Supreme Court Upholds TikTok Ban, and Domestic and Foreign Censors Rejoice–TikTok v. Garland January 17, 2025 · by Eric Goldman

4300 words of burn SCOTUS & Congress by Eric: 

"Congress is kicking TikTok out of the speech marketplace because it doesn’t like who owns TikTok. We’ve tolerated Congress’ control over foreign ownership of broadcasters because of the limited number of broadcast licenses, but even that restriction gives the government troubling control over who get the right to broadcast. When there isn’t a scheme of restricted licenses, giving Congress (or any legislatures) the power to pick-and-choose who owns the printing presses is extraordinarily censorial. It’s ripe for partisan abuse, too."

TeleFrieden: Unintended Consequences When the FCC Cannot Use It...

TeleFrieden: Unintended Consequences When the FCC Cannot Use It...:            The conservative majority in the Supreme Court has worked tirelessly to prevent regulatory agencies from using their expertise to...

TeleFrieden: The Deeply Baked First Amendment Rights and Limite...

TeleFrieden: The Deeply Baked First Amendment Rights and Limite...: The network neutrality tennis match has been called in favor of the Republican Information Service team over Network Neutrality Democrats....

App stores, antitrust and their links to net neutrality: A review of the European policy and academic debate leading to the EU Digital Markets Act

Useful for enforcement of the #TikTok ban? Google and Apple’s smartphone and tablet ‘app’ stores are facing significant antitrust scrutiny in Europe, culminating in enforcement action by the European Commission and specific obligations in the new EU Digital Markets Act. In a field previously dominated by US law and jurisprudence, we review the main European antitrust-related evidence and policy arguments for and against such app store regulation. We further show how this discourse is linked to the heavily-contested policy area of network neutrality.

US return of the #netneutrality zombie - for Johannes Bauer's year as FCC Chief Economist!

FCC details plan to restore the net neutrality rules repealed by Ajit Pai

Democrats finally have 3-2 majority needed to regulate ISPs as common carriers.

Jon Brodkin - 9/27/2023, 4:47 AM

 Rosenworcel's proposed rules will mostly mirror those approved under then-Chairman Tom Wheeler in 2015, senior FCC officials said in a call with reporters today. The proposal would classify broadband providers as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act, providing the legal authority to impose net neutrality rules and other regulations.

Broadband providers are likely to argue that rules aren't necessary because they've behaved themselves in the five years since the previous net neutrality order was repealed in 2018. To counter that argument, FCC officials today pointed out that ISPs are required to follow net neutrality rules in individual states even though the federal government doesn't have uniform rules for the whole country.

Then-Chairman Ajit Pai's attempt to preempt all state net neutrality rules was rejected in court. California enforces net neutrality rules that mirror what the FCC adopted in 2015 and beat industry attempts to get the state law overturned.

FCC officials said today that nearly a dozen states enforce net neutrality through state laws, government contracting policies, or executive orders. 

Return of the Net Neutrality Zombie - podcast

 Breaking a 49 month blog fast to post a link to this enjoyable (for me!) chat with Caroline de Cock from October 2022, just before Tiemo Wolken raised the issue in the European Parliament - now the podcast is published, just as Thierry Breton goes back to his oligopoly mobile roots to argue against net neutrality. Sigh...

Internet traffic is growing MORE SLOWLY THAN EVER! Telegeography, the authority on international traffic, states "COVID bump aside, the pace of growth has been slowing".

So this is more evidence-free policy consultation, or policy-based evidence making as I described it to the Kluge Center at the Library of Congress, at the end of a project on this distortion of reality to fit politics.

For future updates, Twitter search 'marsden #netneutrality'

It's been a long and interesting decade of tweeting about the subject, but from now on, hit this link

Quartz - Tirole on how to regulate platforms

But at the platform level, competition confronts the existence of large returns to scale and/or network externalities, leading to natural monopoly situations and a winner-take-all scenario. Network externalities can be direct: I am on Facebook or Twitter because you also are; I will use Uber or Lyft if many drivers do so. Network externalities can also be indirect: We may not care directly about the presence of other users on the platform, but that presence leads to improved services, as in the case of many apps or delivery services. For example, I want to use Google’s search engine or Waze if you also use them, as the quality of predictions improves with the number of users.

Natural monopoly situations lead to widespread market power, and a concomitant willingness to lose money for a long time to “buy” the prospect of a future monopoly position—think of Amazon or Uber.

https://qz.com/1310266/nobel-winning-economist-jean-tirole-on-how-to-regulate-tech-monopolies/ 

Petty's Grievances: The 5G Hopes & Fears of Vodafone UK's CTO | Light Reading

Petty's Grievances: The 5G Hopes & Fears of Vodafone UK's CTO | Light Reading: "What now looks certain is that Vodafone -- along with many other European operators -- will use 5G first as a bigger pipe in areas where mobile data is gushing like an oil blowout. That has driven Vodafone toward the "non-standalone" variant of 5G, which combines the 5G New Radio (NR) standardized in late 2017 with an existing 4G network, to support mobile broadband services in urban hotspots. This makes commercial sense because 5G is about four times as "spectrally efficient" as 4G, according to Petty, and therefore a less costly option.

Lowering operating expenses may be the only way to improve margins, in this mobile broadband scenario, as Vodafone does not expect consumer spending to rise with the introduction of 5G." 'via Blog this'

What if autonomous vehicles actually make us more dependent on cars?

What if autonomous vehicles actually make us more dependent on cars?: "Autonomous vehicles may be able to park themselves away from urban centres, but they still need to be parked – and make return journeys to collect passengers, adding empty cars to the roads and contributing to congestion and air pollution.

 And there are lots of unanswered questions about how urban systems will work with the introduction of self-driving vehicles. For example, it’s not clear how self-driving vehicles will co-exist with pedestrians and cyclists. If they are programmed to stop whenever a pedestrian or cyclist gets in their way, there will be pressure to further separate vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.

The vision of future cities in the 2050s may then start to look more and more like the vision of the 1950s, with futuristic new models dominating the foreground, while human activities such as walking and cycling are relegated to concrete overpasses and gloomy subways." 'via Blog this'

Zero Rating, Net Neutrality, and the Chilean Regulation: Marco Correa Pérez (Wikimedia)

"The Chilean net neutrality regulation is one of the first national legislative efforts to recognize the principle of preventing
arbitrary discrimination of Internet traffic. One of the main challenges in interpreting and implementing this law within
Chile has been the regular practice of zero-rating, in which certain telecommunications providers prioritize certain
applications through free data. Although this practice was initially characterized as a breach of net neutrality by
the regulatory body (the Subsecretariat of Telecommunications (Subtel)), zero-rating is still practiced by mobile
telephone companies as part of their subscription offers.

This white paper summarizes the research and findings of
a larger academic project that seeks to analyze both the legal status of zero-rating in Chile and the evolution of the
Subtel criteria, which has led to the proliferation of this practice in the country" 'via Blog this'

Own initiative investigation into Hutchinson 3G UK Limited (Three)’s compliance with the net neutrality and roaming regulations - Ofcom

Own initiative investigation into Hutchinson 3G UK Limited (Three)’s compliance with the net neutrality and roaming regulations - Ofcom: "Update note 8 May 2018

 We have revised the scope of this investigation to include the Roaming Regulation and the related CIR in addition to the EU Open Internet Access Regulation. The investigation will examine Three’s practices of:

 Traffic management practices such as ‘throttling’ or intentionally slowing down particular categories of traffic (e.g. video traffic, Peer-to-Peer and Virtual Private Network traffic) when customers are roaming;

Restricting tethering – the practice of using one device to connect another one to the internet – on certain plans offered by Three, including when customers are roaming;

and
Imposing restrictions on the devices in which a SIM can be used – e.g. where a SIM purchased for a mobile phone cannot be used in a tablet.

We are aiming to complete our evidence gathering phase in this investigation by July 2018." 'via Blog this'

Digital Economy Act 2017 s.103 - Code of Practice for social media platforms

Digital Economy Act 2017: "103 Code of practice for providers of online social media platforms

(1)The Secretary of State must issue a code of practice giving guidance to persons who provide online social media platforms for use by persons in the United Kingdom (“social media providers”).

(2)The guidance to be given is guidance about action it may be appropriate for providers to take against the use of the platforms they provide for conduct to which subsection (3) applies." 'via Blog this'

Wetmachine » Yes, the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Is A “Rule” Under the CRA.

Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » Yes, the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Is A “Rule” Under the CRA.: "I agree it is an uphill fight to get the CRA passed and signed by President Trump. But hey, it was always supposed to be impossible to get actual net neutrality rules the court would sustain, and it was always supposed to be impossible to get broadband declared Title II. Then it was supposed to be impossible for the Title II decision to survive judicial review.

As I often say, if I limited my advocacy to what was “possible” I’d never get anything done. But if it actually does pass, and get signed, then the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Order goes bye-bye like a bad dream." 'via Blog this'

Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » UPDATE: Why Tech Freedom Are Totally Wrong About The CRA.

Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » UPDATE: Why Tech Freedom Are Totally Wrong About The CRA.: "Last week, I wrote this blog post addressing the argument that the Markey resolution under the Congressional Review Act would not actually restore the 2015 net neutrality rules. Since then, my opposite numbers at Tech Freedom have put together this 8-page letter saying otherwise. To save myself the trouble of repeating myself, I will update my previous blog post to explain why Tech Freedom specifically is utterly and completely wrong.

 As I explained last time, the CRA defines a “rule” as meaning anything defined as a “rule” by 5 U.S.C. 551(4) (excluding agency actions relating to personnel or applying only to a single company, like a tariff filing). Or, in other words, anything generally subject to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), regardless of what you call it, counts as a “rule” for CRA purposes." 'via Blog this'

Net Neutrality and Internet Regulation: What Needs to Change: Nina Cummins

Net Neutrality and Internet Regulation: What Needs to Change: "With net neutrality being a hot topic, what do you expect to occur in the next year regarding the debate into this area?

 I see the next year being characterised by national telecoms regulators and businesses each pushing to gain a better understanding of how individual provisions in Regulation 2015/2012 (sic: 2021) (the “EU Net Neutrality Regulation“) and the associated BEREC Net Neutrality Guidelines apply to specific business proposals and new offers they are seeking to launch.

Despite the intense debates, many operators and consumers have not experienced the ‘big bang’ effect some predicted. However, many businesses are still unclear about where parameters lie under the new neutrality rules especially with regards to new types of services or offers they are seeking to launch.

In some cases, consumers are missing out, as operators don’t have sufficient regulatory certainty as to how new offers will be received by the relevant regulators and don’t want to become the first test case in the area.

 Some of these uncertainties may be resolved through the recent consultation launched by BEREC (the body of European telecoms regulators)." 'via Blog this'

BEREC’s net neutrality process is a black box - Strand

BEREC’s net neutrality process is a black box: "Strand Consult finds BEREC’s views of “stakeholders” highly suspect, as the criteria for their selection is not public. More to the point, Strand Consult’s research uncovered that 6 of 14 BEREC’s official “stakeholders” had Google funding, including 3 of the 4 civil society organizations had funding from Google. The law allows the rejection of a freedom of information request to be overridden when it is in the public interest.

 Of BEREC’s 43 net neutrality meetings that Strand Consult could identify during the period, 3 were public and 40 were secret. Of the 40 secret meetings, Strand Consult could obtain some minimal amount of information for 30 meeting. Information for the other 10 secret meetings was flatly denied on the basis that is wished to protect the identities of the participants and that disclosure would undermine BEREC’s decision-making process. This claim strikes at the heart of Strand Consult’s critique of BEREC over the years: it selects experts without providing transparent criteria; it makes decisions based on expert’s testimony without making the testimony public; and it claims net neutrality is vital and necessary without providing any academic evidence, cost-benefit analysis, or regulatory impact assessment."

I thought they were better than that.... 'via Blog this'

Ajit Pai hasn’t finalized net neutrality repeal—here’s a theory on why | Ars Technica

Ajit Pai hasn’t finalized net neutrality repeal—here’s a theory on why | Ars Technica: "You may have seen reports in the past few days saying that the net neutrality repeal has been finalized. Those reports were incorrect, though perhaps understandably so given that this process is kind of confusing.

The FCC published its "Restoring Internet Freedom" repeal order in the Federal Register in February. The post-publication 60-day waiting period would have let the repeal take effect on April 23, if not for the FCC's decision to make the core changes contingent on OMB approval.

 The only change yesterday was "a non-substantive title change" that switched the title of the FCC rules from "Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet" to "Internet Freedom," a spokesperson for Pai told Ars.

 Feld says the FCC could have structured the repeal in a different way that would have allowed the net neutrality rules and the Title II classification of ISPs to be repealed before the OMB signs off on information collection requirements. In fact, the Obama-era FCC ensured that the core net neutrality rules took effect in June 2015 even though the OMB didn't approve information collection changes until December 2016—18 months later.

 Pai's FCC got around to submitting the information collection changes to the OMB on March 28. The OMB will stop accepting public comments on the changes after April 27, but we don't know when the OMB will issue a final decision." 'via Blog this'

IoT News - UK NetNeutrality - Ofcom Investigates 3 & Vodafone, reports June

IoT News - UK Not So Neutral, Caps for Cash & Suite Graphics - YouTube: "UK regulator Ofcom has decided to open investigations into Three UK and Vodafone to assess compliance with net neutrality rules. They expect to publish an update on both investigations in June. Three UK is under examination for restricting tethering on certain plans and imposing restrictions on the kinds of devices in which a SIM can be used. Vodafone is being examined for traffic management practices such as slowing down particular categories of traffic and that of customers who are roaming or abroad." 'via Blog this'

Potential Warning Signs in the Colocation Market

Potential Warning Signs in the Colocation Market: "Content and cloud providers are driving the network market. When we examine core submarine cable routes worldwide—notably the Trans-Atlantic, Trans-Pacific, and Intra-Asia routes—content providers account for a majority of the used bandwidth, moreso than the aggregate internet demand on these routes.

 "We're talking about a couple of companies in particular—the Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Microsofts of the world," said Jon. "We also know that the same providers have been building out their own proprietary data centers at a very rapid rate."

According to Jon, in the last two years we've seen 46 percent growth in the number of sites that these operators are deploying, with Google showing a 75 percent increase in their overall number of sites worldwide." 'via Blog this'