Why the Courts Will Have to Save Net Neutrality
'Back in 2005, a small phone company based in North Carolina named Madison River began preventing its subscribers from making phone calls using the internet application Vonage. As Vonage was a competitor in the phone call market, Madison Rivers action was obviously anticompetitive. Consumers complained, and the Federal Communications Commission, under Michael Powell, its Republican-appointed chairman, promptly fined the company and forced it to stop blocking Vonage.
That was the moment when net neutrality rules went from a mere academic proposal to a part of the United States legal order. On that foundation an open internet, with no blocking much of our current internet ecosystem was built.
On Tuesday, the F.C.C. chairman, Ajit Pai, announced plans to eliminate even the most basic net neutrality protections including the ban on blocking replacing them with a transparency regime enforced by the Federal Trade Commission. Transparency, of course, is a euphemism for doing nothing. Companies like Madison River, it seems, will soon be able to block internet calls so long as they disclose the blocking (presumably in fine print). Indeed, a broadband carrier like AT&T, if it wanted, might even practice internet censorship akin to that of the Chinese state, blocking its critics and promoting its own agenda.
Allowing such censorship is anathema to the internets (and Americas) founding spirit. And by going this far, the F.C.C. may also have overplayed its legal hand. So drastic is the reversal of policy (if, as expected, the commission approves Mr. Pais proposal next month), and so weak is the evidence to support the change, that it seems destined to be struck down in court.
The problem for Mr. Pai is that government agencies are not free to abruptly reverse longstanding rules on which many have relied without a good reason, such as a change in factual circumstances. A mere change in F.C.C. ideology isnt enough. As the Supreme Court has said, a federal agency must examine the relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action. Given that net neutrality rules have been a huge success by most measures, the justification for killing them would have to be very strong.'>>>
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/courts-net-neutrality-fcc.html?
marybourg
(12,631 posts)elleng
(130,946 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)How we have fallen.