Google Fears FCC’s New Internet Powers

The Web giant’s lobbyists are quietly fretting about a recent court ruling.

A sign is posted on the exterior of Google headquarters on January 30, 2014 in Mountain View, California.  
National Journal
Brendan Sasso
Feb. 26, 2014, midnight

A re­cent court de­cision that en­dorsed a broad view of the Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion’s au­thor­ity over the In­ter­net has Google and oth­er Web com­pan­ies nervous.

In closed-door meet­ings with reg­u­lat­ors and Cap­it­ol Hill staff, Google’s law­yers have said they’re wor­ried how the FCC may use its new­found powers, ac­cord­ing to mul­tiple people fa­mil­i­ar with the meet­ings.

The ex­tent of the FCC’s au­thor­ity over Google and oth­er Web ser­vices re­mains un­clear, and the cur­rent FCC has giv­en no in­dic­a­tion that it is in­ter­ested in push­ing ag­gress­ive new reg­u­la­tions for Web com­pan­ies. But the pos­sib­il­ity that the com­mis­sion could be­gin telling Google how to or­gan­ize its search res­ults or handle its users’ data is enough to spook the com­pany’s army of Wash­ing­ton lob­by­ists.

The FCC and Google de­clined to com­ment.

Last month, the D.C. Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals struck down the FCC’s net-neut­ral­ity rules, which barred In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders from dis­crim­in­at­ing against or block­ing any web­sites. But the de­cision was based on the nar­row ques­tion of wheth­er the rules too closely re­sembled what are known as “com­mon car­riage” reg­u­la­tions.

On the broad­er is­sue of the FCC’s power to reg­u­late the In­ter­net, the court gave the com­mis­sion a huge win.

FCC Chair­man Tom Wheel­er is now try­ing to use that broad au­thor­ity to re­work the net-neut­ral­ity rules. But the de­cision also opened the door to a host of oth­er pos­sible In­ter­net reg­u­la­tions.

The FCC jus­ti­fied its net neut­ral­ity rules by point­ing to Sec­tion 706 of the Tele­com­mu­nic­a­tions Act, which says the agency has the power to pro­mote the de­ploy­ment of broad­band In­ter­net net­works.

The court largely de­ferred to the FCC, say­ing Con­gress gran­ted the agency the power to en­act reg­u­la­tions that pro­mote the “vir­tu­ous cycle” of In­ter­net in­nov­a­tion and net­work con­struc­tion.

The Re­pub­lic­an-con­trolled House likely didn’t think it was giv­ing the FCC sweep­ing power over the In­ter­net when it en­acted the law in 1996, but the pro­vi­sion could be the hook for a slew of new reg­u­la­tions.

Ber­in Szoka, pres­id­ent of the liber­tari­an group Tech­Free­dom, warned that the FCC may use its new power to en­force pro­vi­sions from the con­tro­ver­sial Stop On­line Pir­acy Act, bet­ter known as SOPA, which Con­gress aban­doned after a massive Web re­volt in 2012.

The FCC could, the­or­et­ic­ally, or­der In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders and search en­gines to block web­sites of­fer­ing il­leg­al cop­ies of mu­sic and movies. The leg­al ar­gu­ment would be that on­line pir­acy dis­cour­ages en­ter­tain­ment com­pan­ies from pro­du­cing con­tent. There­fore, stamp­ing out pir­acy would en­cour­age the pro­duc­tion of more con­tent, lead­ing to more In­ter­net use, and ul­ti­mately the de­ploy­ment of more broad­band net­works.

“It could really be any­thing with­in the scope of com­mu­nic­a­tion,” Szoka said. Even if the agency doesn’t take form­al ac­tions, it could use the threat of its power un­der Sec­tion 706 to pres­sure com­pan­ies to com­ply, Szoka warned.

Har­old Feld, the seni­or vice pres­id­ent of Pub­lic Know­ledge, usu­ally ar­gues for ag­gress­ive FCC ac­tion to pro­tect con­sumers. But even he said the im­plic­a­tions of the court’s de­cision are “very troub­ling.”

Feld sug­ges­ted the FCC could im­pose pri­vacy pro­tec­tion reg­u­la­tions on Google and oth­er com­pan­ies un­der the the­ory that people would be more likely to use the In­ter­net if they felt their per­son­al in­form­a­tion was safe.

The or­der of Google’s search res­ults could also be a tar­get for reg­u­la­tion. Com­pet­it­ors like Mi­crosoft and Yelp have long ac­cused Google of ma­nip­u­lat­ing its search res­ults to fa­vor its own ser­vices.

App stores, smart-home devices, in­stant mes­saging, and cy­ber­se­cur­ity are just a few oth­er pos­sible areas for FCC reg­u­la­tion.

Any new In­ter­net rules un­der Sec­tion 706 would face im­me­di­ate court chal­lenges, and it’s un­clear how far the courts would let the FCC go. Oth­er pro­vi­sions of the Com­mu­nic­a­tions Act and con­sti­tu­tion­al pro­tec­tions such as the First Amend­ment put some lim­its on the FCC’s power over In­ter­net com­pan­ies. It’s un­likely that the D.C. Cir­cuit rul­ing will be the fi­nal word on the com­mis­sion’s In­ter­net au­thor­ity.

Google is not the only Web com­pany that’s un­easy with the im­plic­a­tions of the court’s rul­ing. Face­book, Ya­hoo, Amazon, and scores of oth­er com­pan­ies could be af­fected by new In­ter­net reg­u­la­tions.

But so far, Google has been the most vo­cal be­hind the scenes in rais­ing alarm about the scope of the FCC’s po­ten­tial new powers, ac­cord­ing to people fa­mil­i­ar with the dis­cus­sions. And the com­pany is ad­vised by an ex­pert on the com­mis­sion’s In­ter­net au­thor­ity: Aus­tin Schlick was the FCC’s gen­er­al coun­sel when it en­acted the net-neut­ral­ity rules, and he is now a Google law­yer.

Robert Mc­Dow­ell, a former Re­pub­lic­an FCC com­mis­sion­er, said Google should have thought through the con­sequences of sup­port­ing net-neut­ral­ity rules.

“Those who sub­scribe to the school of thought that says ‘please reg­u­late my rival but not me’ al­most al­ways live to re­gret it,” Mc­Dow­ell said. “Once you in­vite the gov­ern­ment in­to your space, it doesn’t want to leave any­one in that space alone.”

Al­though Pub­lic Know­ledge’s Feld ex­pressed con­cern about the FCC’s po­ten­tially broad power un­der Sec­tion 706, he ar­gued that it’s im­port­ant that the com­mis­sion have some au­thor­ity to reg­u­late In­ter­net ac­cess. So far, the FCC has de­clined to ap­ply the reg­u­lat­ory scheme it uses for tele­phone com­pan­ies to broad­band In­ter­net pro­viders.

“If 706 is the only tool we’ve got, then we’re go­ing to use it,” Feld said.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4710) }}

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×