Size matters when considering safe harbor protections for voice service providers' blocking of robocalls. Parties squared off before the FCC about how broad or narrow such protections should be in docket 17-59 replies posted through Friday. There's disagreement on creation of a critical calls list. Some questioned the need for a secure handling of asserted information using tokens (Shaken) and secure telephone identity revisited (Stir) mandate since industry is implementing it fine.
Leaders of the House Communications and Senate Appropriations Financial Services subcommittees are using the month-plus August recess to finalize their plans for a legislative solution to the debate over how to clear spectrum in the 3.7-4.2 GHz C band for 5G use. Some lawmakers said they need to reach a quick decision on how to proceed to influence the outcome before the FCC releases its proposal. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai appears to be aiming for a plan to clear at least 300 MHz of C-band spectrum (see 1908200044). The sides offered conflicting readings earlier this month of initial comments to the FCC on alternative plans (see 1908150042). Those comments showed little move toward consensus (see 1908080041).
Consumer groups are heading to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday in Seattle to challenge a 2017 FCC order that relaxed regulations on how telcos retire copper phone lines and how they notify customers (see 1906170005). Appellants said in recent interviews they like their odds, while the government and its allies in the case weren't talking. Last September, The Greenlining Institute, Public Knowledge, The Utility Reform Network and National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates petitioned the 9th Circuit to challenge the order, claiming the agency hid intentions during a comment period and predetermined the outcome in striking down the functional test standard in service discontinuances (see 1809270036). The California Public Utilities Commission later added its support to the petition (see 1810040059).
The White House’s potential draft executive order directing the FCC and the FTC to police social media content moderation blatantly violates the First Amendment and is likely to face years of legal battle, representatives from the tech industry and academia told us. Days before President Donald Trump’s proposal emerged, senators from both parties said the tech industry’s content liability shield, which the draft order seeks to modify (see 1908090053), needs re-examining.
The Wireless Infrastructure Association plans a push in coming months to get the FCC to move forward on an additional wireless infrastructure order, focused on rules for approving collocations, President Jonathan Adelstein said in an interview last week. Last year, the agency, where he used to be a Democratic commissioner, approved two major wireless infrastructure orders. Both are targets of court actions.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., plans to introduce legislation in September or October on strategies websites use to “glue” children to devices, said Senior Policy Adviser Joseph Wender Thursday. Markey, who will prioritize two other privacy-related legislative items after congressional recess, is having ongoing conversations with lawmakers about co-sponsoring the Kids (Kids Internet Design and Safety) Act, Wender told us after a Family Online Safety Institute event.
All state-level attorneys general and a dozen major telecom companies announced an agreement Thursday to improve their ability to combat illegal robocalls, saying action was needed as they wait for Capitol Hill to negotiate a compromise bill. The FCC earlier this month updated anti-spoofing rules 5-0 (see 1908010062) as part of implementation of anti-robocalls language in the Repack Airwaves Yielding Better Access for Users of Modern Services (Ray Baum's) Act. Further FCC action on the issue may take time (see 1908220053).
An order on 2019 regulatory fees is expected to be issued soon and will include a Further NPRM on the way the FCC calculates regulatory fees, agency and industry officials told us. Since the fees must be collected before the fiscal year end Sept. 30, the FNPRM is expected to gather a record that could be applied to future regulatory fees, rather than the 2019 fee collection. Though the draft order makes some concessions to broadcaster requests, it's expected to closely resemble the previously released NPRM, FCC officials said. The fee order isn’t expected to be controversial among commissioners.
The FCC likely won’t act soon to provide additional clarity on Telephone Consumer Protection Act rules, agency officials said this week. Commissioner Mike O’Rielly, a big advocate of addressing the rules, told us he has little hope for quick action: “I can’t say that I’m optimistic.” Other officials agreed with O'Rielly.
Letting cable operators make the first negotiating move and thinking about trying to renegotiate the definition of gross revenue were among suggestions localities experts gave state and local franchise authorities facing implementation of the FCC's LFA order adopted 3-2 earlier this month (see 1908010011). In a NATOA webinar Wednesday, they also advised scouring franchise agreements for pre-emption clauses and preservation of benefits clauses.