Commenters detailed how the chip shortage is creating problems for the tech industry, leading to longer lead times for obtaining network equipment, in response to an FCC public notice. Comments posted Friday in docket 21-195. Most didn’t seek specific action.
New York may not start enforcing a state broadband law requiring $15 monthly low-income plans that was to go into effect Tuesday, a federal judge ruled (in Pacer) Friday. ISPs challenging the state’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA) are likely to succeed on conflict and field preemption arguments, ruled Judge Denis Hurley of U.S. District Court in Central Islip, New York. ISPs showed imminent, irreparable harm, and the balance of equities and public interest favor keeping the status quo, he said. The decision counters recent rulings in California net neutrality and Maine ISP privacy cases where courts said states aren’t preempted.
Ransomware cyberattacks on massive targets such as Colonial Pipeline are rising and in the public eye, but TV and radio stations can also be attractive targets, said cybersecurity experts and broadcasters in interviews. And sometimes, such attacks on station owners are high profile.
Emergency broadband benefit providers are encountering problems enrolling eligible households in the program through Universal Service Administrative Co.’s national Lifeline accountability database, representatives said in interviews and FCC filings. Industry groups said it prevented some consumers from taking advantage of the temporary benefit when the EBB launched in May.
New York may not start enforcing a state broadband law requiring $15 monthly low-income plans that was to go into effect Tuesday, a federal judge ruled (in Pacer) Friday.
House Communications Subcommittee member Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Texas, put the onus on congressional Republicans Wednesday to come “to the table and sit down with us” to reach a compromise on an infrastructure spending package, as talks continued after the collapse of negotiations between the White House and a Senate GOP group led by Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia (see 2106080060). Veasey told a USTelecom virtual event that he expects the House Commerce Committee to mark up its part of infrastructure legislation soon so it can “get onto the floor for a vote,” after which it will be up to “my colleagues … in the other chamber to make sure this important legislation moves to” President Joe Biden’s desk. Veasey touted his backing of panel Democrats’ Leading Infrastructure for Tomorrow’s America Act infrastructure bill. HR-1848 includes $80 billion for broadband and $15 billion for next-generation 911 (see 2103110060). Whether that measure or another infrastructure bill passes depends on whether lawmakers are “willing … to come together and pass legislation that will help everyone be connected,” Veasey said. “Rural constituents will be very much … helped by this, as well as the lower income, largely urban residents that I represent.” Veasey touted his Enhanced Emergency Broadband Act, which would provide additional emergency broadband benefit program money (see 2103040049). “Create a path forward,” he said, “to make this program both permanent and sustainable.”
Tech and telco groups disagreed about USTelecom's petition for reconsideration of calling party notification and blocked call list requirements, in comments posted Monday in docket 17-59 (see 2105200074). Lumen said requirements should exclude legacy networks because it's "unclear whether those systems are technically capable of accommodating such a notification." The Voice on the Net Coalition agreed and said the FCC should confirm that calls blocked by a subscriber through anonymous call rejection or Do Not Disturb don't fall under the session initiation protocol (SIP) response code requirements. The Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee disagreed: "Introducing carrier discretion as to the type of notification will only increase confusion for legitimate callers." Incompas and the Cloud Communications Alliance said such flexibility "is exactly what the commission sought to avoid by prescribing standardized uniform notifications." The groups opposed extending January's deadline for notification implementation. USTelecom's petition "does not explain how a different form of notification would be superior to use of the SIP codes," said the American Bankers Association, National Retail Federation and others.
A federal judge peppered New York with questions on how the state’s law requiring $15 monthly low-income plans squares with the FCC 2018 net neutrality order. Judge Denis Hurley asked no questions of the ISPs challenging the policy at a teleconferenced oral argument Thursday in U.S. District Court for Eastern New York. Meanwhile, large telcos are seeking DSL exemptions from the law at the Public Service Commission.
ISP and internet groups allied before the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday in amicus briefs in support of Cox's appeal of a U.S. District Court's upholding a jury's $1 billion verdict that it's liable for subscriber copyright infringement (see 2101130025). NTCA, CTIA and USTelecom said (in Pacer, docket 21-1168) the 4th Circuit should clarify when, if ever, an ISP has specific knowledge that its services are being used for infringing purposes and thus must cut off access. They said for an ISP to be liable for contributory copyright infringement, it must know that it can do something about it, but transmission ISPs aren't able to do anything but cut off service on the assumption future infringements might happen. Because of the verdict against Cox, "transmission ISPs may have no choice but to terminate consumers’ internet access on a massive scale," they said. The Internet Commerce Coalition warned of "crippling damages." It's "Draconian" to require ISPs, on the basis of vicarious and contributory copyright liability, to terminate service to users accused of piracy, the Internet Association said. It said the lower court wrongly says Cox benefits from infringements by its subscribers since those are a minority of subs. IA said terminating access isn't reasonable "because it is a grossly disproportionate response to accusations of illegal downloading." The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Center for Democracy and Technology, American Library Association, Association of College and Research Libraries, Association of Research Libraries and Public Knowledge said affirming the lower court "would have dangerous consequences" because terminating an account "potentially cuts off every household member," and lack of broadband competition may mean no other way to connect. They said the "staggering and poorly justified" $1 billion statutory damages award against Cox "thwarts basic principles of due process and the public interest." IP law professors said there's no proof the infringing activity is a draw for subs, thus no proof Cox received direct financial benefit from piracy.
ISPs protested a NARUC task force’s focus on electric utilities expanding into broadband. Utility officials at the group’s virtual meeting Wednesday applauded a proposed recommendation to reduce barriers to nontraditional providers. Don’t forget wireless or anchor institutions, said other commenters.