Apparently the giant Telecoms and Comcast finally won out; but this decision may reflect larger issues about Federal Regulations.
As The NYTimes article notes, the Appeals Court referenced a SCOTUS ruling that said Courts don’t have to give Fed. Agency rulings preferential treatment and are free to strike such regulations as the courts deem unnecessary.
In its opinion, a three-judge panel pointed to a Supreme Court decision in June, known as Loper Bright, that overturned a 1984 legal precedent that gave deference to government agencies on regulations.
This approach has serious implications for what the regulatory landscape will be in general, and for all things AI related as well. Questions will arise about who knows what regulation is needed. Is it the judges? Or is it the “experts”? Or is it the lobbying interests that push on regulations? Could the “users” of a service possibly have a say? Would it be Congress?
The various US Courts of Appeal are spread out across the country and tend to reflect the views prevalent where they are located which makes for partisanship being a notable factor. As is who is in control of the executive and legislative branches which appoint the judges. Net Neutrality may now be yesterday’s news, but regulation of AI is kind of like the early days of the internet with a lot to be decided as far as rules and regulations.