AT&T Wants To Settle With FTC To Avoid Unlimited Data Throttling Lawsuit (arstechnica.com) 35
AT&T has given up its years-long quest to cripple the Federal Trade Commission's authority to regulate broadband providers. "Just weeks ago, AT&T said it intended to appeal its loss in the case to the U.S. Supreme Court before a deadline of May 29," reports Ars Technica. "But today, AT&T informed (PDF) court officials that it has decided not to file a petition to the Supreme Court and did not ask for a deadline extension." From the report: AT&T had been trying to limit the FTC's authority since October 2014, when the FTC sued AT&T for promising unlimited data to wireless customers and then throttling their speeds by as much as 90 percent. With AT&T having ruled out a Supreme Court appeal, the FTC can finally pursue its case against AT&T and try to secure refunds for affected customers. AT&T's decision also means that traditional phone companies will have to face some net neutrality oversight from the FTC after the Federal Communications Commission finalizes its net neutrality repeal. AT&T said it will try to settle the case with the FTC instead of going to trial. AT&T's decision might indicate that it is already having settlement talks with the agency.
"We have decided not to seek review by the Supreme Court, to focus instead on negotiating a fair resolution of the case with the Federal Trade Commission," AT&T said in a statement to Ars. The FTC is barred from regulating common carriers, and AT&T has long been a common carrier for its mobile voice and landline phone services. AT&T previously argued that the FTC can't regulate any product offered by AT&T, whether it is or isn't a common carrier service. Though ultimately unsuccessful, AT&T's attempt to deny the FTC's authority to regulate any aspect of its business has delayed the throttling case for years.
"We have decided not to seek review by the Supreme Court, to focus instead on negotiating a fair resolution of the case with the Federal Trade Commission," AT&T said in a statement to Ars. The FTC is barred from regulating common carriers, and AT&T has long been a common carrier for its mobile voice and landline phone services. AT&T previously argued that the FTC can't regulate any product offered by AT&T, whether it is or isn't a common carrier service. Though ultimately unsuccessful, AT&T's attempt to deny the FTC's authority to regulate any aspect of its business has delayed the throttling case for years.
MaBell lost one (Score:1)
Re:MaBell lost one (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know...
You can see how throttling your own advertised unlimited data delivery speed seems the polar opposite of net neutrality, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I hope you are being paid to parrot that lie and don't actually believe it. If not, you should really do some math. Find out how much bandwidth and equipment actually costs for big companies like ISPs buying in bulk, and find out how bandwidth flows normally.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that was the purpose of those laws/regulations, but that was the effect. Small ISPs like the one I work for had to stop offering access due to the oppressive laws that were hard to interpret. I got no bonus two years ago since we paid every penny of profit to Perkins Coie law firm that represented Hillary Clinton. Marc Elias, general counsel for Hillary Clinton's and John Kerry's presidential campaigns, who was our previous lawyer used everything we paid him to support Hillary's campaign a
Re: (Score:2)
prevents telecom companies from shoveling bullshit with impunity
But shoveling bullshit falls under the authority of the Department of Agriculture. So back to court AT&T goes to beat down both the FTC and FCC.
Re: so there it is... (Score:1)
Just fucking nationalize AT&T already (Score:5, Insightful)
They didn't learn their lesson back in the '80s, and now here they are pulling shit again.
The only way to deal with corporations is for the government to stand on their necks until they behave. In the absence of serious and unrelenting regulation, corporations will always, always try to fuck everyone. They'd throw a baby into a wood chipper for a 5-cent increase in stock price. Thomas Jefferson knew this. James Madison knew this.
We'll have to wait until some semblance of sanity has been restored to Congress, but AT&T should really be broken up again, and it should be the opening salvo in a number of corporate breakups.
Re: (Score:1)
USA wide gov networks to every wealthy and poor home?
Who is going to pay to connect every poor home in the USA with a new network at cost? Such fast new networks will never be paid back by the poor users using low cost plans for decades.
Make the US tax payer cover all network construction costs into all poor inner city areas?
Then have US tax payers keep network costs down so poor people can enjoy fast internet?
How many billion
Re: (Score:2)
The same people who pay for it now: you and me.
If you settle down for a second and give it a moment's thought, you'll understand just how poorly-informed your questions really are.
Re: (Score:2)
Existing networks are taken from their owners/shareholders as part of a plan to "nationalize" the US telco sector?
Who is going to keep their wealth and invest in the USA if the US gov can just "nationalize" any part of the tech sector it wants for any party political reason?
Who is going to pay to care for this network that got taken as part of an effort to "nationalize" the US telco secto
Re: (Score:2)
So poor people all over the USA don't get a brand new network to their dwelling under a "nationalize" the USA project?
Existing networks are taken from their owners/shareholders as part of a plan to "nationalize" the US telco sector?
Just to be clear, we have paid the telcos Billions (with a "B") to build out the last mile and deliver broadband to every POTS customer. They have not done this, instead giving the money out to executives as bonuses.
Who is going to keep their wealth and invest in the USA if the US gov can just "nationalize" any part of the tech sector it wants for any party political reason?
The government can do this to anything it wants, any time it wants, if it decides it's in its best interest, because of the various blank checks written into the constitution. The Supremes merely have to put their blessing on it. The easiest excuse is for purposes of national defense.
What other sector of the US is going to get this "nationalize" effort?
How much more tax payers money will have to be found to cover the "nationalize" the USA experiment costs?
Internet ac
Re: (Score:1)
How much will that cost US tax payers again?
Well, let's see, subtract something like $20B a year from AT&Ts profits, and I think you have your answer.... $0 more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean by "now"? (Score:2)
This fight has been going on for years. All AT&T has been able to do is make it drag out.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is Congress won't regain sanity. They are the ones that get lobbied to make the laws then retire into C-level positions at those same companies. Unless by some miracle we start voting in people that actually listen to the public, expect no change.
Ah yes, refunds (Score:3)
Customers should expect to receive something in the area of .50 cents by the time it's all said and done.
That'll show AT&T.
What do you want? (Score:1)