Podcasts about open internet order

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Three years after the withdrawal of the Open Internet Order – then-President Barack Obama’s attempt at codifying network neutrality by prohibiting internet service providers from discriminating between content – by the Federal Communications Commission, a need to holistically understand the net neutrality debates still exists. How can we make sense of the intensification of controversy, the advocacy and protests, and the political and corporate wrangling? In his new book, The Paradoxes of Network Neutralities (MIT Press, 2019), Russell A. Newman, an assistant professor at Emerson College, sets out to provide an explication of the debates surrounding network neutrality. To do this, Newman critically examines the narratives put forth that erase elements foundational for interpreting the trajectory of open internet regulation, as well as comprehending the systems and impacts of internet advocacy, and the disparate rhetorics involved in this cause. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The fight for net neutrality is over at the federal level, at least for now. The Obama-era Open Internet Order of 2015 was repealed by Ajit Pai's FCC and solidified after a DC circuit court of appeals' final ruling, leaving prospects looking slim for legislation proactively regulating broadband internet.However, even with the federal repeal, individual states still have the ability to pass their own legislation, which could carry on the spirit of net neutrality by tackling the most frequented issues of blocking lawful content, throttling and paid prioritization.With the future of net neutrality in the hands of the states, how will this play out for end-users and ISPs? On this episode of Ratified, a MarketScale show on the intersection of business and policy, host Daniel Litwin brings two important perspectives to the table to understand the main arguments for and against net neutrality regulations, why small ISPs fought hard for repeal, and what future legislation could look like encourages both broadband expansion and an open internet.Commentary includes perspectives from Matt Polka, CEO of ACA Connects, and Chad Marlow, senior advocacy & policy council at the ACLU.ACA Connects, which represents almost 800 small and medium-sized independent telecom operators across the nation, and works with Washington to ensure fair treatment of these small players so they can provide “affordable video broadband and phone services to Main Street America.” Polka and his members have felt a weight lifted with the repeal of Net Neutrality, and he joined Ratified to give his perspective on Title II regulations, how they affect small ISPs, and whether lawmakers can put partisanship aside to roll out new federal legislation.At the ACLU, Marlow advises specifically on privacy, surveillance, and technology issues. An advocate for a free and open internet, Marlow explained how a state-by-state Net Neutrality framework could play out, who's necessary to advise on quality legislation, and his take on some of the prevailing arguments from the net neutrality discussion.For more on Ratified, follow Daniel Litwin on Twitter and subscribe to MarketScale Radio on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.

The Federal Communications Commission was back in court on Feb. 1, called on to defend its decision to overturn the 2015 Open Internet Order in December 2017. It seems like the FCC lawyers didn’t have the best day in front of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, and Prof. Christopher Terry from the University of […] The post Podcast #180 – Net Neutrality Back in Court Again appeared first on Radio Survivor.

The Federal Communications Commission was back in court on Feb. 1, called on to defend its decision to overturn the 2015 Open Internet Order in December 2017. It seems like the FCC lawyers didn’t have the best day in front of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, and Prof. Christopher Terry from the University of […] The post Podcast #180 – Net Neutrality Back in Court Again appeared first on Radio Survivor.

In 1999, Bill Gates made 15 incredible predictions that sounded outrageous but came true in under 20 years. Several tech companies and advocacy groups took the FCC to court last week in a major attempt to reinstate net neutrality regulations and the Open Internet Order of 2015. After racking up $150 billion in debt over four years, AT&T is now losing consumers at a significant rate and passing incremental costs off to their customers. Google Plus is shutting down in April of this year leaving some groups curious of where to go. Lastly, $190 million of cryptocurrency is gone forever after the CEO unexpectedly passed away and did not leave a record of passwords.

Coined by Columbia University law professor, Tim Wu, in 2003, net neutrality has been the impetus for major political and technological debates. From Comcast to Madison River Communications, there have been various Internet Service Providers who have tested the limits of net neutrality, triggering the Federal Communications Commission to step in, take action, and in effect, shape the future of the internet.  In order to further understand the future state of the internet, we’re exploring the past, present, and future state of net neutrality and its impact on the way consumers access information on the internet. My guest today is Paul Werner, a partner and Practice Leader of Sheppard Mullin’s Business Trials Practice Group in the Washington D.C. office. Paul is a seasoned first-chair litigator and has extensive experience representing cable operators, telecommunications, and other broadband providers in matters involving communications law issues, including local franchising, PEG programming, rights-of-way, pole attachments and infrastructure deployment, and a host of other related issues. What We Discuss in this Episode: What is net neutrality and why is there so much buzz around that topic these days? Are there common carriage obligations and what concerns do they address? In order to understand where we are now with net neutrality, it’s important to understand how the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) has approached communication regulations in the past What is the virtuous cycle of innovation and why is it important to keep it spinning around? How information services developed over the years The essence of net neutrality requires transparency, no blocking, no throttling, and no paid prioritization. How did the FCC change the way internet services were classified for regulatory purposes? What was the Open Internet Order that the FCC issued and what happened to it under the new administration? Should states establish their own individual net neutrality regulations? Can communication policies be localized to the states or are they inherently national? Is internet regulation a good thing? Could it potentially frustrate technological innovation? Resources Mentioned: Communications Act of 1934 Telecommunications Act of 1996 Open Internet Order Contact Information: Paul’s Sheppard Mullin attorney profile pwerner@sheppardmullin.com (202) 747- 1931 Thank you for listening! Don’t forget to SUBSCRIBE to the show to receive every new episode delivered straight to your podcast player every Wednesday. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us get the word out about this podcast. Rate and Review this show in Apple Podcasts, Stitcher Radio, or Google Play. It helps other listeners find this show. Be sure to connect with us and reach out with any questions/concerns: LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Sheppard Mullin website This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not to be construed as legal advice specific to your circumstances. If you need help with any legal matter, be sure to consult with an attorney regarding your specific needs.

California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill on September 30 that would apply the net neutrality regulations imposed by the 2015 Open Internet Order to Internet service providers in the state of California. Will the law stand up to the legal challenges against it? And what can states do to protect consumers when it comes to Internet service? Ash is joined by TechFreedom President Berin Szóka and former TechFreedom Legal Fellow Graham Owens to discuss. For more, see Graham’s paper on state regulation of broadband, and our other work on net neutrality, including our letter urging the veto of the bill, and our statement in support of the Department of Justice’s lawsuit against it.

We dive into what the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) are and how it is affecting companies, benefiting consumers, and changing the definition of personal data. L’Oreal, the French health and beauty giant, is adapting their digital strategy to include augmented reality to allow their customers the ability to virtually try-on makeup and hair products. The United States’ Senate passed a resolution to reinstate the Open Internet Order, with little hope of it moving forward. Google has made the decision to transition Chrome to the default HTTPS setting in September and October. Finally, iOS 12 was announced and new features such as Siri Shortcuts, Measure, Screentime, and Group FaceTime are here.

Adobe is offering the suite of Creative Cloud to educators for an absurd discount - $5 per student per year. Students will have access to Lightroom, Audition, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, and more. In net neutrality news, the United States Senate has forced a vote on the floor to reinstate the 2015 Open Internet Order. The ongoing battle over net neutrality between the FCC, the federal government, states, general public, and the tech industry is quickly coming to a boil. Square, the popular payment services company, recently acquired Weebly. The companies form a solid partnership providing a comprehensive solution for business owners and individuals growing their brand, business, and income.

With the official publication of the FCC's Open Internet Order, opponents in Congress will commence their efforts to repeal the Order under the Congressional Review Act. John Kneuer and Paul Larkin joined us for a Teleforum on March 5th at 2:00 pm as they discussed the likelihood of a successful repeal of the FCC's decision and the political and policy implications of continued uncertainty in Internet regulations.Featuring:Hon. John Kneuer, President and Founder, JKC Consulting LLC and Senior Partner, Fairfax Media Partners Paul Larkin, Senior Legal Research Fellow, the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

It is official...NET NEUTRALITY IS DEAD! Exploring the Five Ws and an H on the Open Internet Order vs No Net Neutrality On December 14th, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will voted and decided on the dynamics of our use of The Internet. Notwithstanding, there are many people who don’t know or understand the impact. Ajit Pai, the chairman of the FCC, was appointed by Donald Trump in January and was confirmed by the US Senate to serve a five-year term in October of this year. The Open Internet Order, was the current set of regulations protecting net neutrality in the US. Please join the Real Talk All The Time crew on Tuesday, December 19th from 7:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m. for an in-depth explanation & conversation on Net Neutrality…WHAT is it? WHEN did it become important to the masses? And WHY? WHO does it affect? WHO controls it? And HOW? WHERE do we go from here? The answers to these questions are instrumental. They demonstrate how essential it is for us to invest in Black Media & Black Businesses. Call in at 657) 383-0612, please PRESS 1 & add to the conversation. Real Talk All The Time 100% Real Unpolished, Unrehearsed, Unapologetic, Real Talk for Real People.www.realtalkallthetime.com

This week on The Politically Incorrect Podcast powered by Voterheads.comWe do a deep dive into what happened today as the FCC changed the way we stream video for the next four years if not forever.Despite overwhelming opposition from Congress, technical experts, advocacy organizations and, of course, the American people, the FCC has voted to eliminate 2015's Open Internet Order and the net neutrality protections it established. As expected, the vote was 3 to 2 along party lines, with Chairman Ajit Pai and Republican Commissioners Brendan Carr and Michael O'Rielly voting in favor of the order, and Democratic Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel voting against.We also try to make sense of the proposed GOP Tax plan that could be passed as soon as next week.

This week on The Politically Incorrect Podcast powered by Voterheads.com We do a deep dive into what happened today as the FCC changed the way we stream video for the next four years if not forever. Despite overwhelming opposition from Congress, technical experts, advocacy organizations and, of course, the American people, the FCC has voted to eliminate 2015’s Open Internet Order and the net neutrality protections it established. As expected, the vote was 3 to 2 along party lines, with Chairman Ajit Pai and Republican Commissioners Brendan Carr and Michael O’Rielly voting in favor of the order, and Democratic Commissioners Mignon Clyburn and Jessica Rosenworcel voting against. We also try to make sense of the proposed GOP Tax plan that could be passed as soon as next week.

  Bio Carmen Scurato (@carmenscurato) is Vice President, Policy and General Counsel at the National Hispanic Media Coalition, where she leads NHMC's policy and government affairs office in Washington, D.C. She is responsible for developing policy and legal strategies that encourage open and affordable communications, innovation, competition, and diversity. Carmen represents NHMC in meetings with decision makers in Congress and at federal regulatory agencies. She has spoken extensively on the ways that communications policy impacts people of color and regularly appears in outlets such as Fast Company, Fortune, The Root and the Guardian to highlight NHMC's policy and advocacy efforts. Carmen coordinates organizational responses to regulatory proposals that threaten to widen the digital divide and has co-authored several notable filings for Voices for Internet Freedom highlighting the importance of Net Neutrality and the Lifeline program for communities of color. In 2017, Carmen was the architect of Freedom of Information Act requests that compelled the FCC to release more than 50,000 consumer complaints, previously undisclosed, that drew renewed attention to the importance of preserving the 2015 Open Internet Order. Carmen also supervises NHMC's legal fellowship program, which provides an opportunity for select students throughout the country to experience media, technology, and telecommunications law and advocacy. Before joining NHMC, Carmen worked at the Department of Justice and assisted in Medicare fraud investigations, including a False Claims Act case that resulted in the recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars. She also worked at the DOJ Office of Legislative Affairs on large document requests received from congressional oversight committees. Carmen, a native of Puerto Rico, earned her J.D. from Villanova University School of Law and her B.A. cum laude from New York University. Carmen also serves on the public policy advisory council to the American Library Association and is a member of the FCC Consumer Advisory Committee. She also sits on the Advisory Board for Full Color Future and was named as one of 2017's Full Color 50. Carmen is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar, Hispanic National Bar Association, and the Federal Communications Bar Association. Resources National Hispanic Media Coalition Weapons of Math Destruction by Cathy O'Neil News Roundup Despite deeply flawed public record, FCC still plans net neutrality repeal The FCC is poised to repeal its net neutrality rules this Thursday despite tens of thousands of fake or fraudulent comments in the record. Both Democratic FCC Commissioners, several members of Congress, and protesters have called on the FCC to delay repealing the rules. However, Chairman Ajit Pai and his Republican colleagues are planning to overturn the rules anyway. The FCC on Monday announced a so-called framework under which it and the FTC would ostensibly work in partnership to weed out bad actors on the internet. However, this is more likely to be political maneuvering by the two agencies' Republican leadership, since FTC Commissioner Terrell McSweeney wrote a widely-read op-ed in Quartz last week stating that the FTC does not have the expertise to regulate internet service providers. Additionally, Brian Fung noted in the Washington Post that a case that's currently pending in the 9th Circuit could restrict those who wish to file grievances against their internet service providers even further. In FTC v. AT&T Mobility, the court will decide, within days, whether a parent corporate entity can escape being classified as a common carrier even if one or more of its smaller subsidiaries is classified as such. This is important because the FTC does not have jurisdiction over common carriers--only the FCC does. So if the court defines AT&T as a common carrier, the notion that the FTC would have any kind of authority to enforce net neutrality principles against ISPs, is a joke, basically--since AT&T would be able to claim an exemption from FTC enforcement based on the fact that its subsidiary is classified as a common carrier. And, as Brian explains, overturning the net neutrality rules would effectively remove AT&T from the FCC's common carrier definition. Taken together, a decision in the 9th circuit that's favorable to AT&T, combined with the FCC overturning the net neutrality rules, would make it a great week for AT&T, as it would mean that the company isn't subject to regulation by either agency. House Democrats, including Elijah Cummings, are calling on the Government Accountability Office to investigate the fake comments. Former National Security Officials say Trump voter database could be hacked In an amicus brief filed in the DC Circuit in support of Common Cause's lawsuit against the Trump Administration, Former National Security officials are worried that the Trump administration's proposed database that's designed to prevent so-called voter fraud would be susceptible to large-scale hacking. The former officials, including former National Intelligence Director James Clapper say exposing the personal information of millions of Americans online would invite hacking by both nation-states and criminals. Cloudflare CEO backtracks on 'Daily Stormer' takedown Remember when Cloudflare decided to stop hosting the neo-Nazi website 'Daily Stormer' for mocking the woman who was mowed down during Charlottesville riots in August? Now, Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince says that was a mistake because he's almost a "free speech absolutist" and that he let his emotions get the better of him. He says he's going to try not to be so impulsive next time. And, in the future, if the Southern Poverty Law Center reaches out to him to complain about hateful content Cloudflare is hosting, he's just going to delegate it to the Electronic Frontier Foundation--a privacy-focused non-profit that's based on the West Coast--and let those two duke it out. He's too busy to help curtail hate speech, basically. Meanwhile, Google announced that it will be hiring 10,000 people to help stamp out extremist content on YouTube.   SEC Crypto unit files first charges The Securities and Exchange Commission's new division that's focused on cryptocurrencies filed its first charges last week. They're against a company called PlexCorps, which was about to hold an initial coin offering (ICO) for which it claimed investors would receive 13 times their investment. The SEC alleged fraud and froze the company's assets. Meanwhile, the price of a single Bitcoin has jumped to over $17,000, from around $1,000 in January. Bitcoin futures also launched on the New York and London exchanges on Monday. Many experts are predicting that Bitcoin will eventually crash.   Facebook kids messenger app raises privacy red flags Facebook released a new app last week called Messenger Kids which lets kids under 12 "connect with people they love but also has the level of control parents want." Almost immediately, Democratic Senators Ed Markey and Richard Blumentahl raised concerns, saying that the app raises privacy and security concerns. So they're asking Facebook for more clarity on how the app works. White House says warrantless NSA surveillance can continue after statute expires The NSA's warrantless surveillance program will expire on January 1st if Congress doesn't pass an extension. However, the White House says that it has the authority to keep the program going because the FISA court met on April 26th and made changes that would remain in place for a year. Charlie Savage reports in the New York Times.  Google blocks Youtube on Amazon devices Google has blocked YouTube on Amazon's streaming devices. Google says Amazon refuses to offer Amazon Prime through Google gadgets and has recently halted the sale of Google's Nest. AT&T/Time Warner merger trial set for March The trial between the Department of Justice against the AT&T/Time Warner merger is set to begin on March 19th. This is unlikely to meet that April 22 deadline for the deal to close, on which AT&T would have to pay Time Warner $500 million.        

 This Week, on December 14th, the FCC is likely to vote to repeal the Open Internet Order of 2015, effectively handing regulatory oversight of the Internet to the FTC, and ending the three bright-line rules against throttling, blocking and paid prioritization. The issue of Net Neutrality is a complex, hotly debated one, and it […]

Ryan Khurana, Research Fellow at the Institute of Research in Economics and Fiscal Issues, and Associate Editor at Speak Freely, moderates a debate between two economists: Daniil Gorbatenko and Roland Fink, on the pros and cons of net neutrality, and whether the FCC is right to repeal the Open Internet Order.

With a ruling on the FCC's proposed order to dismantle the Open Internet Order expected this month, communications technology attorney Martha Buyer walks us through what's at stake.

Right now the FCC is considering a proposal to roll back the net neutrality protections in the Open Internet Order, thereby allowing ISPs, the gatekeepers of the internet, to effectively control what you have access to and how quickly. The FCC, led by chairman Ajit Pai, released the final draft of their plan named "Restoring Internet Freedom," which would reverse a 2015 ruling that classifies ISPs as if they were telecommunication services and instead have them be classified as information services. The FCC is forbidden from imposing neutrality obligations on information services and this proposal gives significant authority back to the Federal Trade Commission and many fear that the FTC does not have the bandwidth to properly regulate. This change could allow ISPs to experiment with so-called "fast lanes" for internet traffic, where some apps and services are prioritized over others. My guest this week is Peter Eckersley, the Chief Computer Scientist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is an international non-profit digital rights group that has fought for our rights online for over 25 years. Peter was on the show back in April to discuss how to hide from your ISP and I am joined by Peter again to talk about what the FCC’s changes mean and how we can fight for net neutrality.

Today's episode takes two deep dives into complicated legal issues in the news. First, we tackle the FCC's recent "Order Restoring Internet Freedom," which is being characterized as ending Net Neutrality.  Is that true?  The answer... probably won't surprise you, actually. Then, Andrew and Thomas discuss general principles of antitrust law with an eye towards the recent news that the Trump Department of Justice has sued to block the AT&T/Time Warner merger. Finally, we close with the answer to Thomas Takes the Bar Exam Question #51 involving class action lawsuits in Tenntucky.  Don't forget to following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances Andrew is going to be on the Wednesday broadcast of the David Pakman show; give it a listen! Show Notes & Links We first discussed Net Neutrality in Episode 64 and Episode 65. The text of the Open Internet Order of 2015 is here. You can also read the Heritage Foundation's plea to have internet regulations fall under FTC rather than FCC jurisdiction. The interim vote to reverse the Open Internet Order of 2015 is here. This is the full Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order ("Restoring Internet Freedom"). This is FTC Commissioner Clyburn's Minority Report and guide to the order. We first discussed antitrust laws in connection with the USFL lawsuit in Episode 57 and Episode 58. Here is the DOJ's lawsuit attempting to block the AT&T/Time Warner merger. The main citations we relied upon in the show were 15 U.S.C. § 1 (The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890); 15 U.S.C. § 18 (The Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914), and 15 U.S.C. § 45 (the FTC Act of 1914). Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

The new FCC Chairman, Ajit Pai, has announced his intention to repeal the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order that had brought the internet under Title II common carrier regulation and to reclassify ISPs as Title I information services. There is sure to be a contentious battle over these new rules and a fierce debate about […]

On May 1, the D.C. Circuit denied petitions for en banc review of United States Telecom Association v. Federal Communications Commission. The petitioners challenge the FCC’s Open Internet Order, in which the FCC established Internet access as a telecommunications service subject to Title II of the Communications Act and adopted net neutrality rules. At the same time, the new Chairman of the FCC, Ajit Pai, has announced that he plans to reclassify Internet access as a Title I information service and roll back some of the net neutrality rules. -- Daniel Berninger, one of the petitioners in the case, and Adam White, who has been counsel for the intervenors, joined us to discuss the status of the case. In particular, discussed the D.C. Circuit’s order denying rehearing, the concurring opinion by Judges Srinivasan and Tatel, the dissenting opinions from Judges Brown and Kavanaugh, the pending FCC rulemaking, and the potential for Supreme Court review of the D.C. Circuit’s decision affirming the FCC’s Open Internet Order. Brett Shumate, counsel to petitioners Alamo Broadband and Daniel Berninger, moderated the discussion. -- Featuring: Daniel Berninger, Founder, VCXC - Voice Communication Exchange Committee and Adam J. White, Research Fellow, The Hoover Institution and Adjunct Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University. Moderator: Brett A. Shumate, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP.

On May 18, 2017, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that seeks comment on reversing the 2015 Open Internet Order by reclassifying broadband as an “information service,” and potentially eliminating the bright line rules which ban blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. The Restoring Internet Freedom Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is expected to generate millions of public comments over the course of what will be a highly contentious debate. In this episode, partner John Heitmann and associate Ross Slutsky walk through the FCC’s proposals and the possible impacts of the proposal.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is serving up a big cup of you-know-what for net neutrality, declaring his intent to decimate the 2 year-old Open Internet Order and the Title II protections it bestows on the internet. Prof. Christopher Terry from the University of Minnesota joins to help us understand what Chairman Pai intends to do, […] The post Podcast #90 – FCC Chair Declares War on the Open Internet appeared first on Radio Survivor.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is serving up a big cup of you-know-what for net neutrality, declaring his intent to decimate the 2 year-old Open Internet Order and the Title II protections it bestows on the internet. Prof. Christopher Terry from the University of Minnesota joins to help us understand what Chairman Pai intends to do, […] The post Podcast #90 – FCC Chair Declares War on the Open Internet appeared first on Radio Survivor.

In this episode, Thomas continues his choose-your-own-adventure in which we discover how two well-meaning efforts to protect privacy on the Internet somehow left us with the "Selling The Internet" Bill, S.J.R. 34.  We also tackle the wackiest of wacky lawsuits, starring everyone's favorite Internet troll, Ann Coulter. First, though, Andrew assigns homework to the listeners for the very first time, previewing what will be an in-depth discussion of the recent Federal Court order granting injunctive relief and blocking President Trump's "Sanctuary Cities" executive order. Then, we return to our story from Friday's show, unraveling the connections between the FCC, the FTC, Internet Privacy, and the Republican Congress. After that, we discuss the Berkeley College Republicans' lawsuit against the school in connection with Milo Yiannopolous and Ann Coulter.  Is this lawsuit as hilarious as it seems?  (Yes.  Yes it is.) Finally, we end with the answer to Thomas (and Phil!) Take the Bar Exam Question #21 about a state choosing first to recognize gay marriage and then trying to repeal it via a ballot initiative.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Recent Appearances: Andrew was a guest on Episode 209 of the Phil Ferguson Show; please give it a listen! Show Notes & Links Here is a link to the decision by the Northern District of California enjoining the enforcement of EO 13768 that Andrew assigned as homework. This is the single sentence text of S.J.R. 34. And these are the 2016 FCC Internet Privacy rules (all 399 pages!) that S.J.R. 34 overturned. This is the earlier 2010 Open Internet Order promulgated by the FCC... ...and this is Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014), which struck down those rules. And this is the case of FTC v. AT&T Mobility, a 2016 decision from the 9th Circuit, discussed in depth in this episode. Finally, this is a link to the text of the Berkeley College Republican/Ann Coulter lawsuit, which is some truly hilarious reading. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

In this episode, Thomas begins a choose-your-own-adventure in which two well-meaning trains collide, producing the so-called "Selling The Internet" Bill, S.J.R. 34.  How did this happen? First, though, Andrew revisits a very difficult TTTBE question (#18), and answers a question from long-standing friend of the show Eric Brewer about the differences between a corporation and an LLC. In the main segment, Thomas gets to choose between the well-meaning FCC and the well-meaning FTC in boarding his doomed train.  Choose along with Thomas and figure out where we're headed! After that, Closed Arguments looks at the Fearless Girl statue and moral rights associated with copyright. Finally, we end with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #21 about repealing gay marriage.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Recent Appearances: Andrew was a guest on Episode 209 of the Phil Ferguson Show; please give it a listen! Show Notes & Links This is the single sentence text of S.J.R. 34. And these are the 2016 FCC Internet Privacy rules (all 399 pages!) that S.J.R. 34 overturned. This is the earlier 2010 Open Internet Order promulgated by the FCC... ...and this is Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014), which struck down those rules.  This is the case we discuss in depth in this part of the story. And, as a special hint to our listeners who read the show notes, Part 2 of this story airing next week will focus on the case of FTC v. AT&T Mobility, a 2016 decision from the 9th Circuit. Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com Direct Download

In February, Chairman Ajit Pai presided over his first major open meeting since becoming chairman, at which the Commission adopted items furthering the FCC’s reverse auctions for Universal Service funding and narrowing the applicability of the Open Internet Order’s transparency requirements. In this podcast, Steve Augustino, Avonne Bell, and Brad Currier break down the key details in the FCC’s Mobility Fund Phase II order, Connect America Fund Phase II auction order, and Open Internet small business exemption order. They also discuss some of Chairman Pai’s recent process reforms in the context of the February and March open meetings. This is the first in a semi-regular series examining noteworthy actions taken at FCC open meetings.

On October 27th, 2016, on a 3-2 party line vote, the Federal Communications Commission adopted controversial new privacy and data security rules for broadband ISPs. The FCC determined such rules were necessary because its Open Internet Order reclassified broadband providers as Title II common carriers. Prior to this reclassification, broadband ISPs operated under the generally applicable privacy and data security framework set forth by the Federal Trade Commission. However, the FCC’s new rules differ from the FTC’s framework in significant ways. Did the FCC need to adopt these new rules to protect consumers, and if so, why? Are there good reasons for these rules to differ from the FTC’s approach, which governs the rest of the Internet? What will be the practical effect of these new rules on companies, competition, and consumers? What might we see from the courts and Congress on this issue in the future? Our panelists discussed these questions and more in a lively Teleforum. -- Featuring: Dallas Harris, Policy Fellow, Public Knowledge and Michelle Rosenthal, Senior Corporate Counsel, T-Mobile. Moderator: Neil Chilson, Attorney-Advisor to Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen, Federal Trade Commission.

When the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the Federal Communications Commission’s 2015 Open Internet Order in June, it extensively applied Chevron deference in its decision. The controversial case has re-ignited the debate about whether Chevron provides too much deference to federal agencies, even as they are left applying aging statutes to new technologies and situations. In this podcast, communications partner Hank Kelly and associate Jennifer Holtz talk about the Chevron doctrine, its origins, and some key public policy considerations in light of the Open Internet decision.

What's next in the litigation over Title II and the FCC's “net neutrality” rules? In June, the FCC scored a victory when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld its Open Internet Order, which reclassified broadband as a common carrier service. While the agency won the first round, TechFreedom and tech entrepreneurs are hoping to overturn the ruling through appeal. Last Friday, they filed a motion for the D.C. Circuit to re-hear the case. If that fails, is it the end of the line? Or, will the Supreme Court have the final say? Evan and Berin discuss.

On June 14, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order, which classified broadband Internet access service (BIAS) as a “telecommunications service” under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, and imposed on providers a slate of “open Internet” and traditional common-carrier regulations. In this podcast, Jennifer Holtz and Jameson Dempsey, associates in Kelley Drye & Warren’s Communications Group, review the challenges to the FCC’s order, and unpack the decision and its reasoning. Listeners should also check out our client advisory on the decision at http://www.kelleydrye.com/publications/client_advisories/1053

This time last year, the FCC voted 3-2 to reclassify broadband under Title II of the 1934 Communications Act, utility rules designed for railroads and telephone monopolies — all in the name of “net neutrality.” Special guest FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, who voted against the Open Internet Order, joins us to give his one-year progress report for the FCC's Internet regulations. Has the Order protected consumers from harm? Or, as critics warned, has it stifled competition, innovation and investment? Did “reclassification” open Pandora's Box?

The FCC derives its legal authority almost entirely from statutes that predate the Internet--primarily from the 1934 Communications Act, which was designed for the regulation of a national telephone monopolist, and the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which was designed to incrementally deregulate the communications industry as the vestiges of that national monopoly gave way to competition. Over the past 20 years, the Internet has become the foundation of the communications industry, playing a role similar to that of the monopoly-provided telecommunications services that the FCC has traditionally regulated. There is unquestionably more competition today than there was in 1934, but perhaps not as much as was hoped in 1996. The FCC’s Open Internet Order, in which the FCC brought Internet Service Providers within the regulatory framework initially created in 1934, presents a compelling example of an agency struggling to find a new role in a changed industry – struggling to imbue old statutes with broad grants of power to govern what the FCC, but perhaps not Congress, believes are issues properly within its ambit. In doing so, the Order thrusts the FCC into current debates about the scope of the administrative state, the potential revival of the major questions doctrine, and the potential demise of Chevron. Framed by these issues, this debate will consider whether the FCC’s Open Internet Order fits within the agency’s statutory authority. -- This debate took place during the 18th Annual Faculty Conference at the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel in New York, NY on January 8, 2016. -- Featuring: Prof. Adam Candeub, Michigan State University School of Law; Prof. Justin (Gus) Hurwitz, Nebraska College of Law; Mr. Geoffrey Manne, International Center for Law and Economics; and Prof. James Speta, Northwestern University School of Law. Moderator: Prof. Daniel Lyons, Boston College Law School.

With the adoption of the Open Internet Order, the Federal Communications Commission has potentially waded into areas that have historically been within the Federal Trade Commission’s jurisdiction. How are privacy, consumer protection, and technology policy issues currently being handled by the agencies – do their actions complement each other or are they creating regulatory tension and uncertainty? If there is a turf war going on, will Congress step in or will the courts decide? How does it impact competition policies and consumer protection? Join FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai and FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen as they engage in a moderated discussion about these and other issues relating to the respective roles of their agencies. -- Featuring: Hon. Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Federal Trade Commission and Hon. Ajit V. Pai, Federal Communications Commission. Moderator: Alexander Okuliar, Partner, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.

High Tech Forum refrains from taking policy positions, but the FCC’s Open Internet Order was one issue on which Founder Richard Bennett simply couldn’t stay silent. Bennett filed an amicus brief questioning... The post Richard Bennett’s amicus filing in the challenge to the FCC’s open Internet Order appeared first on High Tech Forum.

High Tech Forum refrains from taking policy positions, but the FCC's Open Internet Order was one issue on which Founder Richard Bennett simply couldn't stay silent. Bennett filed an amicus brief questioning... The post Richard Bennett's amicus filing in the challenge to the FCC's open Internet Order appeared first on High Tech Forum.

Christian finds himself among two telecommunications and IP experts, Joe and guest Aaron Perzanowski, to discuss the FCC’s recently issued regulations mandating some form of “net neutrality” on broadband internet providers. Will these regulations hold up? Why does your cable company want to provide you with “antivirus” software? What did we receive in the mail last week? Which listener thinks we’re full of it? It’s all in this week’s show. This show’s links: Aaron Perzanowski’s faculty profile and writing Episode 52 and Episode 53 on King v. Burwell William Baude, Could Obama Bypass the Supreme Court?, and Michael Dorf, Obama Wouldn’t Circumvent SCOTUS on Subsidies We’ve reached North Dakota! Our earlier shows on net neutrality: Episode 49, Episode 16 (with Jim Speta), and Episode 10 (with Christina Mulligan) About the FCC’s Open Internet Order Download page for the Open Internet Order and Commissioner statements About the FCC Computer Inquiries of the 1960s and 1970s AT&T v. City of Portland National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet Services Verizon v. FCC About the FCC’s Incentive Auction for the 600MHz band Special Guest: Aaron Perzanowski.