Ms. Buyer is a regular columnist for the THE BULLETIN of the Bar Association of Erie County and is a contributor to No Jitter. Previously, she has written numerous commentaries on telecommunications law for other legal and telecommunications publications including, among others, The Daily Record, Communications Convergence and Computer Telephony. Her articles cover a broad range of topics highlighting current telecommunications issues including federal and state telecommunications policy, litigation, wireless technologies, spectrum policy, FCC initiatives, and industry consolidation. Martha Buyer has also contributed to the ABA Journal Report.
Opponents aren’t taking the FCC’s recent decision lightly. Every issue always comes down to a balancing of interests. What seems black and white rarely is. Such is the case of the FCC’s recent decision -- a three-to-one vote along party lines -- to classify the previously unclassified text messages as information services. The FCC did so under the guise of limiting unsolicited robotexts.
Sooner or later, if not yet, the challenges will impact us all. While the effects of the government shutdown -- 25 days and counting -- may not be as immediately apparent outside the Capital Beltway as inside it, don’t delude yourself, particularly with respect to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and the federal judiciary. Regardless of which side of the wall you stand on, the fact is that issues particularly related to the protection of consumers (even corporate consumers) have largely either ground to a halt or have been substantially curtailed. Translation: This shutdown has created challenges, ranging from mild inconvenience to complete chaos, that sooner or later if not yet, will impact all of us.
The European Data Protection Board issues draft guidelines to help EU outsiders understand their obligations.
In late November, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) issued draft guidelines to help -- at least a bit -- entities outside the EU define their responsibilities and obligations under the EU’s General Data Protection Rule (GDPR). Since GDPR took effect in May, enterprises worldwide that held or hold private information belonging to EU citizens (and yes, I know that based on the day, who is and isn’t an EU citizen is a bit of a moving target) have had to either take prescribed steps to avoid rules violations or simply be nervous that they might be caught non-compliant and forced into massive penalties and subsequent costly remediation.
Remember when everyone knew -- and used -- words like “switchboard” and “intercom?” You don’t have to admit this aloud. As words such as these become obsolete, they’re quickly replaced by others. Consider “doxing” and “swatting,” two words in the communications technology/data security world that first came to my attention just the other day. Neither word is brand-spanking new (and swatting, with respect to insects at least, has been around for eons), but with respect to harnessing technology for unsavory purposes, both represent relatively new phenomena.
Since the earliest days following the D.C. Circuit’s decision to uphold the FCC’s 2015 Net neutrality rules, seven separate court cases have been appealed to the Supreme Court. Last Monday, Nov. 5, the court, by a 4-3 majority (more on that in a few paragraphs), decided NOT to hear any of those appeals on the rules invalidated by the Republican controlled FCC. This doesn’t mean that there may not be more attempts in the future, but for now, all’s quiet on the Supreme Court front.
Print Article