Net neutrality advocates were expected to file briefs late Monday on their challenges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to the FCC's "internet freedom" order undoing Title II open internet regulation under the Communications Act. Public Knowledge believes the commission "made multiple bad policy decisions" under Chairman Ajit Pai. "The FCC also broke the law," said a PK release on its expected joint filing with petitioners Mozilla, Vimeo, New America's Open Technology Institute, National Hispanic Media Coalition, NTCH, Benton Foundation, Free Press, Coalition for Internet Openness, Etsy, Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee, Center for Democracy and Technology, and Incompas. “For the first time, and contradicting every previous FCC to consider the issue, the FCC's current leadership has decided that the agency lacks jurisdiction over broadband entirely. Not only did this radical move violate the statute, but the FCC violated the Administrative Procedure Act by rewriting history and pretending that its latest move is a return to, rather than a rejection of, the bipartisan consensus on the proper role of the FCC with respect to broadband. While past Republican-led FCCs have expressed a preference for ‘light-touch’ regulation, the current leadership has opted instead for a ‘zero-touch’ approach." PK also said the FCC "cherry-picked investment evidence that supported its predetermined outcome and ignored evidence that classifying broadband as ‘telecommunications’ did not harm broadband deployment," among other things. A state and local petitioner brief was also due to file.

Net neutrality advocates were expected to file briefs late Monday on their challenges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to the FCC's "internet freedom" order undoing Title II open internet regulation under the Communications Act. Public Knowledge believes the commission "made multiple bad policy decisions" under Chairman Ajit Pai. "The FCC also broke the law," said a PK release on its expected joint filing with petitioners Mozilla, Vimeo, New America's Open Technology Institute, National Hispanic Media Coalition, NTCH, Benton Foundation, Free Press, Coalition for Internet Openness, Etsy, Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee, Center for Democracy and Technology, and Incompas. “For the first time, and contradicting every previous FCC to consider the issue, the FCC's current leadership has decided that the agency lacks jurisdiction over broadband entirely. Not only did this radical move violate the statute, but the FCC violated the Administrative Procedure Act by rewriting history and pretending that its latest move is a return to, rather than a rejection of, the bipartisan consensus on the proper role of the FCC with respect to broadband. While past Republican-led FCCs have expressed a preference for ‘light-touch’ regulation, the current leadership has opted instead for a ‘zero-touch’ approach." PK also said the FCC "cherry-picked investment evidence that supported its predetermined outcome and ignored evidence that classifying broadband as ‘telecommunications’ did not harm broadband deployment," among other things. A state and local petitioner brief was also due to file.

The divide over the state of fixed broadband competition and deployment deepened in comments posted Monday for an FCC communications marketplace report due by year-end under the Ray Baum's Act. Several industry commenters cited robust market rivalry and activity benefiting consumers, but consumer advocates generally noted shortcomings in competition, deployment and the data used to measure progress. Parties also disagreed on policy proposals. NCTA and USTelecom painted a positive picture and Incompas offered a circumspect view, in comments posted Friday in docket 18-231 (see 1808170049).

The divide over the state of fixed broadband competition and deployment deepened in comments posted Monday for an FCC communications marketplace report due by year-end under the Ray Baum's Act. Several industry commenters cited robust market rivalry and activity benefiting consumers, but consumer advocates generally noted shortcomings in competition, deployment and the data used to measure progress. Parties also disagreed on policy proposals. NCTA and USTelecom painted a positive picture and Incompas offered a circumspect view, in comments posted Friday in docket 18-231 (see 1808170049).

Incumbents and rivals painted different pictures of fixed broadband competition as the FCC prepares a communications market report by year-end required by the Ray Baum's Act. NCTA said competition "is delivering substantial benefits to consumers," bolstered by deregulation, and USTelecom said the fixed broadband market continues to be "dynamic," with increasing competitive alternatives. But Incompas said "data is insufficient to conclude the fixed broadband marketplace is competitive," and urged the agency to dismiss a USTelecom wholesale forbearance petition. Comments were due Friday in docket 18-231.

Incumbents and rivals painted different pictures of fixed broadband competition as the FCC prepares a communications market report by year-end required by the Ray Baum's Act. NCTA said competition "is delivering substantial benefits to consumers," bolstered by deregulation, and USTelecom said the fixed broadband market continues to be "dynamic," with increasing competitive alternatives. But Incompas said "data is insufficient to conclude the fixed broadband marketplace is competitive," and urged the agency to dismiss a USTelecom wholesale forbearance petition. Comments were due Friday in docket 18-231.

Groups asked the FCC to extend comment deadlines to Sept. 27 in two proceedings, on fixed broadband competition and advanced telecom capability (ATC) deployment under Telecom Act Section 706, currently due Friday and Sept. 10, respectively (see 1807300019 and 1808100040). Granting an extension, including of the ATC Sept. 24 reply deadline to Oct. 27, "is warranted in light of the importance and complexity of the proceeding(s), the brief time allotted by the Commission in the initial notices, and conflict with the major Jewish Holidays of Rosh Hashanah and Sukkot," said the motion posted Thursday in dockets 18-231 and 18-238 of Public Knowledge, Incompas, Common Cause, The Greenlining Institute, Communications Workers of America, Benton Foundation, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Texaltel, Federation of ISPs of America and Northwest Telecommunications Association. The agency plans to issue its next 706 report as part of a communications market report required in Q4 under the Ray Baum Act. The FCC declined comment

Groups asked the FCC to extend comment deadlines to Sept. 27 in two proceedings, on fixed broadband competition and advanced telecom capability (ATC) deployment under Telecom Act Section 706, currently due Friday and Sept. 10, respectively (see 1807300019 and 1808100040). Granting an extension, including of the ATC Sept. 24 reply deadline to Oct. 27, "is warranted in light of the importance and complexity of the proceeding(s), the brief time allotted by the Commission in the initial notices, and conflict with the major Jewish Holidays of Rosh Hashanah and Sukkot," said the motion posted Thursday in dockets 18-231 and 18-238 of Public Knowledge, Incompas, Common Cause, The Greenlining Institute, Communications Workers of America, Benton Foundation, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Texaltel, Federation of ISPs of America and Northwest Telecommunications Association. The agency plans to issue its next 706 report as part of a communications market report required in Q4 under the Ray Baum Act. The FCC declined comment

Many parties opposed USTelecom's petition for incumbent telco relief from mandatory wholesale unbundling discounts, resale and other duties under the 1996 Telecom Act. Telco rivals, state regulators and consumer advocates said the petition for nationwide regulatory forbearance would undermine competition and should be rejected as unsubstantiated and overly broad. Verizon was one of the few to support the petition, as comments were posted in docket 18-141, mostly Tuesday, though USTelecom, ILECs and others can file replies due Sept. 5.

The FCC received more mixed views on how to curb intercarrier compensation schemes that stimulate access charges, in replies posted in docket 18-155, mostly Monday, to conflicting initial comments (see 1807230034). Incumbent telcos tended to be more supportive of the agency's main proposal -- to attack financial incentives for arbitrage by giving "access-stimulating" LECs the option of either assuming financial responsibility for traffic or allowing direct connections -- albeit with disputes, particularly over direct connection terms. Some backed a more sweeping move to bill-and-keep arrangements under which carriers generally don't pay each other for exchanging traffic. Smaller providers opposed the proposals and offered alternatives.