Vimeo GC: Net Neutrality Repeal Plan 'Complete Abdication' on Internet Regs
Vimeo GC Michael Cheah, a vocal open internet advocate, spoke to Corporate Counsel about the FCC's plan to dismantle net neutrality regulations.
November 27, 2017 at 07:00 PM
4 minute read
Courtesy photo.
The Federal Communications Commission's recently announced plan to end net neutrality sparked backlash from tech companies including Netflix and Google last week.
Many of these companies said repealing the 2015 Open Internet Order, an Obama-era regulation that ensures internet service providers can't block websites or create paid “fast lanes” online, would be bad for competition and consumers.
One of the most vocal opponents of the new plan is Michael Cheah, the general counsel of online video platform Vimeo and a longtime advocate for an open internet.
Cheah spoke with reporter Caroline Spiezio about how GCs can plan for the changes that could come if the FCC vote to repeal net neutrality is successful in December, as many expect it to be. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Corporate Counsel: The FCC has officially unveiled its plan to end net neutrality. What happens next?
Michael Cheah: It's almost pretty certain [the vote is] going to go the way they expect it to, so it will become the rule, or the lack of rules will become a rule. For us, it represents a pretty big change in how we think about how content is regulated on the internet. We find it to be completely inconsistent with the progression to the 2015 order and a complete abdication on federal regulation on the entire internet infrastructure. It [repealing net neutrality] is not based on any real evidence or economic analysis, so there's almost certainly going to be a challenge to it and we'll probably be a part of it. In terms of lobbying and getting our concerns heard, we're going to continue to be vocal on this.
You mentioned future litigation in a blog post you authored following the FCC's announcement. What type of legal action do you see happening?
The companies that will be involved in the actual appeal, their legal heads will be involved. I'll be personally involved. If people want to get in on this now, they should. There is room for that to happen with less than a month to voting.
How can in-house lawyers at tech companies prep for the massive changes (potentially) ahead? Will there be changes in compliance and new liabilities for companies?
In the near term, probably not so much. We're not going to see an immediate turn to websites being blocked, but its a longer-term slide into a business model that looks more like cable where people have to pay to play. Some of these changes be invisible to some people, but if a company becomes big enough they'll see, because they'll be asked to pay more. The bigger problem isn't that it manifests itself in visible ways, but that [the harm isn't] readily seen by people. At the end of the day you'll have a very small group of companies that control what content gets prioritized on the internet and it won't be transparent what's going on. Companies should stay vigilant and listen to their users, and react very quickly when they hear that another party seems to have better access speeds.
Have you spoken with other GCs about this? What's the general mood right now?
I think everyone's disappointed in what came out. It wasn't unexpected. Chairman [Ajit] Pai made it clear what he wanted to do. If there's any surprise, its how sweeping it was and how much of a rollback it was. It wasn't changing a few things, it was completely sweeping back the rules. In doing so, I think the FCC may have overreached.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDigging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
5 minute readElaine Darr Brings Transformation and Value to DHL's Business
PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250