Regulatory classification

California's net neutrality law could pave the way for conflicting broadband regulations in all 50 states, a lawyer for the cable industry argued to a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. “The question before this court is whether interstate broadband service will continue to be governed by a single, national set of rules, or instead will for the first time face a patchwork of conflicting state regulation,” attorney Scott Angstreich, who represents broadband lobbying groups, told the appellate judges.

Google is seeking to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the Ohio attorney general seeking to declare the company's search service a public utility. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost (R-OH) filed the lawsuit in June, arguing Google has used its dominance to prioritize its own products in a way that “intentionally disadvantages competitors.” Google’s lawyers argue in a court motion that the company does not meet the state’s requirements to be considered a common carrier. “Ohio’s Complaint mistakenly assumes Google Search is a common carrier or public utility because Ohioans choose to use Google Searc

Should Google get front-facing internet platforms should be regulated as common carriers or public utilities has been kicking around for a while. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a l

Acting Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel would not comment on the degree to which the president's failure to name a third Democratic commissioner has prevented it from taking action on some big issues — like restoring network neutrality rules — but she suggested the agency has been hard at work on other things and was still supportive of making net neutrality rules the law of the land.

Federal Communications Commission Acting Chair Jessica Rosenworcel expressed general support for the items in President Biden’s big competition executive order, but as the commission still lacks a Democratic majority, she declined to say when the agency might act on it. Biden’s requests for the FCC include reinstating net neutrality rules, helping ensure apartment dwellers have a choice of internet providers and imposing broadband pricing transparency — all ideas she endorsed.

President Joe Biden wants net neutrality regulations back on the books. In his executive order on competition, Biden urged the Federal Communications Commission to restore Obama-era net neutrality rules and to take other measures to promote broadband competition, including asking the FCC to require broadband companies to provide transparency on pricing. Net neutrality supporters applauded the executive order and calls for the FCC to restore net neutrality protections.

Congress is about to make critical decisions about the future of internet access and speed in the United States. It has a potentially once-in-a-lifetime amount of funding to spend on broadband infrastructure, and at the heart of this debate is the minimum speed requirement for taxpayer-funded internet. It’s easy to get overwhelmed by the granularity of this debate, but ultimately it boils down to this: cable companies want a definition that requires them to do and give less, one that will not meet our needs in the future.

The decades of US redlining represent a form of systematic racism that has denied generations of Black communities the kind of opportunities many other Americans enjoy, and the fear is it's happening again with broadband internet service. Big providers, when deciding where to invest the money to upgrade their networks, often focus on wealthier parts of cities and shun low-income communities. Fiber connections are expensive, and internet service providers are hesitant to expand unless they expect a return on their investment.

The broadband industry says that a New York state ruling against requiring broadband providers to offer $15-a-month service to low-income households supports its quest to block California's net neutrality law. The California law prohibits broadband providers from blocking or throttling content, charging higher fees for prioritized delivery, and exempting certain data from customers' monthly caps.

Google and Amazon defended their smart-speaker businesses as US senators warned the grip the companies have over the market could harm competition and consumer privacy. Both Republicans and Democrats at a June 15 hearing raised concerns about what they said were anticompetitive practices, such as selling devices below cost and promoting companies' own services over those of competitors on their platforms. Representatives from Google and Amazon argued that they prevent this by offering an optional range of rival voice-assistant services on their own devices.