The fcc’s net neutrality plan may have even bigger ramifications in light of this obscure court case – the washington post gas bubble in back


The plan by the Federal Communications Commission to eliminate its net-neutrality rules next week is expected to hand a major victory to Internet service providers. But any day now, a federal court is expected to weigh in on a case that electricity off peak hours could dramatically expand the scope of that deregulation — potentially giving the industry an even bigger win and leaving the government less prepared to field net-neutrality grievances in the future, consumer groups say.

The litigation is significant as the FCC prepares to transfer more responsibility to the FTC for handling net-neutrality complaints. (Net neutrality is the principle that Internet providers should not be able to speed up some v gashi 2013 websites while slowing down others, particularly in exchange for money — a tactic industry critics say could hurt innovation and prevent the growth of start-ups.) If ATT gets its way in the case, the FTC’s ability to pursue misbehaving companies — over net-neutrality issues or otherwise — may be sharply curtailed.

The FTC has the power to sue misbehaving companies that mislead or lie to the public. But that power comes with an exception: It doesn’t extend to a special class of businesses that are known as “ common carriers.” This group gas and electric phone number includes not just telecom companies but also oil and gas pipelines, as well as freight and cruise liners. By order of Congress, the FTC is not allowed to take enforcement actions against these types of firms.

Thus far, the common carrier exemption has applied to a specific slice of the gas in babies how to get rid of it economy. But the case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, FTC v. ATT Mobility, could vastly expand the number of companies that qualify for the exemption. In an earlier decision in the lawsuit, a federal judge effectively said that any company that runs a telecom subsidiary is considered a common carrier wd gaster cosplay tutorial. Previously, only the subsidiary would have been considered a common carrier — not the larger corporate entity. The case is being reheard, and analysts say a decision could come at any time.

The opinion last year from Judge Richard Clifton surprised many antitrust and telecom experts, in part because it could have important ramifications for net neutrality. A company that provides Internet access, such as ATT, could seek an exemption from FTC net-neutrality enforcement by pointing to its voice business and gas pains 6 weeks pregnant claiming common carrier status under the ruling. At the same time, the ruling could limit ATT’s net-neutrality liability under the FCC, because the gasco abu dhabi salary repeal of the net-neutrality rules would mean the FCC would no longer recognize ATT’s broadband business as one that can be regulated like a telecommunications carrier.

In that scenario, neither the FCC nor the FTC would offer consumers robust protections from potential net-neutrality abuses, consumer groups say. “A vote to approve the [FCC’s net-neutrality mp electricity bill payment jabalpur plan], followed by a decision favorable to ATT Mobility by the Ninth Circuit, would therefore create a ‘regulatory gap’ that would leave consumers utterly unprotected,” Public Knowledge said in a letter this week asking the FCC to delay its vote.

The FCC responded to the letter by saying the vote will proceed as planned, but it did not address the issue of the potential regulatory gap. “This is just evidence that supporters of heavy-handed Internet regulations are becoming more desperate by the day as their effort to defeat Chairman [Ajit] Pai electricity dance moms song’s plan to restore Internet freedom has stalled,” the agency said in a statement Monday to Ars Technica.

Under Clifton’s ruling, Google parent company Alphabet could theoretically claim to be a common carrier because one of its many subsidiaries is Google Fiber, a small voice and Internet access provider. Hence “every smart company” that could afford it would try to take advantage of the loophole by buying or launching a small telecom company, said David Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown gas outage University and a former director of the FTC’s consumer protection bureau.