Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Sunday May 14 2017, @02:22AM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the ath0 dept.

How one obscure court case could decide the future of internet business

In August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit dealt the Federal Trade Commission a major blow by calling into question one of the consumer protection agency's most important powers. The court said the FTC should be banned from regulating a company if even a small part of that firm's business is regulated by the Federal Communications Commission as a telecom service, otherwise known as a "common carrier."

[...] The court's decision this week to rehear the case served to nullify the ruling, so the loophole is temporarily closed. But it could easily be reopened if the court comes to the same conclusion, analysts say. Other possibilities include reversing the court's previous position entirely or coming down somewhere in the middle.

AT&T said in a statement that it looked forward to participating in the rehearing.

The outcome of the case won't just affect the FTC; it may also lend momentum to the FCC's effort to repeal its own net neutrality rules. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has argued that the trade commission should be responsible for policing internet providers, not the FCC. Right now, the FTC has no power over ISPs because the net neutrality rules consider all ISPs as common carriers.

Undoing the 9th Circuit's ruling for good would mean giving the FTC the ability once again to go after the parts of an ISP's business that aren't common carrier-related. But the FCC wants to go further than that. Pai has proposed undoing the classification of ISPs as common carriers, which could give the FTC even greater jurisdiction over internet providers.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Politics: FCC Guards Eject Reporter 37 comments

John M. Donnelly, a senior writer at CQ Roll Call, said he was trying to talk with FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly one-on-one after a news conference when two plainclothes guards pinned him against a wall with the backs of their bodies.

Washington Post

“Not only did they get in between me and O’Rielly but they put their shoulders together and simultaneously backed me up into the wall and pinned me to the wall for about 10 seconds just as I started to say, “Commissioner O’Rielly, I have a question,” Donnelly said Friday.

Donnelly said he was stopped long enough to allow O’Rielly to walk away.

Los Angeles Times

Donnelly, who also happens to be chair of the National Press Club Press Freedom team, said he was then forced out of the building after being asked why he had not posed his question during the news conference.

O'Rielly apologized to Donnelly on Twitter, saying he didn't recognize Donnelly in the hallway. "I saw security put themselves between you, me and my staff. I didn't see anyone put a hand on you. I'm sorry this occurred."

Politico

According to the publication for which the reporter works (archived copy),

Senators, including Judiciary Chairman Charles E. Grassley, are warning the Federal Communications Commission about its treatment of reporters after a CQ Roll Call reporter was manhandled Thursday.

“The Federal Communications Commission needs to take a hard look at why this happened and make sure it doesn’t happen again. As The Washington Post pointed out, it’s standard operating procedure for reporters to ask questions of public officials after meetings and news conferences,” the Iowa Republican said. “It happens all day, every day. There’s no good reason to put hands on a reporter who’s doing his or her job.”

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 14 2017, @06:18AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 14 2017, @06:18AM (#509375)

    nigeria

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday May 14 2017, @07:11AM (7 children)

    by kaszz (4211) on Sunday May 14 2017, @07:11AM (#509383) Journal

    So big sites like Book-of-drama-queens and data collection will get priority while the MAFIAA will once again get the opportunity to screw around with internet services.

    Make America Great Everagain.. hmm..

    Which president will be voted into office to undo this mess?

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 14 2017, @10:32AM (6 children)

      None. It isn't a widely cared about enough issue.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday May 14 2017, @11:14AM (5 children)

        by kaszz (4211) on Sunday May 14 2017, @11:14AM (#509426) Journal

        What issues do they care about then?

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 14 2017, @02:19PM (4 children)

          Security mostly. Fiscal, physical, whatever. Me, I care a lot more about liberty but I'm an odd duck in today's political landscape.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday May 14 2017, @02:45PM (3 children)

            by kaszz (4211) on Sunday May 14 2017, @02:45PM (#509463) Journal

            The problem is always that with enough security people will lose the liberty to uphold their security. Check-mate.
            Which is why the famous quote is remembered.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday May 14 2017, @05:46PM (2 children)

              Remembered by a select few only. Everyone nowadays thinks the federal government should hold their hand cradle to grave when it was only meant to keep one state from fucking over another state and organize a military when necessary. Every power the government takes on itself is a portion of liberty taken from the people.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday May 14 2017, @06:03PM (1 child)

                by kaszz (4211) on Sunday May 14 2017, @06:03PM (#509565) Journal

                Really the problem isn't so much government per se. But when scums gets enough power to fuck other people over. Which is also why people should be able to retract power on a individual basis. As a system comparison, the communist system while good in theory will quickly enable psychopaths to rise to the top and without elections it's doomed.

                A problem is however health care. Most people will stay healthy and some will be sick. If costs are pooled then the costs will be small if spread out. However if only sick people should pay for health care, they will die from bills before disease. Another aspect of this is that if the general population is kept healthy way less infection vectors will be available and protect everybody, including rich and healthy people. Having people coughing TB in public will increase the probability for every body to get sick without discrimination and lower national productivity.

(1)