USTelecom Threatens Legal Challenge to Possible Hybrid Title II Decision by FCC
Industry groups and companies reacted along already well-established lines to a Wall Street Journalreport that FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is considering a net neutrality order, with some hybrid version of Communications Act Title II, for a vote as early as the Dec. 11 commissioner meeting.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
If the commission goes forward with a hybrid Title II proposal similar to the one described in that report, USTelecom would be "compelled" to challenge it in court, Jon Banks, USTelecom senior vice president-law and policy, told us on Friday. “Any use of Title II would be problematic,” AT&T tweeted.
The report was not a surprise. We reported Oct. 28 that an order was possibly being readied for the December open meeting (see 1410270055). Industry and FCC officials told us earlier in October that the most likely proposal was some iteration of Title II reclassification of broadband, likely based on proposals by Mozilla and Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu, an early proponent of net neutrality, or a third, similar proposal urged by the Center for Democracy & Technology (see 1410160052).
Craig Moffett, analyst at MoffettNathanson, said what the Journal described was the “grand bargain,” he had predicted on net neutrality. Ev Ehrlich, former undersecretary of commerce under President Bill Clinton, said in a statement the proposed approach would give “content behemoths a free ride” on the Internet. A hybrid approach “would open the door to paralyzing regulatory uncertainty in the market and invite judges to resolve the key issues facing the FCC, rather than Congress or the Administration,” he said. Ehrlich is a visiting fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute.
"We're very pleased to see that the FCC Chairman is moving towards a Title II framework for creating rules to protect an open Internet,” said Gene Kimmelman, president of Public Knowledge, in a statement. “Although there are many details that do not appear to have been worked out, we are confident that the proposal they're considering could use Title II and other regulatory tools in a manner that effectively addresses the most important issues in the debate.”
“Any net neutrality proposal that allows paid prioritization agreements or Internet fast lanes is a non-starter,” Rep. Doris Matsui, D-Calif., said in a statement Friday. “Paid prioritization would amount to a tax on innovation and consumer choice.” She said the “overwhelming majority” of people who commented to the FCC about net neutrality oppose the concept of Internet fast lanes. “The Chairman must not ignore the American people,” she said. “It is too important an issue for consumers, innovation, and competition.” Matsui has introduced legislation that would ban paid prioritization deals.
“This Frankenstein proposal is no treat for Internet users, and they shouldn’t be tricked,” said Free Press President Craig Aaron.