Trade groups claimed the state law is preempted by former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s repeal of net neutrality rules. Pai’s repeal placed ISPs under the more forgiving Title I regulatory framework instead of the common-carrier framework in Title II of the Communications Act. 2nd Circuit judges did not find this argument convincing:

Second, the ABA is not conflict-preempted by the Federal Communications Commission’s 2018 order classifying broadband as an information service. That order stripped the agency of its authority to regulate the rates charged for broadband Internet, and a federal agency cannot exclude states from regulating in an area where the agency itself lacks regulatory authority. Accordingly, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and VACATE the permanent injunction.

  • Cheems@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    While looking for that I also found something saying the FCC wants to raise the requirements of it it 100 but the last vote didn’t go through

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Wow, that would be pretty great, unless there’s a data cap, which makes it useless.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think 100 is unreasonable, especially if it’s a minimum agreed level of service. Peak usage would absolutely suffer and be hard to maintain at that level.

      I think the should raise it to 25/10 though. 3mbps up sucks for things like video calls. 5 is probably enough, but 3 is just too low.

      I personally have 50/25 ($55/month total), and it’s plenty fast for everything I’ve needed. I plan to upgrade soon when I get on my city’s new fiber network, but I’m unwilling to pay for anything much faster right now.