SC: Appeal U/S 374 CrPC/415 BNSS is Not Maintainable Against Sessions Court's Reversal of Acquittal  ||  SC Asked the Centre to Promote Awareness About the Consequences of Driving With an Expired Licence  ||  SC Explains How a Deceased Christian Wife's Property Devolves under the Indian Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Reach Stacker isn't a Motor Vehicle; MACT Claim Not Maintainable  ||  Supreme Court: Lift Makers, Operators and Owners Share Responsibility for User Safety  ||  Patna HC: Pressure to Sign Divorce and Child Custody does not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Bombay HC: Externment under the Police Act Requires Satisfaction About a Gang's Activities  ||  Bombay HC: False Travel Distance Claim Alone Doesn't Constitute Misappropriation  ||  J&K&L High Court: Interest on Delayed Gratuity is Not a Mandatory Pre-Deposit For an Appeal  ||  Meghalaya HC: Meritorious Candidate Cannot Be Denied Admission For a Two-Minute Delay    

United States Telecom Association et al v. Federal Communications Commission and ors - (14 Jun 2016)

FCC’s ‘Open Internet’ upheld; dissenting judge scathing in remarks

MANU/UDCC/0245/2016

Media and Communication

A United States Court of Appeals gave further credence to a Federal Communications Commission move in February 2016 to classify the internet as a public utility, and strengthened the case for an open, neutral internet.

Brought by associations and companies in telecom, cable and wireless, the petition had challenged the FCC ruling for the greater government regulation and scrutiny it would bring.

Though the three justices were largely congruent in their ruling, Senior Circuit Judge Williams was scathing in his assessment of the “unreasoned patchwork” the FCC had indulged in. Though he agreed with the outcome of the FCC’s actions, he was deign to accept the manner in which it was achieved. His conclusions professed “natural monopolies” in broadband service, as he derided the public utility track for creating high barriers to entry and discouraging innovation in business models and technology.

Government scrutiny is the real bugbear for the internet industry, which until recently had enjoyed a policy of laissez faire. Not too long after reclassifying internet did the FCC release a paper discussing rules to protect broadband consumer privacy.

Relevant : Comcast Corp. v. FCC MANU/UDCC/0031/2010 Advanced Micro Devices v. C.A.B. MANU/UDCC/0335/1984 DiCola v. Food and Drug Administration MANU/UDCC/0232/1996

Tags : NET NEUTRALITY   FCC   PUBLIC UTILITY   PRIVACY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved