I have been a proud Luddite against social media ever since Instagram, Snapchat, and other platforms have captured the attention of my generation. Those around me know to avoid the topic if they do not want to listen to a condescending rant that reminds them of their grandmother. I begrudgingly maintain a Linkedin account, but other than that, I try to stay true to my belief that social media should play an extremely limited role, if any, in our society. My initial convictions about this subject began after listening to Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at NYU, give a lecture connecting the youth mental health crisis to the prevalent usage of smartphones and social media among Gen Z. Many of my psychology classes and internship experiences during my undergrad years reaffirmed these beliefs, and I have not shut up about it since.
Continue readingtechnology
Should the First Amendment Protect Generative AI Outputs?
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
The most important free speech question of the decade may not be about social media. It may be about chatbots. As generative AI reshapes how people communicate, courts and legislators must confront whether and how the First Amendment protects AI outputs. Last year, the first court to face this question punted, explaining at the motion to dismiss stage that it was “not prepared” yet to hold that a large language model’s output is speech. That case settled without a definitive answer. But the question won’t stay dormant, and First Amendment principles compel a clear conclusion: many chatbot outputs are protected speech, which should shape how courts handle AI-related litigation.
Continue readingSupreme Court Considers FCC’s Jury Trial Problem
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has loomed large on the Supreme Court’s docket recently. Last term, the Justices addressed E-Rate fraud prevention efforts, the agency’s authority to bind courts, and the constitutionality of its Universal Service Program. Now the Commission is before the High Court. This new case, FCC v. AT&T, asks whether the FCC’s power to levy punitive fines violates the Seventh Amendment right to a trial by jury—a question whose resolution could reshape not just telecommunications regulation but the balance of power among agencies, courts, and juries.
Continue readingSupreme Court Questions Broadband Provider Liability for User Misconduct
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
Intermediary liability—when a company should be liable for users’ misuse of its product by users—has been a long-standing issue in tech policy. Two years ago, the Supreme Court dismissed a case alleging Twitter aided and abetted terrorism by allowing ISIS to recruit on its platform. This week, the Court weighed in again, hearing argument in a case involving a billion-dollar judgment against broadband provider Cox Communications for failing to terminate accounts suspected of copyright infringement. The case raises significant questions about copyright enforceability, broadband providers’ role as gateways to the internet, and digital equity concerns. The justices seemed doubtful that notification of user misuse was sufficient to trigger liability, although they struggled to find an alternative that balanced the equities of the case.
Continue readingAnalyzing the Charter-Cox Merger
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
Earlier this year, Charter Communications, Incorporated and Cox Communications announced a $34.5 billion proposed merger. If completed, the combined company would become both the largest cable television provider and the largest broadband provider in the country.
At first glance, one might be concerned about a proposal to merge the second and third-largest cable providers into a single behemoth. But to describe the merger in these simplistic terms fails to appreciate both the challenges facing companies in mature industries and the revolutionary changes affecting the telecommunications industry. This proposed deal is not a power grab, but a rational response to a maturing, intensely competitive market. That’s the argument that I’ve made in my latest article as part of the Free State Foundation’s Perspectives series.
Continue readingCarr Reins in FCC Overreach on School Wi-Fi
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr has been in the news a lot lately. Under his energetic leadership, the agency has pursued an ambitious agenda at a breakneck pace. And while he has taken flak (including from me) for some of his high-profile controversies—perhaps most notably threatening Jimmy Kimmel like a second-rate Jersey mob boss—he deserves significant credit for the less flashy efforts his team is taking behind the scenes to restore the agency’s proper role and rein in the prior administration’s excesses. One such effort was last month’s decision to terminate E-Rate funding for Wi-Fi hotspot lending and school bus Wi-Fi access. While the merits of those programs can be debated, they clearly exceeded the statute’s bounds, and the FCC was right to rein them in.
Continue readingCourt Strikes Down Law Regulating Election-Related AI Content
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
By reducing traditional barriers of content creation, the AI revolution holds the potential to unleash an explosion in creative expression. It also increases the societal risks associated with the spread of misinformation. This tension is the subject of a recent landmark judicial decision, Babylon Bee v Bonta (hat tip to Ajit Pai, whose social media account remains an outstanding follow). The eponymous satirical news site and others challenged California’s AB 2839, which prohibited the dissemination of “materially deceptive” AI-generated audio or video content related to elections. Although the court recognized that the case presented a novel question about “synthetically edited or digitally altered” content, it struck down the law, concluding that the rise of AI does not justify a departure from long-standing First Amendment principles.
Continue readingPrison Call Order Delays Reform of Market Ripe for Disruption
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
Earlier this summer, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) unexpectedly delayed implementation of its 2024 prison call order until 2027. The order, which was mandated by Congress and had bipartisan support in the agency and on Capitol Hill, sought to correct long-standing market distortions through a combination of cost-based pricing and competition-friendly rules. The delay was requested by incumbent providers and correctional facilities based on unexpected implementation challenges. But this postponement is unfortunate, coming right as new entrants such as Ameelio are poised to challenge those incumbents and perpetuating inefficiencies, high costs, and limited innovation in a sector ripe for disruption.
Continue readingSurprise! USF Decision Signals Admin Law Revolution, But Not the One We Expected
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
Late last month, the Supreme Court decided FCC v. Consumers Research. Although an undercard among the Court’s last-day decisions, the case was closely watched in administrative law circles as a potential vehicle for revitalizing the moribund Nondelegation Doctrine. But as predicted after oral argument, the Court found this was not the right case to do so. The big surprise was Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence, which likely killed future efforts to reform nondelegation, but also signaled big news ahead for the law governing independent agencies.
Continue readingNTIA Streamlines BEAD Program, But Risks Further Delays
This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.
On June 6, the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) issued its long-awaited overhaul of the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. This new policy notice repeals many administrative burdens imposed by Biden-era NTIA oversight and aligns the program more closely with Congress’s original intent. This revised guidance promises to enhance broadband deployment by increasing flexibility and reducing costs to taxpayers. But it also risks further delays in a program already criticized for its sluggish rollout—and in the meantime, private enterprise is closing many of the coverage gaps BEAD sought to address.
Continue reading
BC Law: Impact 