[ad_1]
A new law on net neutrality in California,
signed Sunday evening by Governor Jerry Brown, paved the way for a confrontation between the states and the federal government on broadband policy.
California SB 822, which largely restores the rules of neutrality of the Obama era network, prohibits broadband providers from blocking or suppressing traffic, imposing higher fees for fast track service, and
exempt their own video feeds from consumer data limitations. Less than an hour after its adoption, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit to block the measure.
"California
… seeks to challenge the regulatory approach adopted by the federal government by adopting SB-822 ", writes the Justice Department in a complaint filed Sunday in the US District Court.
District of Eastern California. The Department of Justice is asking for a court order declaring California law invalid and preventing the state from enforcing it.
publicity
publicity
Latest
In December, the FCC, led by Republicans, voted by 3 votes to 3 to repeal the regulation that banned broadband providers from blocking or smothering traffic and charging higher fees for a priority broadcast.
The agency had said at the time that it was also preventing states from adopting or enforcing their own broadband laws.
California is not the only state trying to restore network neutrality
rules. Earlier this year, the governors of Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Montana, Hawaii and Vermont ordered state agencies to enter into contracts only with Suppliers following Net
principles of neutrality. In Oregon, lawmakers passed a bill banning state agencies from contracting broadband providers that violate the principles of net neutrality. The state of Washington has spent a plus
comprehensive law prohibiting broadband providers operating in the state from preventing or limiting traffic and imposing on businesses higher fees for priority broadcast
It is not clear whether the agency's attempt to preempt state laws will hold in court.
Catherine Sandoval, a telecommunications expert, a law professor at Santa Clara University and a recent member of the California Public Utilities Commission, has already told MediaPost that the preemption argument
is "very problematic".
She said the government will have to argue that the FCC has "occupied the field" of broadband by adopting regulations that make it impossible for operators to do so.
to comply with federal and national rules at the same time. Here, by removing the regulations, the FCC did the opposite by occupying the ground, she said.
FCC President Ajit Pai, who led
the repeal, said the previous rules were too "heavy", and the investment depressed.
But net neutrality advocates say network neutrality rules are needed to prevent Comcast, AT & T and
other broadband providers to censor their sites or discriminate against competitors such as Netflix. Lawyers who have reviewed carrier inventory reports dispute the fact that the rules depressed investment; Free
The press said last year that the investment of 13
leading broadband providers increased in the two years following the FCC's adoption of Net Neutrality rules.
The Department of Justice says in its lawsuit that the rules of the Obama era were a
departure of previous FCC decisions. When the FCC adopted the rules of internet neutrality in 2015, the agency for the first time declared that broadband was a public service.
But even though the FCC did not have
Previously, characterizing broadband to a public service, the agency had already tried to impose certain rules relating to the common carrier, including rules against blocking and limiting traffic. A call
Court overturned these earlier regulations in 2014, ruling that the FCC could
only require carrier rules common to utility providers.
[ad_2]
Source link
