A court's delay in issuing a net neutrality ruling provides few hints about the outcome, those on both sides told us Friday. (The court generally issues rulings on Tuesdays and Fridays.) Several said a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is probably struggling to reconcile the complexities and some said it's likely split. But most didn't read much, if anything, about the court's leanings into the six-plus months that have passed since Dec. 4 oral argument on the various challenges to the FCC's 2015 order that reclassified broadband under Title II of the Communications Act and created net neutrality rules (see 1512040058). Lawmakers aren't too concerned, either (see 1606090064).
A federal court set Sept. 13 oral argument on Neustar's challenge to an FCC order that gave Telcordia the inside track to be the next local number portability administrator. The composition of the three-judge panel to hear the case will be revealed 30 days before oral argument, said a short order Wednesday of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (Neustar v. FCC, No. 15-1080). A Neustar spokesperson said, "We are pleased to see that oral argument has been scheduled for early fall." The FCC had no comment. Neustar and the FCC made their arguments last fall (see 1509210040, 1510290029 and 1511270033) and briefing closed in December. Asked about the D.C. Circuit's delay in setting oral argument, Georgetown Law Institute for Public Representation Senior Counselor Andrew Schwartzman, who is not involved in the case but is a longtime court watcher, told us “it does seem to be a little slow, but I’m not sure this is unusual.” The D.C. Circuit “stops hearing cases in late May. Unless there is some need for expedition, cases that don't make that schedule are heard in the fall, and the court doesn't start scheduling the new term until about now," he emailed. "This case is one of the very first cases being heard in the fall, so without knowing more, it could well be that it just missed the cut for the current term." But he also said two cases heard in May had briefing that wasn't completed until February or March, "so something might have held" up the Neustar case.
Broadcaster joint sales agreements may come up in an appropriations rider this year despite Wednesday's court ruling remanding to the FCC JSA TV limits. House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., sees the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals media ownership ruling, which vacated limitations on JSAs due to process concerns over the agency's delaying its quadrennial reviews (see 1605250073) as a bigger impetus for telecom oversight and overhaul, particularly in the form of FCC reauthorization legislation. Attorneys and analysts are divided over how the FCC will respond to the ruling, with some seeing a retooled JSA attribution rule in the offing and others expecting some deregulation.
The FCC lost a media ownership court case in which broadcasters appealed an order limiting TV joint sales agreements in some circumstances and public interest groups appealed on a lack of further regulation and on concerns the commission didn't fully address diversity issues. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals also ordered mediation. It vacated and remanded to the commission the TV JSA agreement rule, in a brief order Wednesday.
Three former federal employees who support stronger data and device encryption said Tuesday the debate over the issue is changing as several former intelligence and homeland security officials have come out in favor of end-to-end encryption. At a panel co-sponsored by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and New America's Open Technology Institute, Venable attorney Ari Schwartz said former CIA Director Michael Hayden and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff are on the side of stronger encryption, and the intelligence community is no longer "as adamant" about having back or front doors to encrypted information. "They don't see it as essential" in doing their work, he said.
The FCC's upcoming quadrennial review of its broadcast ownership rules will be greatly complicated by the ongoing incentive auction and is unlikely to be resolved under the current commission, broadcast attorneys told us. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler repeatedly has said and the FCC told a federal appeals court that a draft quadrennial review order will be on circulation by June 30, but that date almost certainly will fall in the midst of the incentive auction, broadcast and public interest attorneys told us. That means at the time of circulation, neither the FCC nor the broadcast industry itself will know what broadcast stations in what markets will be staying in business, or how diverse the remaining owners will be, the attorneys told us. “The auction is a black hole,” Fletcher Heald broadcast attorney Frank Montero said. “It's going to be extremely difficult to come out with reasoned policy,” he said.
Three former federal employees who support stronger data and device encryption said Tuesday the debate over the issue is changing as several former intelligence and homeland security officials have come out in favor of end-to-end encryption. At a panel co-sponsored by the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) and New America's Open Technology Institute, Venable attorney Ari Schwartz said former CIA Director Michael Hayden and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff are on the side of stronger encryption, and the intelligence community is no longer "as adamant" about having back or front doors to encrypted information. "They don't see it as essential" in doing their work, he said.
The FCC's backlog of public comments could complicate policymaking, especially in more technical proceedings, industry and public interest lawyers said in interviews Friday. A day earlier, a spokeswoman said that the agency has 74,000 backlogged comments, after more than 200,000 in the past four weeks were filed to its Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Part of the problem has been the huge volume of filings in the set-top box and ISP privacy proceedings, the spokeswoman said. The FCC is completing a long-standing overhaul of its system, which should be in place this summer, she said. Lawyers and others periodically have complained about ECFS and other FCC IT problems over recent years (see 1401150030), and at times the comment system doesn't fully work.
The FCC's backlog of public comments could complicate policymaking, especially in more technical proceedings, industry and public interest lawyers said in interviews Friday. A day earlier, a spokeswoman said that the agency has 74,000 backlogged comments, after more than 200,000 in the past four weeks were filed to its Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Part of the problem has been the huge volume of filings in the set-top box and ISP privacy proceedings, the spokeswoman said. The FCC is completing a long-standing overhaul of its system, which should be in place this summer, she said. Lawyers and others periodically have complained about ECFS and other FCC IT problems over recent years (see 1401150030), and at times the comment system doesn't fully work.
Charter Communications will pay a $640,000 settlement and set up a three-year compliance plan that widens the variety of third-party cable modems it accepts on its network, the FCC Media Bureau said in an order and consent decree Tuesday. The order follows a bureau investigation of Charter that it said sprung from Zoom Telephonics' petition to deny FCC approval of Charter's buying of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable, with the cable modem maker alleging Charter infringed on the rights of subscribers to use non-harmful third-party cable modems (see 1510130054). The bureau said its investigation found that from 2012 to 2014, Charter told subscribers that they no longer could attach customer-owned modems and then provided a list of authorized third-party modems that required testing for issues not relating to network harm or theft of service. Under the order, Charter also is revising its cable modem testing regime so compliance testing will take no more than three weeks. Also, it is required under the order to appoint a senior corporate manager as compliance officer for implementing the compliance plan. Under the order, Charter can reject only certain cable modems, such as those that don't support DOCSIS 3.0 or higher. In a statement Wednesday, Charter said it is "pleased to be able to continue to give our customers the choice to use a modem provided by Charter for free or purchase an approved third party modem." "Zoom is pleased with much of the Commission’s action, including its requirement for much faster certification testing for cable modems and appropriate limits on tests," Zoom counsel Andrew Schwartzman said in an email to us Wednesday. "This is a major victory, and we hope other cable service providers will act consistent with the clear wishes of the FCC." Around the time the Charter settlement was released, the FCC also issued the text of the commissioners' order approving Charter/TWC/BHN (see 1605100050).