California state senators 21-12 passed a net neutrality bill Monday that would make violations unlawful under consumer protection and unfair business practices laws and would bar state agencies from contracting with ISPs unless the companies certify as net neutral under penalty of perjury. It moves next to the Assembly. Voting on SB-460 fell mainly on partisan lines, except Democratic state Sen. Richard Roth voted no. Representing Riverside, Roth supported an open internet but, after researching the issue over the weekend, couldn’t find any net neutrality violations in the about two decades that the FTC had authority over internet services. The FTC, he said, "last time I checked, is still in business.” Enacting SB-460 would precipitate many complicated lawsuits in California’s overcrowded and underfunded trial courts, he said. “This is fairly pre-empted,” said Sen. Jeff Stone (R). The FCC restored a light-touch regime where the government stays out of the internet’s way, he said. Senate leader Kevin de León said only Congress -- not a regulatory body -- can pre-empt states. Opponents’ talking points are the same used in Washington to sway the FCC to overturn net neutrality, said de León, who's running for U.S. senator in a Democratic primary against Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Sen. Scott Wiener (D), with a separate net neutrality bill (SB-822), supports SB-460 because the FCC "abdicated its responsibility to protect the internet, and so we now are forced to step in.” Many states have net neutrality bills (see 1801290043), but California's moved quickly through committees and is furthest through the process (see 1801240041).

The FCC Technological Advisory Council meets March 7 10 a.m.-3 p.m. in the Commission Meeting Room, said a public notice Monday. The TAC has been focused on promoting broadband advances and is expected to discuss its proposed work program for 2018, the PN said.

AT&T's proposal for Congress to pursue an “Internet Bill of Rights” on net neutrality that “applies to all internet companies” drew swift condemnation Wednesday from the Internet Association and praise from several communications sector groups. “End the debate once and for all, by writing new laws that govern the internet and protect consumers,” said AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson in an open letter. “Legislation would not only ensure consumers’ rights are protected, but it would provide consistent rules of the road for all internet companies across all websites, content, devices and applications. In the very near future, technological advances like self-driving cars, remote surgery and augmented reality will demand even greater performance from the internet. Without predictable rules for how the internet works, it will be difficult to meet the demands of these new technology advances.” AT&T is running such advertisements. “It is impossible to believe that AT&T is serious when they have such a long track record opposing consumer protections like net neutrality,” an IA spokesman emailed. “IA and our members support” planned Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval aimed at undoing the FCC's order to rescind its 2015 net neutrality rules and that has support of all 49 Democratic senators and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. “We support strong, enforceable net neutrality rules, which were consumer protections on the books until AT&T and their allies had their way” via the FCC rescission order, the IA spokesman said. USTelecom CEO Jonathan Spalter lauded AT&T's proposal “and encourage[d] our Congressional leaders to work together to enshrine net neutrality principles into law.” The Internet Innovation Alliance said it has “long advocated for Congressional legislation that would make permanent the core principles of an open Internet. Only Congress can craft a unified regulatory framework that would apply to all entities in the Internet ecosystem and provide the nation’s consumers and businesses with the online protections they deserve.”

The Entertainment Software Association backed core findings in an FCC draft report on the status of broadband-like deployment under Telecom Act Section 706. ESA supports the draft's plan to keep the fixed speed benchmark for advanced telecom capability (ATC) at 25/3 Mbps and not declare that mobile is a full substitute for fixed service. But the group believes the fixed benchmark will "need to be raised over time," said a filing Monday in docket 17-199 on a meeting with an aide to Chairman Ajit Pai, who shared the draft last week with colleagues (see 1801180053). The report should clearly state "that low latency is an important element of ATC and that going forward it would explore the appropriate ATC benchmark for latency," ESA said, referring to data retrieval time. The "Commission should eventually set a latency benchmark of 75 milliseconds or less, since such latency is necessary for real-time interactive online applications, such as video games," it said. The report's effective due date is Feb. 2, an agency spokesman told us Tuesday.

A Washington state senator introduced a net neutrality bill Wednesday that responds to the FCC’s December decision rescinding Communications Act Title II protections. SB-6423 by Kevin Ranker (D) would require the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission by Jan. 1 to prohibit broadband ISPs from blocking content, degrading internet traffic, engaging in paid prioritization or interfering with customer access or edge provider provision of content applications, services or devices. A Washington House panel was to have considered two net neutrality bills at a hearing late Thursday -- HB-2282 by Rep. Drew Hansen (D) and HB-2284 by Rep. Norma Smith (R). Lawmakers -- mostly Democrats -- have introduced or promised net neutrality bills and resolutions in more than 10 states (see 1801160055).

Hughes Network Systems said "facilities through which satellite-based broadband networks deliver high-quality, high-speed, affordable broadband services to anywhere in the United States, including unserved and remote regions, substantially increased in 2017 with the deployment of new, advanced high-throughput satellite systems." The EchoStar company's filing posted Tuesday in docket 17-199 on an FCC inquiry into advanced telecom capability deployment under Telecom Act Section 706 cited deployments by Hughes and ViaSat, and a Hughes partnership with OneWeb "to produce the ground network system that will support" that company's nongeostationary orbit satellite constellation. Hughes took issue with comments by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance and Next Century Cities that sought policies to "effectively eliminate a technology that enhances broadband competition, and thereby deny a broadband service option for many Americans."

New York protested Charter Communications repeating arguments that the FCC December net neutrality order supports the cable company’s defense against the state’s broadband speed transparency lawsuit. Last week at the New York Supreme Court in case 450318-2017E, Charter said the FCC decision supported its case that federal law pre-empts state attorney general allegations that its acquired Time Warner Cable deceived customers about broadband speeds (see 1801090053). “This is the third time Defendants have attempted to supplement their briefing post-submission,” the attorney general's office said. Charter's words gave “a selective and misleading reading of the FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom [RIF] Order and repeatedly mischaracterize” allegations, the state AG said. “This litigation does not conflict with any federal methodology, but is simply an exercise of traditional state police power that holds Defendants accountable for failing to achieve the standards for internet performance that they promised to New Yorkers through their pervasive marketing campaigns.” The company also argued last week that the RIF order supported its 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission can’t regulate interconnected VoIP (see 1801110022).

An FTC-FCC draft memorandum of understanding lists online consumer protection options after Thursday's expected vote to revoke net neutrality rules, said a statement released Monday. The draft policy said the FCC will review complaints about ISP compliance with disclosure obligations in the new transparency rule, including providing notice of practices on blocking, throttling, paid prioritization and congestion management, and take enforcement action if an ISP fails to make required disclosures. The FTC would take action against ISPs on "accuracy" of disclosures or other "deceptive or unfair" broadband provider actions. The two agencies vowed to "broadly share legal and technical expertise" in investigating complaints and coordinate on industry outreach and education. House Commerce Committee Republican leaders lauded the draft agreement as a “positive move for consumers and the internet ecosystem,” but committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., criticized the move. It’s “good to know that these powerful commissions are working together to protect consumers from any unfair or anticompetitive practices” before the FCC’s planned vote, said committee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and House Digital Commerce Subcommittee Chairman Bob Latta, R-Ohio. “The FTC has successfully provided those essential protections for decades, and we are confident they will continue to do so.” The agreement “is effectively worthless” given the 9th Circuit’s pending decision in AT&T v. FTC, Pallone said in a statement. It “underscores the absurdity” of Pai’s proposed repeal of the 2015 rules, which “not only leaves consumers fending for themselves, it is now creating a bureaucratic nightmare with no one left in charge when things inevitably go wrong." The agreement is "a confusing, lackluster, reactionary afterthought: an attempt to paper over weaknesses in the Chairman’s draft proposal repealing the FCC’s 2015 net neutrality rules," said a statement from FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn. Public Knowledge saw little to celebrate, saying the FCC is joining forces with the FTC "only when a broadband provider is deceiving the public," said Vice President Chris Lewis. On Democratic members of Congress' concerns on Thursday's vote: see 1712110050; on paid prioritization, see 1712110002.

Intelsat and Intel are pushing their joint plan for clearing some C-band for 5G with Chairman Ajit Pai's staff. The two in a docket 17-183 ex parte filing posted Monday recapped a meeting with a Pai aide in which the companies asked the agency to act on an NPRM suggesting the Intelsat/Intel sharing framework the two put forth in October (see 1710020047). They "stand ready" to work on hammering out implementation details.

Uses for 5G range from enhanced mobile broadband and IoT to connected vehicles and low-latency applications like tactile interaction and automated factories, 5G Americas wrote Wednesday. Its report also outlines technical requirements and maps them to 5G capabilities.