FCC Preempts Restrictive Broadband Laws – Impact on Michigan featured image

FCC Preempts Restrictive Broadband Laws – Impact on Michigan

by Eric Misterovich

Partner

Internet Lawyer Revision Legal

2000px-FCC_New_Logo.svg On February 26, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission voted to preempt state laws that restrict a municipality’s ability to expand outside its territory.

This started when the City of Wilson, North Carolina and Chattanooga, Tennessee wanted to provide broadband service to residents of neighboring towns. They complained to the FCC that because of their state laws, providing this service was impossible.

The FCC agreed that these state laws, which exist in one form or another in 19 other states, conflict with the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. Specifically, Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act directs the FCC to take action to remove barriers to broadband investment and competition. As a result, state laws that act as barriers to expansion are preempted and unenforceable.

What Does the Federal Preemption of State Laws Restricting Broadband Mean for Michigan?

In 2005, Michigan passed a law that placed restrictions on a municipality’s ability to provide telecommunication services. Specifically, MCL 484.2252 permits a municipality to provide telecommunications services within its boundaries, provided it has issued a request for competitive bids and has received less than 3 qualified bids within 60 days.

Because of the FCC ruling, it is clear that MCL 484.2252’s limitation on providing telecommunication services within a municipality’s boundary is suspect at best. Equally at risk are the provisions requiring a bid process before a municipality can move forward with its own investment.

Municipalities considering the option of investing in telecommunication services, including providing broadband, should see the FCC’s ruling as a win. For more information on municipal broadband issues, please contact us today.

 

 

Extra, Extra!
Recent Posts

Can You Claim Your Dietary Supplements are “Healthy” on the Packaging?

Can You Claim Your Dietary Supplements are “Healthy” on the Packaging?

Corporate

The answer is legally complicated since the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has defined the term “healthy” to apply to foods, not dietary supplements. On the other hand, in some circumstances, certain types of oils — like olive oil — are now eligible to use the “healthy” label. Thus, if your supplement is an oil […]

Read more about Can You Claim Your Dietary Supplements are “Healthy” on the Packaging?

Avoiding “Naked” Trademark Licensing With Superior Licensing Agreements

Avoiding “Naked” Trademark Licensing With Superior Licensing Agreements

Trademark

If nurtured properly, trademarks can continue to function indefinitely, bringing continued and increasing value to the owners. There are, however, ways that trademarks can be “lost.” As an example, a trademark can be abandoned through lack of use or can be lost to the general public through the process of genericide. That happens when the […]

Read more about Avoiding “Naked” Trademark Licensing With Superior Licensing Agreements

Put Revision Legal on your side