associate dean

After Net Neutrality: The Return of the States

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

I recently discussed the Sixth Circuit decision classifying broadband as a Title I information service and effectively eliminating the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) general power to regulate broadband. But like nature, regulators abhor a vacuum. While closing the door to federal regulators, the decision also creates opportunities for states to act. This post examines the present and potential future of state-level broadband regulation.

Historically, state regulators were key players in the telecommunications space. The Communications Act of 1934 divided the telecommunications world into two neat hemispheres: The FCC regulated interstate long-distance service, while state commissions regulated local and intrastate long distance. This division of authority made sense in a world where 98 percent of calls were local, and long-distance calls were a luxury. But the Telecommunications Act of 1996 dramatically rearranged the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Meanwhile, local telephone service largely disappeared as a separate market, before communication shifted from the telephone to broadband networks. As a result, most states shuttered their telecommunications regulators early in the 21st century.

Continue reading →

Sixth Circuit Strikes Net Neutrality in Victory for Tech, Administrative Law

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

My fellow tech policy enthusiasts, our long national nightmare is over. Last week, the Sixth Circuit brought an end to the decade-long fight over net neutrality by prohibiting the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from applying Title II common carrier regulation to broadband providers. The decision is a victory for tech policy, freeing Internet access from the shadow of overbearing regulation. It’s also a win for administrative law, as it aligns with the Supreme Court’s guidance that courts, not agencies, should resolve disputes over statutory interpretations. The ruling reaffirms the principle that important policy decisions should be made by Congress, not by agencies under the guise of interpreting ambiguous statutes.

Continue reading →

What’s Next After Court Upholds TikTok Ban

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Last week, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the TikTok divest-or-ban bill against a constitutional challenge. The result was unsurprising given how poorly TikTok fared at September’s oral argument. The decision itself contains many intriguing legal insights at the nexus of national security and free speech. This post examines the Court’s First Amendment analysis and explains why, despite the loss, the popular but problematic platform is unlikely to be shut down.

Continue reading →

Assessing the Rosenworcel Era: Lessons for Incoming FCC Chairman Carr

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Blair Levin is one of telecommunications policy’s respected elder statesmen. He served as chief of staff to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Reed Hundt, executive director of the National Broadband Plan, and played a key role for the Obama transition team. His insightful commentary on tech issues, offered from his current perches at Brookings and New Street Research, is followed closely by power players both in Washington and on Wall Street.

Continue reading →

Breaking Down a Big Week in the Net Neutrality Case

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

While the eyes of much of the country were on Pennsylvania and Georgia last week, the tech community was focused on Cincinnati, where the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the net neutrality case. As I’ve noted before, it’s unwise to predict a decision based on oral argument alone. But the arguments signaled that the court is far more interested in the merits of the case than most anticipated. This post discusses that shift, while acknowledging that events last Tuesday may ultimately overshadow those on Halloween.

Continue reading →

TikTok’s No Good, Very Bad Day in Court

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

I have previously discussed the First Amendment implications of a potential TikTok ban. Removing TikTok from US markets implicates not just the speech rights of TikTok US—an American subsidiary of China-based ByteDance—but also those of its 170 million American users, many of whom actively create content on the platform. To prevail, the government must demonstrate that the ban furthers an important governmental interest unrelated to free expression and that it does not substantially burden more speech than necessary to achieve that interest. The latter is particularly challenging, which is why courts enjoined earlier bans on TikTok and WeChat.

Continue reading →

Telegram CEO Arrest and Brazil’s X Ban Raise Free Speech and Privacy Concerns

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Last week, global headlines spotlighted two separate flashpoints in the battle by governments to police social media networks. In Paris, Telegram CEO Pavel Durov was arrested for complicity in distribution of child sexual abuse imagery. And in Brazil, a judge banned X (formerly Twitter) nationwide after the company refused to block certain users on the eve of election season.  While both incidents can be couched as failures to comply with national law, the unusually harsh remedies raise important concerns about free speech and privacy online.

Continue reading →

The House TikTok Ban is an Empty Threat

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in TIME, and was reposted in the AEIdeas Blog.

Last month, the House of Representatives proudly voted to ban TikTok unless its corporate parent sells the app within six months. But proponents eager to strike a blow against the Chinese government might not celebrate just yet. There are three main problems with the proposed TikTok ban: it’s probably unconstitutional, it’s practically unenforceable, and, even if it worked, it wouldn’t solve the problem of China gathering sensitive data about American users.

Other than that, it’s fine.

Continue reading →

Concern for Kids Prompts Problematic Internet Regulation, Take 27

/ BC Law Impact Guest Posts / Leave a comment

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

“What about the kids?” plays an outsized role in the short history of Internet law. From the Communications Decency Act to the Child Online Protection Act, California’s violent video game law, and more, the contours of online regulation have been shaped well-meaning legislation that turned out to be unwise, unconstitutional, or both. 

Last month, the Senate Commerce Committee reported out a bill poised to become the next entry in this dubious canon. The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) purports to protect minors from the very real risks posed by social media. But it does so by placing a vague duty of care on a wide range of Internet-based companies in a manner likely to chill significant amounts of online speech and do more harm than good to minors and society in general—in the unlikely event that it survives judicial review.

The crux of the act is Section 3, which requires “covered platforms” to take reasonable measures to prevent and mitigate specific harms to minors, including:

Continue reading →