Six lawsuits against FCC's 5G idiocy – that $2bn windfall for telcos – is bundled into one appeals court sueball

Tenth Circuit wins lawsuit lottery over terrible policy


Six lawsuits filed against controversial new 5G rules drawn up by America's communications watchdog have been bundled into one, and will be heard at the Tenth Circuit of Appeals.

A lottery held late last week selected the appeals court that covers the middle of the country – Oklahoma, Utah, Colorado, etc – and the appellants, who range from West Coast cities to East Coast telco operators – have been told this week to migrate their cases accordingly.

At the heart of the mass challenge is the FCC's recent decision to override state and local governments and insist there be a single flat-fee for installing new 5G cell nodes, as well as standardized national processes and contracts for approving new sites.

Due to its design, 5G will need many more cell sites packed closer together in order to offer greater speeds. As such the federal watchdog believes its standardized approach will cut red tape and therefore speed up rollout. The flat fee will be $270 per site per year – far lower than some existing agreements already reached by big cities – and the FCC claims this will free up billions of dollars that the telcos will then invest back into building out the network.

In effect, the regulator is letting wireless carriers pay way less money than expected to city coffers, cutting the corporations a $2bn discount.

The imposition of federal rules was met with fury by many local governments — including Los Angeles, San Jose and Huntington Beach in California; Las Vegas in Nevada; and Portland in Oregon – which came good on their threat to take legal action if the rules were approved, and sued the FCC claiming [PDF] it has overstepped its authority.

The FCC order violates the Constitution, they argue, because states should not be forced to carry out a program authorized by a federal regulator. They also argue that the new rules deprives them of their right to own property – because they are being told what they can, and cannot, do with their land.

Waste of time?

Perhaps more surprisingly, there is a big question mark over whether the new rules will actually result in the intended boost to the next-generation wireless technology. Last week, Verizon raised eyebrows when it said on a conference call with financial analysts that the new rules would have no impact on its 5G rollout plans and it may actually slow down current plans instead of expand them.

On top of that, the FCC is also being sued [PDF] by three telecoms operators – the very companies that the measure was supposed to benefit – because they claim it didn't go far enough.

AT&T, Verizon and Sprint say the FCC rules should have included so-called "deemed granted" provisions that would cause a new cell site to be automatically approved once the imposed application timelines had been passed.

Otherwise they will be forced to sue if local authorities miss the deadline – and that's a big waste of their time and money, the telcos cry.

By not giving the carriers the automatic right to install their equipment, the federal regulator had been "arbitrary and capricious" the telcos argue. And it was responsible for an "abuse of discretion." And its directive had been "inadequately reasoned."

Sheesh, even when you bend over backwards to help them, telco companies just want more. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022