Transparency and accountability are crucial to increase diversity in corporate boardrooms and executive suites, business, trade association and advocacy group representatives said Wednesday at a Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council's conference. Discussion by two afternoon panels centered around the need for large corporations in the media, tech and telecom industries to create a more diverse "C-suite."

More parties are seeking to file amicus briefs supporting petitioners challenging the FCC net neutrality order, motions filed Tuesday revealed in USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063 at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (available via Pacer). Petitioners challenging the order's net neutrality rules and broadband reclassification as a telecom service under Title II of the Communications Act are Alamo Broadband, the American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, Daniel Berninger, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association. The Business Roundtable, National Association of Manufacturers and U.S. Chamber of Commerce to file an amicus brief that would argue the FCC regulation "will reduce broadband investment and stifle innovation." The Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy seeks to address the "underlying economic issues" and show the commission "incorrectly assessed both the costs and benefits of a Title II regulatory regime" and "explain and quantify how the FCC's actions will negatively impact investment in the Internet." University of Pennsylvania Law professor Christopher Yoo seeks to show the order "contradicts the technical principles that determined" the Supreme Court's 2005 ruling upholding the commission's previous Title I cable broadband classification in NCTA v. Brand X. Richard Bennett, who says he is a co-inventor of Wi-Fi and modern ethernet architecture, seeks to explain how the Title II broadband reclassification "effectively bans Quality of Service modes of communications unique and essential to the functioning of the Internet, and are vital for real-time communication, High-Definition voice, video conferencing, and the Internet of things." He also plans to show the agency ruling "displays a lack of expertise on the subject matter" and made other errors, including by ignoring that broadband Internet access service is "part of an integrated whole that includes a larger and more important information processing component." The Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council seeks to support AT&T, CenturyLink, CTIA, NCTA and USTelecom by arguing that the commission "failed to adequately consider evidence that Title II regulation will: 1) impose a regulatory paradigm that will adversely affect broadband access, deployment and adoption in historically disadvantaged communities where mass market broadband services are not ubiquitous; and 2) endanger the progress made under the FCC's previous regulatory paradigm toward narrowing the digital divide for vulnerable populations and creating workforce development in these communities." Three other parties made filings on Monday announcing their intent to submit amicus briefs supporting petitioners (see 1507140035).

Consumers need more access to public Wi-Fi, said Travis Litman, legal adviser for FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, during a broadband summit sponsored by the 706 Joint Conference. The FCC also needs to keep tabs on innovative broadband access programs across the country and modernize the Lifeline program, he said. “More than half of us online have used public Wi-Fi at some point and for many American households, it’s their only means of getting online,” Litman said. “So having more Wi-Fi in more places means more opportunities for students to get their homework done.” Rosenworcel was scheduled to be the keynote speaker at the multiple-panel event held Wednesday afternoon after the NARUC summer committee meetings came to a close, but was pulled away by other business at the last minute. The panels focused on high-speed technology and the availability of services, broadband service adoption and innovation.

Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Mobile Future and the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) plan to file amicus briefs in support of petitioners challenging the FCC net neutrality order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). Furchtgott-Roth, a former FCC commissioner, and WLF intend to file a brief Aug. 6 in support of petitioners Alamo Broadband, the American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, Daniel Berninger, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless Internet Service Provider Association, their notice filed Monday said. It said all the parties, including the FCC and Justice Department, consented to the filing of the brief. Mobile Future intends to file an amicus brief in support of CTIA and AT&T, its motion filed Monday said. Mobile Future said it plans to address points "unique to mobile broadband providers" that may not be fully discussed by the main group of petitioners, which includes both mobile and fixed providers, some of which oppose mobile broadband arguments to be made by CTIA. Mobile Future said it was "impractical" for it to join with other parties in an amicus brief.

The Telecommunications Industry Association plans to support challenges to the FCC net neutrality order, the group said in an emailed news release Monday. TIA filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to file an amicus brief on Aug. 6 in support of various petitioners in the case, including USTelecom (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). TIA said it would argue that the FCC decisions to reclassify broadband Internet access service under Title II of the Communications Act and craft an Internet conduct rule were "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with the law."

The FCC released its declaratory ruling clarifying its interpretation of the Telephone Consumers Protection Act, approved over a dissent by Commissioner Ajit Pai and partial dissent by Commissioner Mike O’Rielly at the June 18 FCC meeting (see 1506180046). Pai in particular complained that the order will mean more class-action lawsuits under the TCPA. “While the Commission’s past interpretations have addressed nuanced aspects of the TCPA rules, changes in how consumers use their phones, how technology can access consumers, and the way consumers and businesses wish to make calls mean that we are presented with new issues regarding application and interpretation of the TCPA,” the ruling said. “Through their complaints and comments, consumers have expressed their frustration with unwanted voice calls and texts and have asked the Commission to preserve their privacy rights under the TCPA.”

USTelecom is calling on the Wireline Bureau to tightly control its E-rate USF support program as it implements FCC changes allowing schools and libraries to self-provision fiber/broadband networks in certain circumstances. The bureau should confirm that school and library self-provisioning “should be the option of last resort” and take other steps to ensure proper E-rate funding allocation, including through continued use of copper phone networks, USTelecom said in reply comments filed last week in docket 13-184 on a proposed list of services eligible for E-rate discounts.

The FCC plans to vote at its Aug. 6 meeting on two draft IP technology transition orders that Chairman Tom Wheeler is circulating with commissioners, agency staff said Friday. The drafts would create a regulatory framework as telecom carriers migrate from traditional circuit-switched, copper-based phone networks to packet-switched, IP-based broadband systems using fiber and other networks. The intent is to “help deliver the promise of dynamic new networks, provide clear rules of the road for network operators, and preserve our core values, including protecting consumers and promotion competition and public safety,” Wheeler said in an FCC blog.

Judicial review of the net neutrality litigation is coming into clearer focus as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently set a briefing schedule, and telco and cable petitioners outlined their many lines of attack on the FCC's order. The court essentially accepted the parties’ proposed expedited briefing timetable running through mid-October, but it shortened and consolidated the briefs proposed by the main telco and cable broadband groups challenging the order while raising the word limit for intervenors defending the commission's net neutrality rules and broadband reclassification. One key aspect of the court's review still isn't known: the identity of the three judges who will review the merits of the industry challenges, which argue the FCC order violated the Communications Act, administrative procedures and even the First Amendment.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit set a net neutrality case briefing schedule that runs through Oct. 13. Opening briefs of telco/cable petitioners challenging the FCC order are due July 30, and supporting intervenors challenging the agency order Aug. 6, said the court order from Judges David Tatel and Janice Rogers Brown. The responding brief of the FCC and Department of Justice is due Sept. 14, and the brief of their supporting intervenors defending the order Sept. 21; reply briefs of petitioners and their supporting intervenors are due Oct. 5; and final briefs are due Oct. 13. The court directed its clerk to schedule oral argument on the first appropriate date following the completion of briefing. NCTA outside counsel Miguel Estrada said June 3 that he thought briefing could be completed by fall so oral argument could be in December or January, paving the way for a ruling about three months later (see 1506030034). The briefing schedule tracks the briefing schedule that was jointly proposed by telco/cable petitioners after consulting with the FCC/DOJ and others. But the court shortened the number of words that the petitioners would be allowed collectively in their opening briefs to 33,000 (from 48,000), as it did the number of words that the FCC/DOJ would be allowed in its response brief. The court also urged parties to be careful about their use of acronyms. Petitioners challenging FCC broadband reclassification and other decisions as overly regulatory include: Alamo Broadband and Daniel Berninger, American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless ISP Association. Petitioners challenging the FCC order as providing broadband providers too much "forbearance" relief include Full Service Network, True Connect Mobile, Sage Telecom and Telescape Communications. The litigation focuses on the merits of the legal challenges after the D.C. Circuit denied a telco/cable stay request (see 1506110048).