Term 1

Verizon is highly likely to win its appeal of the FCC's December Open Internet order, because the FCC's order is likely to deeply and broadly offend the legal sensibilities of the Appeals Court, just like the FCC offended the DC Appeals Court's sensibilities when it punished Comcast for violating a regulation that did not exist.

• The Court responded to that FCC injustice last April by ruling in its Comcast vs. the FCC decision that the FCC had no authority to regulate broadband or the Internet.

To understand the most likely outcome here, it is critical to cut through the FCC's claims, assertions, and arguments, and focus on the big picture context of what the FCC is actually doing in this Open Internet Order, i.e. what is the effect of the FCC's decision and process on the rule of law. That is what matters most to the Court.

Building on my previous post: "Internet Co-designer: "It's every man for himself," the Internet's co-designer, Google's Vint Cerf, made a similarly ominous comment about the future of the Internet to the New York Times last week.

In John Markoff's outstanding front page NYT article: "Thieves winning online war, maybe on your computer" the Internet's co-designer painted a bleak portrait of the safety and security of the Internet going forward.  

• "Many Internet executives fear that basic trust in what has become the foundation of 21st century commerce is rapidly eroding."
• “There’s an increasing trend to depend on the Internet for a wide range of applications, many of them having to deal with financial institutions,” said Vinton G. Cerf, one of the original designers of the Internet, who is now Google’s “chief Internet evangelist.”"
• “The more we depend on these types of systems, the more vulnerable we become,” he said.

Other experts agree. As Mr. Markoff reported yesterday: a government/technology industry panel is pressing the new Administration in a new report to make cyber-security a high national security priority.