Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Monday April 25 2022, @04:01AM   Printer-friendly
from the discommendation dept.

ISPs can't find any judges who will block California net neutrality law:

The broadband industry has lost another attempt to block California's net neutrality law.

After ISP lobby groups' motion for a preliminary injunction was denied last year in US District Court for the Eastern District of California, they appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. A three-judge panel unanimously upheld the ruling against the broadband industry in January, after which the industry groups petitioned for a rehearing with all of the appellate court's judges (called an "en banc" hearing).

The answer came back Wednesday: No judges on the appeals court thought the broadband industry's petition for a rehearing was even worth voting on.

"The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied," the order said.

California can thus continue enforcing its net neutrality law while the case continues.

"It is notable that not a single judge on the nation's largest court of appeals even asked for a vote on the industry's rehearing petition," Andrew Jay Schwartzman, senior counselor for the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, said in a statement responding to the denial. The court has 29 judgeships and all 29 are currently filled.

Schwartzman also said the denial "is hardly a surprise. The Ninth Circuit's unanimous panel opinion affirming the lower court's decision allowing the new law to go into effect followed established principles. Its finding that federal law does not preclude California from adopting its own network neutrality rules is rock solid."

[...] The state of Washington is also enforcing a net neutrality law. While the Pai FCC attempted to preempt all such state net neutrality laws, an appeals court ruled that it couldn't do so.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived.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: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:13AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:13AM (#1239267)

    Get Sonic.

    They are not the cheapest, but they cover good parts of the state, and they are "good." It's the ISP urging their customers to vote forr net neutrality.

    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday April 25 2022, @05:04PM (2 children)

      by krishnoid (1156) on Monday April 25 2022, @05:04PM (#1239398)

      Do they do a good job of wrangling with AT&T support to get stuff fixed when your service gets dicey?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @05:56PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @05:56PM (#1239411)

        Sonic's DSL service relies on AT&T for the last-mile copper lines, but I'm told they have their own switches at the local AT&T locations.

        Initial installation was done by Sonic techs, not AT&T, and haven't needed to contact them since, so can't tell how they deal with AT&T.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2022, @06:10AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 26 2022, @06:10AM (#1239611)

          Unfortunately that was a killer for me.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:29AM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:29AM (#1239272)

    I still haven't figured out any way to report infractions to the FCC. I have a home server that I connect over VPN and stream files over http from. I get full speed everywhere except one family member's house I only get a couple mbps from any services on my home server. Http, different VPNs types, all always limited if I connect directly. If I connect from a different ISP I get full speed. If I tunnel through a third party VPN (one they can't slow down without thousands of angry users) I get full speed to my home server. Its literally only this one ISP that gets slow speed but I have zero ability to do anything about it. I call the ISP and they claim they don't even have the capability to slow connections down selectively. But its clear as day, 25MiB/s through any major website, but 2mbps to my own server. Any other ISP maxes out my home server's 100Mbps connection. Been this way for years through multiple server upgrades, router upgrades, lots of different VPNs and configs.

    Feels good to vent but thats about all I can do it seems. Besides change ISPs, but the only other options in the area are even worse (mountain living means satellite or shitty cable ISP).

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:57AM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @04:57AM (#1239275)

      Uhm ... if it's a state law (and not an FCC/federal infraction) that's being violated then shouldn't you report it to the state (assuming you are in a state that has such a law)?

      Does the FCC enforce net neutrality?

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @05:07AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @05:07AM (#1239276)

        Commie Californistan! Protecting the rights of the common people! Ha! They probably have taxes there, too.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @10:21PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @10:21PM (#1239473)

          Texas has higher taxes than California. Unless you are very rich, then Texas gives you tax cuts and bleeds the 99% to fund the shortage. Along with the variety of draconian laws, Texas is one of the least free states but fReEe GunS makes a lot of idiots think otherwise. Too bad the idiots don't realize their Rich fRens hate them to the core.

      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @06:04AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @06:04AM (#1239281)

        The entire point of the article is that that FCC doesn't enforce net neutrality so it falls to state law.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday April 25 2022, @03:09PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday April 25 2022, @03:09PM (#1239354) Journal

      Infraction of what?

      The current FCC rules say they can do whatever the fuck they want.

      I was assured that Net Neutrality was a bad thing when the FCC eliminated it during Trump's term.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @06:10PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @06:10PM (#1239413)

      Starlink is a thing now... you should look into it.

      • (Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Tuesday April 26 2022, @01:02PM

        by Nobuddy (1626) on Tuesday April 26 2022, @01:02PM (#1239671)

        Not everywhere. And the up/down is not comparable to land links. But it is orders of magnitude better than any other satellite link. A wonderful solution for rural users. Like me.

  • (Score: 0, Troll) by HammeredGlass on Monday April 25 2022, @01:16PM (5 children)

    by HammeredGlass (12241) on Monday April 25 2022, @01:16PM (#1239314)

    The statists are busy consolidating power into the unbreachable halls of bureaucratic hell. You shall cry out for these and many other powers you've lost control of to the state one day.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday April 25 2022, @02:49PM (4 children)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday April 25 2022, @02:49PM (#1239346) Journal

      Ah yes, give me that TRUE FREEDOM that only a Comcast customer can experience!

      "You're suffering will be legendary, even in hell!" = Cenobite Priest, AKA "Jim" at the call center

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @03:40PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2022, @03:40PM (#1239370)

        the freedom to be free from freedom?

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday April 25 2022, @06:17PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday April 25 2022, @06:17PM (#1239414) Journal

        "You're suffering will be legendary, even in hell!" = Cenobite Priest, AKA "Jim" at the call center

        Which is impressive compared to a guy working in a call center. His suffering is damn near xfinity!

        (why yes, I will be here all week! try the veal)

      • (Score: 2) by HammeredGlass on Tuesday April 26 2022, @02:27PM

        by HammeredGlass (12241) on Tuesday April 26 2022, @02:27PM (#1239700)

        Why hasn't it happened all over the US already?!?

  • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Monday April 25 2022, @05:11PM (2 children)

    by krishnoid (1156) on Monday April 25 2022, @05:11PM (#1239400)

    So they wouldn't rehear for the preliminary injunction, right? The main case is still happening, so if someone brings a net neutrality suit against them, they could drag it out until the conclusion of the main case?

    • (Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Tuesday April 26 2022, @01:09PM (1 child)

      by Nobuddy (1626) on Tuesday April 26 2022, @01:09PM (#1239672)

      They could, but it would be pointless. If no judge will issue an injunction, they would still have to comply until it is decided.

      • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday April 26 2022, @11:19PM

        by krishnoid (1156) on Tuesday April 26 2022, @11:19PM (#1239866)

        That's what I meant -- the ISP could choose not to comply, and then get sued for noncompliance, and drag out *that* case until the main case is decided.

(1)