Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
Related: About this forumT-Mobile may be first in line to take advantage of SCOTUS's Chevron decision to vacate an $80 million FCC fine
T-Mobile may be first in line to take advantage of SCOTUSs Chevron decision to vacate an $80 million FCC fine
In Featured News by Wireless Estimator July 2, 2024
On February 27, unaware that the following day, the US Supreme Court would decide to limit the broad regulatory authority of federal agencies such as the FCC, T-Mobile USA, Inc. filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, contesting a substantial forfeiture order issued by the agency.
Missouri Sheriff Cory Hutcheson wanted to get tough on drug dealers but spent six months in prison after being convicted of illegally tracking mobile phone users without a warrant by GPS locations services provider Securus Technologies. He could have faced up to 20 months but skated on a sweetheart deal. However, the FCC got tough on the major carriers who allowed alleged unlawful GPS access with a $200 million fine. T-Mobile is appealing the decision and will likely be helped by Fridays US Supreme Court decision.
The outcome of this case, likely influenced by the SCOTUS decision, could set a precedent for how federal agencies interpret and enforce ambiguous statutes. A ruling favoring T-Mobile could limit the FCCs future regulatory actions and interpretations, particularly concerning new or evolving technologies and data privacy concerns. ... The proposed $80 million fine against T-Mobile and additional fines for three other carriers stemmed from allegations of mishandling customer proprietary network information (CPNI), specifically mobile device location data.
The dispute centers on a 2018 revelation that leading US wireless carriers, including T-Mobile, had been sharing real-time location data with third-party aggregators without obtaining proper customer consent. This practice came to light following reports that a Missouri sheriff had used a location-finding service to track mobile phone users illegally. In response, the FCC initiated enforcement actions against AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon, resulting in nearly $200 million in fines.
On April 29, 2024, a divided FCC, in a 3-2 vote, with Republican Commissioners Brendan Carr and Nathan Simington dissenting, concluded that T-Mobile violated Section 222 of the Communications Act and related regulations. The Commission imposed an $80 million penalty on T-Mobile, asserting that the company failed to take reasonable measures to protect against unauthorized access to customer location data unrelated to voice calls.
{snip}
In Featured News by Wireless Estimator July 2, 2024
On February 27, unaware that the following day, the US Supreme Court would decide to limit the broad regulatory authority of federal agencies such as the FCC, T-Mobile USA, Inc. filed a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, contesting a substantial forfeiture order issued by the agency.
Missouri Sheriff Cory Hutcheson wanted to get tough on drug dealers but spent six months in prison after being convicted of illegally tracking mobile phone users without a warrant by GPS locations services provider Securus Technologies. He could have faced up to 20 months but skated on a sweetheart deal. However, the FCC got tough on the major carriers who allowed alleged unlawful GPS access with a $200 million fine. T-Mobile is appealing the decision and will likely be helped by Fridays US Supreme Court decision.
The outcome of this case, likely influenced by the SCOTUS decision, could set a precedent for how federal agencies interpret and enforce ambiguous statutes. A ruling favoring T-Mobile could limit the FCCs future regulatory actions and interpretations, particularly concerning new or evolving technologies and data privacy concerns. ... The proposed $80 million fine against T-Mobile and additional fines for three other carriers stemmed from allegations of mishandling customer proprietary network information (CPNI), specifically mobile device location data.
The dispute centers on a 2018 revelation that leading US wireless carriers, including T-Mobile, had been sharing real-time location data with third-party aggregators without obtaining proper customer consent. This practice came to light following reports that a Missouri sheriff had used a location-finding service to track mobile phone users illegally. In response, the FCC initiated enforcement actions against AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon, resulting in nearly $200 million in fines.
On April 29, 2024, a divided FCC, in a 3-2 vote, with Republican Commissioners Brendan Carr and Nathan Simington dissenting, concluded that T-Mobile violated Section 222 of the Communications Act and related regulations. The Commission imposed an $80 million penalty on T-Mobile, asserting that the company failed to take reasonable measures to protect against unauthorized access to customer location data unrelated to voice calls.
{snip}
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
T-Mobile may be first in line to take advantage of SCOTUS's Chevron decision to vacate an $80 million FCC fine (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Jul 2024
OP
Lovie777
(15,220 posts)1. So consumers are fucked........................
including the GQPs.
MOMFUDSKI
(7,080 posts)3. MAGA jerks don't understand they are as
screwed as the Dems they so despise. They are caught in the autocratic spider web but still think they are gods chosen.
Turbineguy
(38,502 posts)2. Well let's hope they share with some of the Justices
This is no time to be a cheapskate.