{ "id": "R43971", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R43971", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 588599, "date": "2016-04-11", "retrieved": "2020-01-03T15:13:43.257234", "title": "Net Neutrality: Selected Legal Issues Raised by the FCC\u2019s 2015 Open Internet Order", "summary": "In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted an order that will impose rules governing the management of Internet traffic as it passes over broadband Internet access services (BIAS), whether those services are fixed or wireless. The rules are commonly known as \u201cnet neutrality\u201d rules. The order was released in March 2015 and published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2015. The order took effect on June 12, 2015. According to the order, the rules ban the blocking of legal content, forbid paid prioritization of affiliated or proprietary content, and prohibit the throttling of legal content by broadband Internet access service providers (BIAS providers). The rules are subject to reasonable network management, as that term is defined by the FCC. \nThis is not the first time the FCC has attempted to impose some version of net neutrality rules. Most recently, the FCC issued the Open Internet Order in 2010, which would have created similar rules for the provision of broadband Internet access services. However, the bulk of those rules, with the sole exception of a disclosure rule, were struck down by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The court found that the FCC did have broad enough authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to impose the rules. However, the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, permits only \u201ctelecommunications services\u201d to be regulated as common carriers. Broadband Internet access services were classified as \u201cinformation services\u201d under the act by the FCC. Because the court found some of the rules imposed by the Open Internet Order to be common carrier regulation per se, the court found that the rules could not be applied to broadband Internet access services. \nFollowing this decision, the FCC essentially had three options. The Commission could have enforced the remaining disclosure rules as they were. The Commission could have returned to the drawing board to create more flexible rules that would not be found to be per se common carrier rules. The D.C. Circuit had suggested in its opinion striking down the rules that such a path was possible. The third option was the option to reclassify broadband Internet access services as telecommunications services, and to impose the strong rules the FCC had sought to impose initially, but on a firmer statutory footing. \nAfter issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on all three of these options, the FCC has chosen the third option. The agency voted to reclassify broadband Internet access services as telecommunications services under the Communications Act. If upheld in court, this decision could represent a significant shift in the FCC\u2019s ability to regulate these services. Reclassification arguably would provide the FCC with clear authority to impose network neutrality rules. Notably, reclassification may also give the FCC direct authority, under Title II of the Communications Act, to regulate other aspects of the provision of broadband Internet access services. This report will analyze the primary legal issues raised by the FCC\u2019s order reclassifying broadband Internet access services. It has also been updated to include a discussion of H.R. 2666, the No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act in the Recent Developments section.\nFor more information on the policy debate and the history of net neutrality rules, see CRS Report R40616, Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate, by Angele A. Gilroy.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43971", "sha1": "9b9143368fb4fe8abc4857d658b216a177a9f13b", "filename": "files/20160411_R43971_9b9143368fb4fe8abc4857d658b216a177a9f13b.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43971", "sha1": "0af46c08e57d76b510e16d8288320980d56436d3", "filename": "files/20160411_R43971_0af46c08e57d76b510e16d8288320980d56436d3.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 442156, "date": "2015-06-12", "retrieved": "2016-04-06T18:56:56.161407", "title": "Net Neutrality: Selected Legal Issues Raised by the FCC\u2019s 2015 Open Internet Order", "summary": "In February 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted an order that will impose rules governing the management of Internet traffic as it passes over broadband Internet access services (BIAS), whether those services are fixed or wireless. The rules are commonly known as \u201cnet neutrality\u201d rules. The order was released in March 2015 and published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2015. The order took effect on June 12, 2015. According to the order, the rules ban the blocking of legal content, forbid paid prioritization of affiliated or proprietary content, and prohibit the throttling of legal content by broadband Internet access service providers (BIAS providers). The rules are subject to reasonable network management, as that term is defined by the FCC. \nThis is not the first time the FCC has attempted to impose some version of net neutrality rules. Most recently, the FCC issued the Open Internet Order in 2010, which would have created similar rules for the provision of broadband Internet access services. However, the bulk of those rules, with the sole exception of a disclosure rule, were struck down by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Interestingly, the court found that the FCC did have broad enough authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to impose the rules. However, the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, permits only \u201ctelecommunications services\u201d to be regulated as common carriers. Broadband Internet access services were classified as \u201cinformation services\u201d under the act by the FCC. Because the court found some of the rules imposed by the Open Internet Order to be common carrier regulation per se, the court found that the rules could not be applied to broadband Internet access services. \nFollowing this decision, the FCC essentially had three options. The Commission could have enforced the remaining disclosure rules as they were. The Commission could have returned to the drawing board to create more flexible rules that would not be found to be per se common carrier rules. The D.C. Circuit had suggested in its opinion striking down the rules that such a path was possible. The third option was the option to reclassify broadband Internet access services as telecommunications services, and to impose the strong rules the FCC had sought to impose initially, but on a firmer statutory footing. \nAfter issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on all three of these options, the FCC has chosen the third option. The agency voted to reclassify broadband Internet access services as telecommunications services under the Communications Act. If upheld in court, this decision could represent a significant shift in the FCC\u2019s ability to regulate these services. Reclassification arguably will provide the FCC with clear authority to impose network neutrality rules. Notably, reclassification may also give the FCC direct authority, under Title II of the Communications Act, to regulate other aspects of the provision of broadband Internet access services. This report will analyze the primary legal issues raised by the FCC\u2019s order reclassifying broadband Internet access services.\nFor more information on the policy debate and the history of net neutrality rules, see CRS Report R40616, Access to Broadband Networks: The Net Neutrality Debate, by Angele A. Gilroy.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43971", "sha1": "8cb667d1892656543c7c142167a14a280e341f31", "filename": "files/20150612_R43971_8cb667d1892656543c7c142167a14a280e341f31.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43971", "sha1": "4877d0157050bf55d7a14cb494c5dd00d0fdd37b", "filename": "files/20150612_R43971_4877d0157050bf55d7a14cb494c5dd00d0fdd37b.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc505485/", "id": "R43971_2015Apr06", "date": "2015-04-06", "retrieved": "2015-05-29T05:37:21", "title": "Net Neutrality: Selected Legal Issues Raised by the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order", "summary": "This report discusses the primary legal issues raised by the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC's) 2015 Open Internet Order: the FCC's authority to reclassify broadband Internet access services, the FCC's authority to forbear from the imposition of Title II regulations following reclassification, the FCC's authority under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and whether the FCC properly complied with the Administrative Procedure Act.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20150406_R43971_a914b4d15b6f6fb348c64fec43c863b0179cc2f7.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20150406_R43971_a914b4d15b6f6fb348c64fec43c863b0179cc2f7.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet", "name": "Internet" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Internet service providers", "name": "Internet service providers" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Information superhighway", "name": "Information superhighway" } ] } ], "topics": [] }