In the fight between Comcast and the FCC, a unanimous ruling by a DC court sided with Comcast over something that Comcast insisted was simply policy and the FCC said was within the scope of the existing laws.
The court said the FCC was wrong in believing it had untrammeled authority over the internet so that it could enforce rules that made providers responsible for keeping the internet neutral- meaning that some sites wouldn’t cost consumers more than other sites- or some ” Apps” wouldn’t cost consumers more than other apps. But again, the court decided that was not upheld by existing laws and now since the FCC is committed to net neutrality the most likely outcome here is that the law will be changed to keep the internet open to users.
It is often true that we follow policies because we believe that they are law. This case shows what businesses like Comcast do when they disagree with a policy decision. I have nothing against Comcast’s play here, I think they did what they thought they had to do, but every decision that gets court approval changes the game, this change will certainly strengthen internet service as if it is a necessary system of communication. In the past it has been seen as less necessary to consumers than phone or cable. This ruling simply shows the FCC that the law that exists isn’t enough to protect the free exchange of information on the internet.
Things will change. I imagine that since this decision creates a gap that the folks at Comcast will be preparing briefs to support their positions. This ruling gives Comcast a voice at the table when the rules get changed. This story also points to issues about the lack of an equal playing field between individual citizens and corporations like Comcast. Individuals might have a hard time finding legal representation and even if they win, they don’t automatically win ’standing’ so that they get to talk about changes the US is considering in creating new laws.
It’s worth paying attention to! What do you think?
love,
mo