FCC Adopts Rules to Prevent and Eliminate Digital Discrimination

Internet access and fast broadband are essential for participating in modern life.  The Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 revealed the seriousness of what was already known – that a severe “digital divide” exists in the United States.  Citizens in low economic communities, rural areas, and Tribal territories often suffer from spotty, slow, and even non-existent internet access.  Most of these historically unserved and underserved communities parallel those that suffered from the “redlining” created by the National Housing Act of 1934.  During the closure of many services during the pandemic, residents in these areas had intermittent access to educational, health and social services.  Internet was needed for online classes so that students could participate in lessons and do their homework.  Many health services were only available through telehealth medicine.  Social services, such as applying for financial assistance or accessing information, were only available with computer access.  Job searches moved to being mostly online.  Cell phone usage was not reliable enough for people to accomplish the tasks they needed to do.

Therefore, in November of 2021, Congress passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.  This law invested $65 billion dollars in universal broadband access which would make the internet both available and affordable, especially in those underserved areas.  Section 60506 of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law states that “[i]t is the policy of the United States that, insofar as technically and economically feasible, subscribers should benefit from equal access to broadband.”  The law then directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to “adopt rules to facilitate equal access to broadband internet access service” that “[prevent] digital discrimination of access based on income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion, or national origin; and [identify] necessary steps for the Commission to take to eliminate discrimination.”  Two years later, on November 15, 2023, the FCC officially adopted these rules.  Chairwoman Rosenworcel and Commissioners Starks and Gomez wrote individual statements in support of the rules while Commissioners Carr and Simington both issued dissenting statements.

These FCC rules define “digital discrimination of access” as “policies or practices, not justified by genuine issues of technical or economic feasibility, that differentially impact consumers’ access to broadband internet access service based on their income level, race, ethnicity, color, religion or national origin, or are intended to have such differential impact.” These impacts can arise from discriminatory intent, or they can be unintentional but still have a discriminatory effect.  The rules do take into account cost to the providers for delivering services as well as their technological ability to do so.  In general, the standard for these feasibilities is whether other, similar providers are able to serve these areas at the same level and at a more reasonable price. 

The source for the Congress’s and the FCC’s commitment to universal access is rooted in the Communications Act of 1934, which addressed wire and radio communication, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which expanded the law to include telecommunications.

The text of the report and rules, as well as the statements of the commissioners can be found here. 

 

Increase in Business E-Mail Scams

The F.B.I. is warning businesses to beware of a dramatic rise in business e-mail compromise scams (B.E.C.). The scammers spoof company e-mail or assume the identify of a company officer or trusted vendor and often involve wire transfer using dollars. The scam has been conducted in all states and in at least 79 countries. Victims should contact the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3)

Report on the Future of Privacy

On December 18, 2014 Pew Research, a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, released a report that looks "into the future of privacy in light of the technological change, ever-growing monetization of digital encounters, and shifting relationship of citizens and their governments that is likely to extend through the next decade." Digital Life in 2025: The Future of Privacy canvassed thousands of experts and Internet builders to share their predictions. (They use the term canvas since this was not a representative randomized survey.) Questions asked of the responders were:

• Will policy makers and technology innovators create a secure, popularly accepted, and trusted privacy-rights infrastructure by 2025 that allows for business innovation and monetization while also offering individuals choices for protecting their personal information in easy-to-use formats?
• Describe what you think the reality will be in 2025 when it comes to the overall public perception about whether policy makers and corporations have struck the right balance between personal privacy, secure data, and compelling content and apps that emerge from consumer tracking and analytics. 
• Consider the future of privacy in a broader social context. How will public norms about privacy be different in 2025 from the way they are now?

Common thoughts shared by those interviewed were:

• Privacy and security are foundational issues of the digital world
• People are living in an unprecedented condition of ubiquitous surveillance
• People require little more inducement than personal convenience to disclose their personal information
• Norms are always evolving, and privacy will certainly change in coming years 
• An arms-race dynamic is unfolding
• Renegotiation and compromise will be a constant in privacy-security policy space

For more information and to obtain a PDF of the report, access 

http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/12/18/future-of-privacy/

FCC Proposed Rule on the Open Internet

On May 15, 2014 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a proposed rule about protecting and promoting the Open Internet with a comment date of July 15, 2014 and and reply to the comments date of September 10, 2014. The document includes both supporting and dissenting opinions. The third point made in the introduction states the purpose of the notice:

3. Today, there are no legally enforceable rules by which the Commission can stop broadband providers from limiting Internet openness. This Notice begins the process of closing that gap, by proposing to reinstitute the no-blocking rule adopted in 2010 and creating a new rule that would bar commercially unreasonable actions from threatening Internet openness (as well as enhancing the transparency rule that is currently in effect).

What are some of the reactions to the notice? Andrea Peterson of The Washington Post interviewed Lynn Bradley, the director of government relations at the American Library Association's Washington office, about how net neutrality affects all types of libraries and ALA's hope to preserve an open Internet policy.