ARTICLE
30 June 2016

Court Of Appeals Upholds FCC's Net Neutrality Rules And Regulatory Authority

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
On June 14, 2016, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in favor of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) net neutrality rules, which the commission approved on February 26, 2015 (published March 12, 2015).
United States Privacy

On June 14, 2016, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in favor of the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) net neutrality rules, which the commission approved on February 26, 2015 (published March 12, 2015). This reclassified broadband internet access service (BIAS) as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, affording the FCC greater regulatory authority over Internet Service Providers (ISPs) or BIAS providers. In response to the reclassification, the United States Telecom Association, a trade group representing various telecomm giants, joined by other companies and groups, filed a Protective Petition for Review of FCC's net neutrality rules. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the petition, siding with the FCC's position on a number of issues raised, including the following:

  • BIAS as a service is separate from information services;
  • The FCC can regulate interconnection arrangements between BIAS providers and edge providers on a case-by-case basis to ensure that BIAS providers do not use terms of interconnection to disadvantage edge providers or prevent consumers from reaching the services and applications of their choosing;
  • Mobile broadband is a commercial mobile service;
  • The FCC has independent rulemaking authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and can therefore issue the anti-paid-prioritization rule;
  • The FCC's General Conduct Rule, based on the FCC's conclusion that three express rules barring blocking, throttling and paid prioritization are insufficient to protect the open internet, is not unconstitutionally vague; and
  • The Net Neutrality rules impose nondiscrimination and equal access obligations that do not raise and have never raised a First Amendment concern. The BIAS providers regulated by the rules are only broadband providers that hold themselves out as neutral, indiscriminate conduits.

The court's decision provides underlying jurisdictional support to the Commission's controversial Notice of Proposed Rulemaking In re "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and other Telecommunication Services" (FCC 16-39), which we have previously discussed here. The NPRM was open for comment until May 27, 2016, and the FCC's response is expected on June 27, 2016. The regulatory environment for BIAS providers will evolve as the FCC continues to promulgate rules under its Net Neutrality authority.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More