SCOTUScast 11-6-15 featuring Cory Andrews Cory L. Andrews November 06, 2015
On October 6, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in DIRECTV v. Imburgia. This case involves a class action lawsuit which argues that DIRECTV improperly charged early termination fees to its customers. The question is whether the California Court of Appeal erred by holding that a reference to state law in an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act requires the application of state law preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.
To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, who is Senior Litigation Counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation. Short video featuring Andy Hessick discussing Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
University of Utah Law Professor Andy Hessick previews an upcoming Supreme Court case and explains the possible application of the Fair Credit Reporting Act to search engines.
Mr. Robins found that one of these internet search engines, Spokeo, provided incorrect information about his age, education and marital status. Spokeo, a website that aggregates data from a variety of online sources, claims that Robins lacks standing because he did not suffer an “injury in fact.” In opposition, Robins claims that a violation of the FCRA alone constitutes an injury. Litigation Practice Group Podcast
After suffering two judicial setbacks, most recently in the D.C. Circuit’s Verizon v. FCC decision in January 2014, the Federal Communications Commission adopted new net neutrality regulations and subjected broadband providers to public utility regulation under Title II of the Communications Act. In a new case, petitioners and intervenors challenging the FCC’s order recently filed their opening briefs outlining their arguments opposing the FCC’s latest attempt to regulate the internet.
In this Teleforum, counsel for two of the net neutrality petitioners and the intervenors discussed the issues being raised in the D.C. Circuit appeal. The panelists described the challenges to the FCC’s authority to regulate the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act. Is broadband a telecommunications service subject to public utility regulation or is it an information service? Can the FCC adopt rules to regulate the Internet under Section 706? Are broadband providers protected by the First Amendment? How will the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in King v. Burwell and Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, and other constitutionally-rooted canons of statutory construction, affect the net neutrality case? Can the FCC ban paid prioritization of Internet traffic?
Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group Podcast
- Brett Shumate, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
- Adam J. White, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates
The role of municipally-owned and operated broadband networks in the United States has been the subject of considerable debate. Among some stakeholders, there is increasing enthusiasm around the potential for government-owned broadband networks (GONs) to serve as an engine for municipalities to jump-start economic development. When GONs fail, however, the costs are borne by taxpayers. Earlier this year, the FCC threw its hat into the ring by moving aggressively to preempt certain provisions of Tennessee and North Carolina law that restrict municipal provision of broadband service. In this teleforum, our experts assessed the need for GONs, addressed the competition policy and regulatory issues associated with these projects, and explored whether the FCC’s move to preempt the states will survive judicial appeal.
Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group
- Charles M. Davidson, Director, Advanced Communications Law and Policy Institute, New York Law School
- Randolph J. May, President, The Free State Foundation
- Christopher Mitchell, Policy Director, Next Century Cities
- Moderator: Rachael M. Bender, Senior Policy Director, Mobile Future
With the adoption of the Open Internet Order, the Federal Communications Commission has potentially waded into areas that have historically been within the Federal Trade Commission’s jurisdiction. How are privacy, consumer protection, and technology policy issues currently being handled by the agencies – do their actions complement each other or are they creating regulatory tension and uncertainty? If there is a turf war going on, will Congress step in or will the courts decide? How does it impact competition policies and consumer protection? Join FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai and FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen as they engage in a moderated discussion about these and other issues relating to the respective roles of their agencies.
- Hon. Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Federal Trade Commission
- Hon. Ajit V. Pai, Federal Communications Commission
- Moderator: Alexander Okuliar, Partner, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
September 2, 2015