The trade group USTelecom and AT&T are not giving up their fight to stop Federal Communication Commission rules that would impose regulation on the Internet, taking their case to federal court. The FCC last week rejected a “stay” on the rules. But AT&T and the group insist they are not opposed to “net neutrality.” They oppose overall net regulation, predicting a “Department of the Internet.”

In the filing on Wednesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., USTelecom wants the court to “stay” the new FCC rules before those go into effect on June 12.

AT&T and several firms filed suit against the FCC decision in March.

Resorting to the courts again after last week’s FCC decision, AT&T and the trade group said in the filing to the FCC seeking a “stay,” the group again on Wednesday said it did not oppose “rules prohibiting blocking, throttling and paid prioritization.”

Those three points are part of the “net neutrality” movement.

The FCC by a 3-2 vote decided to impose regulation on Internet service providers as a public utility in February.

Speaking out

USTelecom President Walter McCormick said in a statement:

“USTelecom strongly supports an open Internet. Our member companies have invested hundreds of billions of dollars to make that Internet a reality. We are not seeking to stay the order’s bright-line rules prohibiting blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. However, as we said in our previous stay request with the FCC, we are seeking to stay this ill-conceived order’s reclassification of broadband service as a public utility service. This reclassification does not serve the public interest, but unlawfully paves the way toward expansive government management of the Internet.”

“The facts show the FCC had no adequate legal basis for reclassifying broadband Internet access service as a Title II utility telecommunications service. The order does not provide a solid legal basis for overriding the governing statute and decades of commission and court decisions that contradict this changed classification. Once implemented, the order will result in huge burdens on companies of all sizes, and create an open season of regulation and litigation that imposes immediate and unrecoverable costs. These harms are described in detail in filings from 22 companies, including well-documented difficulties faced by rural providers that the FCC’s stay denial sweepingly dismisses with no explanation.”

The filing

In a filing running more than 50 pages, USTelecom and AT&T declared:

“This case concerns the attempt, by a sharply divided FCC, to assert unprecedented regulatory power over the Internet.

“Since its inception, the Internet has flourished as a space where companies may invest and innovate freely. Congress codified that approach in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to ensure the continued growth of the Internet, ‘unfettered by Federal or State regulation.’

“For nearly two decades, bipartisan majorities of the FCC have consistently and repeatedly interpreted the 1996 Act to exempt broadband Internet access from common carrier, public-utility-style regulation. Providers have invested billions of dollars in networks and services in reliance on this statutory construction, to the enormous benefit of consumers.

“The Order represents a sharp about-face in which a federal agency — without any statutory change or congressional sanction — has arrogated to itself breathtaking authority over the most transformative technology in living memory. It has done so by subjecting broadband Internet access service to a regime that was originally designed, not for the era of social networking and streaming video, but for 19th century railroads.

“If the Order becomes effective, the FCC will become the ”Department of the Internet.’”

Read the full filing at: https://www.ustelecom.org/sites/default/files/documents/1343793_1%202015%2003%2013%20Joint%20Motion%20for%20Partial%20Stay%20Pending%20Judicial%20Revi….pdf