. “The same assuredly cannot be said” for broadband providers’ own add-on applications.
The appeals court’s 2-1 ruling sided with the FCC in a dense, methodical opinion that rejected the challengers’ various arguments one by one.
The D.C. Circuit majority said its role in reviewing the net-neutrality regulations was “a limited one.” The court said its job was “to ensure that an agency has acted within the limits of Congress’s delegation of authority.” The FCC’s rules fell permissibly within those limits, the court said.
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said the ruling was “a victory for consumers and innovators who deserve unfettered access to the entire web, and it ensures the internet remains a platform for unparalleled innovation, free expression and economic growth.”
The 115-page majority opinion was written jointly by Judges David Tatel and Sri Srinivasan. Judge Tatel, a Clinton appointee, wrote the appeals court’s previous two opinions that went against the FCC on net-neutrality issues. Judge Srinivasan is an Obama appointee who was on the president’s short list for the Supreme Court vacancy created by the February death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Judge Stephen Williams, a Reagan appointee, dissented, saying a core part of the FCC’s approach “fails for want of reasoned decisionmaking.” The judge said the FCC’s explanation for its new regulatory treatment of broadband providers “is watery thin and self-contradictory.”
The wireless and cable industries have fought the rules, arguing they would stifle investment in telecommunications networks and hinder the transition to the next generation of wireless service, known as 5G.
They also have worried the FCC might try to crack down on some emerging industry practices that open-internet advocates criticize as methods of skirting the net-neutrality rules. Those include imposing data caps on consumers but exempting provider-sponsored content.
CTIA, a wireless industry group, said in a Tuesday statement the industry “remains committed to preserving an open internet and will pursue judicial and congressional options.” The National Cable & Telecommunications Association said, “While this is unlikely the last step in this decadelong debate over internet regulation, we urge bipartisan leaders in Congress to renew their efforts to craft meaningful legislation that can end ongoing uncertainty, promote network investment and protect consumers.”
Netflix Inc., which favors the rules, responded to the decision in a statement: “By upholding all parts of the FCC’s net-neutrality approach, the appeals court settled two decades of debate and legal uncertainty by ensuring the internet remains open to all.”
Tuesday’s ruling may not be the last legal word on the matter, but there is no guarantee industry challengers will succeed in obtaining further court review of the FCC rules. The Supreme Court currently is working with eight justices, who sometimes split 4-4 along conservative and liberal lines.
It remains unclear when a ninth member might join the court, given the continued political standoff between Democrats and Republicans. The high court has been accepting fewer new cases for review since Justice Scalia died, and the cases it has accepted haven’t involved blockbuster issues.
The challengers also could ask the D.C. Circuit to reconsider the case, with a larger roster of judges participating. But the appeals court doesn’t often rehear cases, and the court has a majority of judges appointed by Democratic presidents who may agree with Tuesday’s ruling.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fcc-net-...urt-1465914663