Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Net Neutrality Falls by the Wayside ' Again

By Samuel Fineman
January 31, 2014

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) failed again in its attempt to regulate broadband Internet service providers. On January 14, a unanimous three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the FCC lacked the legal authority to write certain rules governing the management of data on the Internet ' popularly known as the “network neutrality” rules. The decision could leave companies such as Netflix Inc. and Amazon, Inc. facing higher charges for the fastest service.

In Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission, 11-1356, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals gave the FCC one important victory, establishing for the first time that the agency has the authority to issue rules governing broadband providers. But the agency's Open Internet Order (Preserving Open Internet; Final Rule, 76 Fed. Reg. 59,192) was improper, the court found, because it treats broadband providers as common carriers, like telephone companies.

“Even though the Commission has general authority to regulate in this arena, it may not impose requirements that contravene express statutory mandates,” wrote Judge David Tatel. “Given that the commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the Communications Act expressly prohibits the commission from nonetheless regulating them as such,” Tatel wrote.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.