ISPs, Consumer Advocates Spar Over Net Neutrality Remanded Items

Net neutrality stakeholders didn't budge on three remanded issues (see 1910010018), in replies to the FCC posted through Thursday in dockets including 17-287. "Concerns noted by the Mozilla court on three discrete issues do not justify abandoning the Commission’s decision to return to [Communications Act] Title I classification as the benefits of the regulatory framework ... vastly outweigh any potential costs," USTelecom said. Common Cause, Public Knowledge and New America’s Open Technology Institute want the FCC to retain Title II common carrier authority over broadband and "restore legal certainty for the Lifeline program, empower the Commission to protect public safety during the COVID-19 pandemic." The Greenlining Institute wants the FCC to "acknowledge the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic and the importance strong net neutrality protections" have for public safety. CTIA said "concerns regarding paid prioritization’s impact on public safety are theoretical, have not materialized." The Alarm Industry Communications Committee said "state and local laws often impose service standards that alarm companies may not be able to meet without adequate protection of their use of broadband networks." Verizon said there's ample evidence to find "no reason to revisit its decision to restore the information service classification for broadband." NCTA wants the FCC to conclude its current regime "is fully warranted from the perspective of public safety, pole access, and the Lifeline program." Incompas countered claims there have been no major net neutrality violations since the repeal: "In addition to the fact that there is no longer a federal 'cop on the beat' ... there very well could be violations occurring that customers do not realize." AT&T said the FCC "has ample ancillary authority to extend section 224 rights to standalone broadband providers if it concludes that doing so is necessary for competitive parity in non-certifying states, just as it has ancillary authority to extend Lifeline support to standalone broadband services." ACA Connects said the FCC "cannot and should not upend its entire regulatory framework for broadband merely to cater to the interests of broadband-only providers in invoking" one-touch, make-ready pole attachment rules. The Wireless ISP Association wants the FCC to use its statutory authority to eliminate practices that slow down broadband deployment, such as discriminatory infrastructure access. Other replies came from the Broadband Institute of California at the Santa Clara University School of Law (here), Center for Democracy and Technology (here) Free Press (here) and the California Public Utilities Commission (here), which unsuccessfully sought a longer deadline extension due to the pandemic (see 2005200013). Initial comments came in last month (see 2004210019).