Last week, we told you that President Trump signed bipartisan legislation establishing minimum security requirements for Internet of Things (“IoT”) devices used by the federal government. The Act is the first of its kind at the federal level, aimed at protecting the security of IoT devices and services in the marketplace. The Act governs federal purchases of IoT devices and services but is intended to leverage the purchasing power of the federal government to affect the broader IoT market indirectly.  Thus, without (yet) setting standards for all IoT devices and services, the legislation nevertheless is significant whether or not a company sells its product to the government.

Continue Reading NIST Wastes No Time in Implementing the IoT Cybersecurity Act of 2020

On December 4, 2020, President Trump signed bipartisan legislation establishing minimum security requirements for Internet of Things (“IoT”) devices used by the federal government. The legislation, H.R. 1668, passed the House in September and the Senate in November.

The Internet of Things Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2020 draws upon work that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) has been doing to address cybersecurity for IoT devices. Referencing work done over the Summer on IoT Device Cybersecurity, the Act directs NIST to issue standards for the “appropriate use and management” of IoT devices owned or controlled by federal agencies. NIST, which already was working on the federal profile of IoT uses, is directed to issue these guideline by March 4, 2021. Within 6 months of that date, the Office of Management and Budget is to review agency information security policies and principles based upon NIST’s guidelines. And, adding a hammer to the incentives, federal government acquisition standards are to be revised to implement these standards. In other words, federal contractors will be required to adhere to the NIST standards in IoT devices sold to the federal government.

Continue Reading President Signs IoT Cybersecurity Act of 2020

In the latest episode of Full Spectrum’s Inside the TCPA series, we discuss a series of FCC orders that require implementation of a call authentication framework called STIR/SHAKEN. It covers the FCC’s anti-robocall program, the specifics of STIR/SHAKEN, its implementation requirements and deadlines, and other implications for service providers, including what might be ahead in

The upcoming election will bring changes to the FCC, regardless of which party wins the White House. In this episode of Kelley Drye’s Full Spectrum, the Communications group is joined by Dana Wood, co-chair of Kelley Drye’s Government Relations and Public Policy (GRPP) practice, for a discussion of the potential organizational and policy changes

This edition of Full Spectrum’s recurring series on FCC enforcement features a “decision of the month” illustrating key FCC enforcement trends. For September, they cover the proposed fine against BarrierFree, where the FCC took a hard look at broadband reporting requirements and the continuing violation theory. The episode discusses why all providers should pay attention

Join Partner Steve Augustino and the FCBA’s Internet of Things committee for “Furthering U.S. Drone Operations: An Update on FAA and Spectrum Policy Developments,” a virtual CLE on Monday, June 15th from 3:00  – 5:10 p.m. Steve will moderate the first of two panels. His session,  “Furthering UAS Deployment in U.S. Airspace,” will provide an

In a move spurred by Twitter’s decision to fact-check a pair of President Trump’s tweets, the president recently signed a multi-pronged “Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship” with the claimed intention of stopping online platforms from making content moderation decisions that discriminate against particular viewpoints. The President, along with other conservative political figures and commentators, have frequently claimed that social media platforms have used content moderation practices to stifle conservative speech. The Executive Order (“EO”) evokes the First Amendment, calling online platforms the 21st century “public square,” where people go to express and debate different views, and saying the allegedly biased content moderation practices undermine that free expression.

The most controversial aspects of the order are its interpretation of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (“CDA”)—the statutory provision that shields online service providers from liability for user-generated content and the decisions they make about how to moderate that content—and its attempt to prompt the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) to adopt regulations further interpreting the law. Reform of Section 230 has been under consideration in Congress for years, with Republicans and Democrats both offering different—and mostly contrary—critiques about how online platforms have failed to act in accordance with the statute while also benefitting from the liability protections.

Other directives in the EO attempt to elicit other parts of the federal government to discipline online platforms for their content moderation practices. Absent Congressional action, the EO’s directives appear to stand on shaky legal ground and are likely to have limited legal impact.  However, the issuance of the EO alone may be unlawful, at least according to a complaint challenging the constitutionality of the EO filed with the U.S. District Court in D.C. by the Center for Democracy & Technology (“CDT”). According to the complaint, the EO violates the First Amendment, which strictly limits the government’s ability to abridge speech, by retaliating against Twitter for exercising its right to comment on the President’s statements and because it “seeks to curtail and chill the constitutionally protected speech of all online platforms and individuals” by demonstrating the government’s willingness to retaliate against those who criticize the government.

Continue Reading Section 230 Executive Order Strikes Back at Twitter, But Legal Impact Likely to be Limited

The FCC plans to create a new “5G Fund” offering up to $9 billion over ten years to support the deployment of wireless broadband and voice services in rural and other hard-to-serve areas. Under a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) adopted at the FCC’s April meeting, the 5G Fund would operate as the wireless counterpart to the wireline-focused Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”) approved earlier this year and replace Phase II of the Mobility Fund, which the FCC mothballed in 2018 after questions arose about reported coverage data. The NPRM proposes awarding funding through auction in two phases. Phase I would provide up to $8 billion in support, with $680 million reserved for deployments on Tribal lands. Phase II would provide up to $1 billion (plus any funding remaining after Phase I) for deployments for precision agriculture and particularly hard-to-serve areas like farms and ranches. The 5G Fund would exclude areas covered by the recently-approved T-Mobile/Sprint merger, which included a commitment to serve 90% of rural Americans within six years. The NPRM is just the first step towards launching the 5G Fund and presents an opportunity for all stakeholders to provide their input on the fundamental policies and procedures the will govern the new program.

Continue Reading FCC Proposes 5G Fund for Rural Wireless Networks, But Timing Remains Uncertain

The FCC has proposed new rules to eliminate several obscure telecommunications charges that were either mandated or authorized for price regulated local exchange carriers and then mirrored by many competitive telecommunications providers. At its March 2020 Open Meeting, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would eliminate the FCC’s regulation of the Subscriber Line Charge, and several other end-user access charges largely created as cost-recovery mechanism during access charge reforms in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. The NPRM also would prohibit all carriers from both listing these charges in their tariffs and breaking out these charges into separate line items on customer bills. These moves are touted by the Commission as relieving carriers of price regulation and increasing transparency for consumers.

Continue Reading FCC Initiates Rulemaking to Deregulate End-User Charges and Simplify Customer Bills