I’ve been blogging about Net Neutrality since my first blog on August 1, 2008 and now the latest saga was reported by the Washington Post that California voted to establish “the nation’s toughest net neutrality law to prevent Internet providers from favoring certain websites, setting up a fight with federal regulators who voted last year to erase such rules.” The August 31, 2018 article entitled “California lawmakers vote to pass toughest net neutrality law in the nation” after the FCC rolled back the federal Net Neutrality earlier this year and the report included these comments:
Industry groups have said a single, uniform law written by Congress would be far more effective at guaranteeing net neutrality protections for Internet users.
AT&T, which pushed hard against the California bill through its local lobbyists, has called for a national “Internet Bill of Rights” that would cover Internet providers and online platforms alike, such as Google and Facebook.
The limitations provoked a loud outcry from Internet providers such as Verizon and Comcast, which said the rules would add unnecessary costs to their businesses and prevent them from investing in upgrades to their networks.
Consumer groups, however, argued that the rules were vital to protect users at a time when Internet providers are focused on buying up media companies and establishing Facebook-like businesses that mine user data for advertising purposes.
Clearly the Net Neutrality laws continue to be a challenge and are a long way from be over.
This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney.
This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary.
The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites.
In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.