You are here Regulation
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2014-12-08 18:12
Will this FCC legal team learn from the legal mistakes of their predecessors and ensure the FCC has a thorough and a sufficient legal record to justify their legal theories, given that the FCC already has failed twice in crafting legal net neutrality regulations in Comcast v. FCC in 2010 and again in Verizon v. FCC in 2014?
Kindly, the U.S. Court of Appeals has provided the FCC a roadmap to follow to legally justify their net neutrality rules under Section 706.
It is telling that the court provided no similar legal “roadmap” for Title II reclassification. That’s because Title II reclassification would require successfully backtracking decades of opposing FCC and court precedents and remixing FCC authorities in new and imaginative ways to traverse uncharted legal territory.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2014-11-11 21:18
The top ten most descriptive adjectives for the President’s claim that Title II utility regulation authority is needed to implement net neutrality are:
-
UNTRUE
-
UNWARRANTED
-
UNNECESSARY
-
UNFAIR
-
UNPOPULAR
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2014-11-10 12:37
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 10, 2014
Contact: Scott Cleland 703-217-2407
The President’s Call for Regulating the Internet as a Title II Utility Could Break the Global Internet
Autocratic Nations Want the UN’s International Telecommunications Union to Control the Internet
Reclassifying the Internet as “Telecommunications” Isn’t Domestic Policy, but Trade/Foreign Policy
WASHINGTON D.C. – The following may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition:
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sat, 2014-11-08 09:41
Please don’t miss my Daily Caller op-ed here: “The Federal Communications Congress?”
It explains how the FCC would be reversing longstanding, successful, bipartisan U.S. trade and foreign policy, if it unilaterally reversed the legal status of Internet traffic from an un-tariffed information service to a price (and tariff) regulated “telecommunications” service.
This is Part 71 of my FCC Open Internet Order Series.
***
FCC Open Internet Order Series
Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2014-11-03 18:14
If the FCC believes it needs additional legal authority to ensure no Internet “fast lanes” or “paid prioritization,” it should ask Congress for the authority to do it.
That’s what agency “creatures of Congress” do when their original legal authorities have obsolesced and need modernization to remain functional. It’s Congress’ constitutional role to set American communications/Internet policy; it’s the FCC’s role to implement and adjudicate it. That’s basically why the U.S. D.C. Court of Appeals overturned the FCC in 2010 in Comcast v. FCCand again in 2014 in Verizon v. FCC.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Fri, 2014-10-31 13:41
Please don’t miss my Daily Caller op-ed here: “Net Neutrality Has Become an Industrial Policy.”
It explains how net neutrality is being exposed to be less about protecting consumers and more about “Trojan horse” political messaging to protect and subsidize Silicon Valley economic interests.
This is Part 70 of my FCC Open Internet Order Series.
***
FCC Open Internet Order Series
Part 1: The Many Vulnerabilities of an Open Internet [9-24-09]
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Sun, 2014-10-05 22:40
Rep. Henry Waxman, Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, wrote the FCC to propose that the FCC, in its pending Open Internet order remand, “reclassif[y] broadband providers as telecommunications services and then using the modern [Title I] authority of section 706 to set bright-line rules to prevent blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization.”
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2014-09-29 12:03
While proposing to follow the D.C. Circuit Court’s roadmap in Verizon v. FCC to create a legal FCC regulatory framework for the Internet Age under the FCC’s 706 authorities, the FCC also invited proposals to potentially subject broadband to Title II common carrier utility regulation.
The FCC’s invitation has prompted a “rainbow of policy and legal proposals” that would explore “new ideas for protecting and promoting the open Internet” by imposing Title II telecommunications regulation on America’s Internet infrastructure.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2014-09-23 18:37
The FTC implicitly laid down an important jurisdictional, political, and public marker against FCC reclassification of broadband as a utility, in its recent FCC filing in the FCC’s Section 706 inquiry proceeding.
Respectfully outside of the Open Internet proceeding considering whether to reclassify broadband information services as a Title II common carrier (utility) telecommunication service, the FTC officially and deftly introduced key legal facts into the overall FCC record – that deftly have the practical and legal effect of opposing FCC reclassification of broadband Internet access service as a Title II common carrier – on the record.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2014-09-18 21:38
Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: “The Forgotten Consumer in the Fast Lane Net Neutrality Debate” – here.
- It explains how the whole “no fast lane” argument is misdirection that serves Silicon Valley’s interests at the expense of what’s best for empowering consumers.
- It is Part 64 in my FCC Open Internet Order Series.
***
FCC Open Internet Order Series
Pages
|