Comcast, AT&T Sue Maine Over Privacy Law, Claim It Violates Free Speech
from the ALL-the-rights-for-me,-none-of-the-rights-for-you dept
Back in 2017, the telecom industry successfully lobbied Congress to kill some modest FCC privacy rules before they could even take effect. The rules simply required that ISPs be more transparent about what data they collect and who they sell it to, requiring that consumers opt in to the sale of more sensitive location data (financial, location). From there, the telecom lobby proceeded to convince the FCC to effectively neuter its consumer protection authority almost entirely. Not only that, it successfully lobbied the FCC to try and ban states from stepping in and protecting consumers -- though the courts (so far) didn't look too kindly upon that.
In short the telecom sector lobbied to kill federal oversight, resulting in a lot of states now rushing in to try and fill the void. It then proceeded to cry like a toddler about a "discordant and fractured framework of state protections," hoping you'd ignore this was a problem the sector created.
Case in point: the telecom sector has now stepped in to sue Maine for attempting to pass a new privacy law that closely mirrors the FCC's discarded 2017 rules. According to a coalition of telecom lobbying organizations, Maine's law violates AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Spectrum's First Amendment rights:
"Maine cannot discriminate against a subset of companies that collect and use consumer data by attempting to regulate just that subset and not others, especially given the absence of any legislative findings or other evidentiary support that would justify targeting ISPs alone. Maine's decision to impose unique burdens on ISPs' speech—while ignoring the online and offline businesses that have and use the very same information and for the same and similar purposes as ISPs—represents discrimination between similarly situated speakers that is impermissible under the First Amendment."
Maine's law was signed by Governor Janet Mills last June, and is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2020. The law not only requires that consumers opt in before sensitive data is collected and sold, but it also attempted to ban ISPs from charging broadband subscribers even more money to opt out of snoopvertising, something AT&T engaged in for years. Again, Maine's law, like the laws popping up in other states, wouldn't exist if the telecom sector hadn't lobbied to effectively obliterate modest federal FCC rules. And again, this is a problem the sector created by trying to have its cake and eat it too.
One of the key arguments underpinning most of the telecom sector's lobbying shenanigans of late involves one central claim: that state or federal efforts to hold giant ISPs accountable somehow violates Comcast and other ISPs' First Amendment rights. You'll recall ISPs tried to claim that net neutrality also somehow violated ISPs' free speech rights, despite the fact that as simple conduits they don't engage in "editorial" decisions, making the argument rather silly. Effectively, the industry has spent a decade trying to claim that any federal or state consumer protections violate ISPs' free speech rights and therefore shouldn't exist.
All the while, the industry falsely claims it really wants meaningful privacy guidelines. In reality, what the industry wants is either no privacy guidelines at all (pretty much what we've "enjoyed" for 20 some odd years now), or weak federal guidelines their lawyers get to write -- so flimsy and loophole filled that they don't do much of anything. Well, anything except pre-empting other better state or federal privacy laws written with something vaguely resembling a consensus.
While everybody fixates on "big tech," "big telecom" is effectively gutting all meaningful oversight of a quickly consolidating sector that was already an anti-consumer, anti-innovation, and anticompetitive mess. Gosh, wonder how that's going to turn out?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 1st amendment, fcc, free speech, maine, privacy, privacy laws
Companies: at&t, comcast, spectrum, verizon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If they're claiming that regulating their use of consumer (read: other people's) data is a violation of their freedom of speech... does that mean they're claiming to be a publisher, and are thus liable for the speech of their customers? Because that's the only way that this position is consistent, and I don't think they actually want that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So no section 230 for the ISPs...
I see what you did there ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet access providers don't necessarily need 230. They're supposed to be dumb pipes, not providers of platforms for speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tell that to ...
Universal Studios... a Comcast company
NBC ... a Comcast company.
Time-Warner media (or whatever they call it now)... an AT&T company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tell that to ...
Different rules apply to different products, services and divisions of diversified companies. If they do not run their ISP and phones services as dumb pipes, they are interfering with other peoples freedom of speech.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Universal Studios, NBC, and Time-Warner Media are not Internet access providers. Your argument makes no sense. Do better than this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Indeed, I'm willing to make that trade, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be happy with it.
'Okay, fine, from now on the content passing through your networks will be treated as your speech, and therefore laws attempting to restrict how you can handle it are a no-go.
That said, as it is your speech you are now responsible for it, all of it, and lemme tell you you are not going to be happy with what you have been saying lately and which you are now liable for, so if I were you I'd be calling up a lot of lawyers, because you are going to need them.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Let alone the piracy you've been committing.... I'd start getting the semi's filled with cash now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They are right about being discriminated against
The obvious solution is to apply the same rules to other businesses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a coincidence, this is very similar to a lie Dick was pushing less than a week ago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dear Comcast and AT&T
Your gormless temerity has moved me. Please name these other businesses (with specificity) so that I can level the playing field by adding them to the list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dear Comcast and AT&T
Did you intend to put that somewhere else?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Dear Comcast and AT&T
Did you intend to put that somewhere else?
Probably should have included the /sarc tag, but the basic premise is that these gormless companies hand waved at mentioning the specifics of " the online and offline businesses that have and use the very same information and for the same and similar purposes as ISPs"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Dear Comcast and AT&T
Ah, you were addressing the quotation, not me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
if At&t sells your data using it free speech.
Does it know about all the times you said it hates humanity?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]