Net Neutrality

A new study predicts that Apple will overtake Hewlett-Packard next year as the world's top personal computer vendor - if the iPad is counted as a PC, according to USA Today.

An IDG News examination found that 27 Republicans who opposed net neutrality because they say it unnecessarily regulates the Internet favor controversial legislation to crack down on online piracy that critics say will undermine the integrity of the Internet.

The Wall Street Journal profiles Joe Wayland, the Justice Department's lead antitrust trial lawyer who is leading the department's lawsuit to block AT&T's bid to buy T-Mobile USA.

Microsoft is buying the online video search engine VideoSurf, the Seattle Times reports.

As part of its Black Friday deals, Amazon plans to sell all its non-iPhone smart phones for a penny, according to The Washington Post.

Read all of today's e-Reads on our Tech page.

The White House has pulled back on environmental regulations and the Department of Health and Human Services' says it can't move forward on the CLASS long-term care program. Now some House Republicans want President Obama to add net neutrality rules to that list.

The controversial net neutrality regulations, which govern anticompetitive behavior online, have yet to go into effect but are being challenged in court and the House has voted to overturn them.

Now House Energy and Commerce Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore.m and Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., want Obama to stop any implementation of the rules.

"...implementation of the net neutrality rules could derail the investment and innovation that have been the hallmark of the information economy in the United States," the pair wrote in a letter to Obama on Thursday. "The net neutrality rules at best create uncertainty in the technology sector and at worst hinder this vital economic engine from creating the jobs Americans need."

The lawmakers argue that the regulations don't meet Obama's own "common sense test."

Supporters of the rules, approved by the Federal Communications Commission in December, say they are needed to prevent Internet companies from blocking or restricting access to competitors' services. Critics, including many Republicans, say the rules are unnecessary and hurt Internet freedom by imposing unauthorized government control.

The leading wireless industry association wants to defend federal Internet competition rules from consumer groups that say the regulations are too loose.

CTIA-The Wireless Association filed a motion to intervene with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Wednesday. The filing adds another angle to the legal battle over the so-called net neutrality rules, which govern how Internet companies provide service.

Verizon has sued the FCC over the rules, arguing that the agency does not have the authority to regulate the Internet.

At least four other groups have also challenged the rules, but from the other side of the argument. They say the FCC's rules are too weak and arbitrarily exclude wireless networks from many of the regulations.

"CTIA wishes to defend the FCC against that challenge and any related arguments that the FCC erred in imposing too few regulatory burdens," the court filing states.

The advocacy group Public Knowledge has also asked to be allowed to defend the rules against Verizon's arguments.

In what may be an early victory for Verizon, a judicial panel announced Thursday that lawsuits against federal Internet competition rules will be heard in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

That's where Verizon filed its challenge to the net neutrality regulations, which govern how Internet providers provide access. The telecom giant argues that the Federal Communications Commission has no authority to regulate such issues.

Other groups, which take the opposite view and argue that the FCC didn't go far enough, filed lawsuits in five other courts. Those will all be combined and heard in the D.C. court, which was chosen randomly in a lottery system overseen by a panel of judges.

It is seen as a potentially favorable court because in 2010 it ruled that the FCC did not have the authority to prevent Comcast from blocking a website.

The Federal Communications Commission is moving to dismiss Verizon's challenge to the agency's open Internet rules.

The FCC filed a motion Wednesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to dismiss Verizon's lawsuit challenging rules barring wireline broadband providers from discriminating against Internet content, services or applications.

"We look forward to defending our open Internet framework in court. This strong and balanced framework has brought certainty and predictability, stimulating investment across the broadband economy," an FCC spokesman said Thursday. "Verizon's legal challenge is not only misguided; it threatens to destabilize an important and growing part of our economy at a critical time."

Verizon officially relaunched its legal bid to overturn the so-called net neutrality rules last week. Its original lawsuit filed in January was derailed after a federal court said the company could not file a challenge until the rules were published in the Federal Register, which the FCC did on Sept. 23.

In its motion to dismiss, the FCC argued that Verizon lacks jurisdiction to challenge the rules to the federal appeals court because it would not modify "radio licenses" as Verizon has claimed.

Public Knowledge wants in on Verizon's lawsuit against federal Internet competition rules. But the advocacy group isn't joining the chorus of challenges. It wants to defend the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality regulations.

"The rules are worth defending, and the FCC's authority to make rules is worth defending," said Public Knowledge legal director Harold Feld.

Verizon argues that the FCC doesn't have the authority to enact the rules, which regulate how Internet companies provide access. Public Knowledge filed a motion to intervene in the case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

"PK actively participated in the Preserving the Open Internet; Broadband Industry Practices proceedings below and represents members who would be adversely affected by a reversal of the Order because their activities or businesses depend upon access to an open Internet," the motion reads. "Therefore, PK's interests will be substantially affected by this Court's review of the Commission's Order."

Public Knowledge did not join the other consumer advocacy groups, Free Press and Media Access Project, which have filed lawsuits against the net neutrality rules as well. Their lawsuits contend that while the FCC has the authority to regulate Internet access, it did not go far enough to prevent anticompetitive behavior online.

Controversial federal rules targeting anticompetitive behavior online are scheduled to be published in the Federal Register Friday, clearing the way for them to go into effect in November.

The Federal Communications Commission's network neutrality regulations were passed last December, and are designed to prohibit Internet companies from blocking or hindering competing companies online.

The rules will take effect on Nov. 20. Once published, the rules can be legally challenged. Verizon has already sued to block the rules but a court said the company had acted prematurely.

The House has also already voted to overturn the rules, and on Thursday, Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., called on the Senate to do likewise.

"Net neutrality is a net loser," she said in a statement. "These regulations were approved last December and the FCC has been slow-walking them to avoid the lawsuits that are certain to be filed. It is just another example of a federal agency defying the will of the people."

Public advocacy groups, meanwhile, praised the rules while vowing to fight for even stronger measures.

The Federal Communications Commission has sent its network neutrality regulations to the Federal Register for publication, an FCC spokesperson said on Monday.

The rules, designed to prevent Internet companies from engaging in anticompetitive behavior, were sent to the Register on Friday.

The Federal Register usually publishes such regulations within 1-3 weeks of receiving them, and the regulations will then take effect 60 days after publication.

Once published, the rules will likely face a new round of challenge from critics who say they are unneeded and overly broad. Earlier this year Verizon sued to block the regulations but a court ruled that the company had to wait until they were published in the Federal Register.

The House has also voted to overturn the rules, with a similar measure awaiting action in the Senate.

Top Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee said Thursday they are investigating whether the Federal Communications Commission improperly coordinated with the White House and public interest groups in the development of the network neutrality rules adopted in December.

In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, the lawmakers cited instances where they say commission officials may have improperly met with the White House or outside groups to discuss the network neutrality rules. The FCC's rules bar broadband providers from discriminating against Internet content, services or applications. President Obama endorsed the rules after they were adopted.

From National Journal:
Activists Call for a Fair Debt Deal

DeMint Wants to Change Business as Usual

Debt Showdown is Damaging the Economy

Will Drilling in Cuba Threaten U.S. Beaches

GRAPHIC: GOPers on Hot-Button Issues

"Agency decisions should be based on law and policy," Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., wrote.

"These allegations suggest the FCC's network neutrality proceeding was designed to fulfill a presidential campaign slogan, when it should have been based on an analysis of statutory authority, an economic analysis of the Internet service market, and an examination of the record," they added.

"If true, it seems the FCC failed to develop an independent conclusion derived from a balanced fact-based record, which is incompatible with proper rule-making."

Among the examples the lawmakers cited included meetings they say Genachowski and a top FCC official had at the White House during which the net neutrality rules were debated, and meetings between Commissioner Michael Copps' staff and the public interest group Free Press, which favored stronger net neutrality rules than were ultimately adopted.

The lawmakers have asked the FCC for information -- by Aug. 12 -- on a wide range of communications related to the commission's network neutrality proceeding between June 25, 2009 and Dec. 21, 2010.

The information includes all the communications between the FCC and the White House, as well as any third parties who discussed the issue with commission officials. In addition, the lawmakers are seeking information about whether FCC officials discussed any conditions or commitments related to the open Internet rules as part of its examination of the Comcast-NBC Universal merger.

A spokesman for Genachowski said, the agency woudl cooperate.

Public interest groups said committee probe unfairly targets net neutrality supporters and not opponents.

"This is a poorly researched, blatantly partisan fishing expedition," Free Press President and CEO Craig Aaron said in a statement. "It cites the thoroughly debunked and ridiculous notion pushed by the group Judicial Watch that routine, publicly documented ex parte contacts between Free Press and Commissioner Copps' office were somehow nefarious. If that's what these congressmen call coordination, then Congress should be far more concerned with the agency's coordination with powerful companies like AT&T, which shaped the final net neutrality rules that Free Press roundly criticized."

Eleven Republicans from the Senate Commerce Committee are demanding that the Federal Communications Commission conduct a cost-benefit analysis of net neutrality rules designed to prevent anticompetitive behavior online.

In a letter sent Wednesday to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, the Republicans request that the agency review the rules under a new Executive Order to reduce regulation.

On July 11, President Obama issued the order, which formally asked independent agencies to join executive agencies in reducing regulations that place unnecessary burdens on businesses.

"We believe that had these Executive Orders been implemented before net neutrality orders were approved by a vote of 3-2 by the FCC on December 21, 2010, the Commission would have made a more informed decision," the letter says. "Therefore, we respectfully request that before net neutrality rules go into effect, you honor the intent of the President's Executive Order by applying a retrospective review towards the net neutrality order and pursuing a cost benefit analysis."

The FCC's much-maligned net neutrality regulations were enacted in December but have yet to take effect. Republicans criticize the rules as unnecessary and overly burdensome for Internet companies, while supporters argue the protections are needed to prevent companies from restricting access online.

The letter was signed by Commerce Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas; and Sens. Dean Heller, R-Nev.; Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H.; Roy Blunt, R-M.O.; Patrick Toomey, R-Penn., Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; Roger Wicker, R-Miss.; John Thune, R-S.D.; Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.; and John Boozman, R-Ark.