In a 2016 Federal court ruling, the courts decided that high-speed internet service is a utility. This was a victory for start-up tech firms, microbusinesses and everyday consumers. They all use and depend on the internet on a daily basis. While some Americans cannot afford high-speed internet, many Americans find it difficult to function without it. Therefore, the Federal Communications Commission (F.C.C.) decided high-speed internet is a necessity and the courts agreed. This ruling affirms that high-speed internet is as important as telephones and electrical power in the lives of Americans. It is not a luxury.
The decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was made in a case about net neutrality. Net neutrality is a rule that ensures internet service providers deliver the same internet service to all its consumers. This keeps companies who can afford to pay for faster speed and broader service from having an unfair advantage over their competitors who cannot afford it. Without net neutrality broadband providers could allow some content on the web to be delivered at slower speeds. Consumers could be charged extra for better service and have to pay more to be able to receive some content. Only two judges were in agreement. The dissenting Judge, Stephen Williams referred to the rules an “unreasoned patchwork”. He felt that competition in the broadband industry would be jeopardized by the ruling of the F.C.C. Google and Netflix are in favor of the neutrality rules.
When the rule was put in place Ajit Pai was a commissioner with the F.C.C. He was appointed by President Obama in May 2012. Ajit Pai, a Republican commissioner, was outspokenly against the regulation of broadband as a utility from the very beginning. Ajit Pai encouraged cable and telecommunications firms to continue the legal challenges against the rule. Cable, telecommunications and wireless internet providers sued to overturn the regulations put in place by the F.C.C, claiming that the F.C.C. exceeded its authority. This resulted in the 2016 ruling, upholding the decision by the F.C.C. The legal battle is anticipated to continue.
In January 2017, President Trump named Ajit Pai the new Chairman of the F.C.C. Since Mr. Pai took office, the F.C.C. closed an investigation involving T-Mobile, AT&T and Verizon. The investigation was concerning their zero-rating practices. Some view this as the dismantling of net neutrality by the F.C.C.
The past few months have been loaded with bits and pieces of information regarding travels to Cuba, and the normalization of our relationship with the next door neighbor. As our partnership with the country continues to improve, it is imperative for us to become familiar with Cuban legislature and its laws. It has been over 50 years since the Cuban Embargo was put in place, and establishing appropriate channels to exchanging legal information and policies will be very helpful towards tourism between both countries.
The Florida Bar Association is sponsoring a group of 37 lawyers to fly to Havana this week and attend a four day seminar. The objective of this trip will be for US attorneys to become familiar with Cuba’s legal system and politics. Given the overwhelming numbers of travels that are planned to happen in the next few years, this council will also look at the economic state of Cuba and bring back these important findings.
The four day excursion will also focus on the understanding of foreign organizations operating in Cuba, and the legal ramification that will follow their establishment. The attorneys will also become familiar with specific regulations regarding investment opportunities, and business dealings. During this trip the attorneys will also be meeting with their counterparts from the Cuban Bar Association, as well as state officials. These exchanges will place light on a lot of inquiries US companies have about owning land or establishing businesses in Cuba. Topics on telecommunications and banking, as well as the supply of water and electricity are some of the most immediate questions investors would like to know. On a lighter note, the 37 lawyers will also be able to tour some of the country’s historical establishments, such as the Museum of Cuban Art and have a performance of Cuban music and dance.
Cuba is taking a cautious response in relation the US inquiries and interests. Given that there are no private practices all commercial opportunities have to pass through government- run entities.
Earlier this May, the Herald Tribune wrote a piece regarding the false arrest of Cooper Moore, for an outstanding aggravated battery assault from June 2014. Cooper was arrested by local police as soon as he landed on the Grand Cayman islands on a vacation with his current girlfriend. While he was being held up, Cooper asked the police to explain why he was detained, but they did not give an explanation and instead locked him up.
At a loss for justice, Mr. Cooper’s parents contacted the Byrd Law Firm, which in collaboration with a private investigator put together a case that was aimed to clearing Cooper Moore’s name. According to the documents, Cooper was wrongfully accused for partaking in a fight at a Florida Smokin’ Joes. However, the investigators found that Moore was not involved, and a witness revealed the correct name of the person who was involved. Due to these findings the charges were quickly dropped.
According to an officer who first responded to the scene, Moore’s name was first brought to him by a bar employee who showed him the suspects Facebook page. Officer Dodge, who was on the scene said that “people lie to us everyday and they don’t want to tell the truth especially if they are associated with someone involved in a crime.”
According to The Innocence Project, misidentification of witnesses in regards to the crime scene is one of the leading reasons of wrongfully convicting and imprisoning people in the United States. The article also points out that the recollection of witness memory of the crime scene is even less credible after they have been shown countless of photographs of the alleged victim.
Further evidence of the case used by lawyers at The Byrd Law Firm was Moore’s alibi and the fact that he was never contacted by the Sarasota Police Department. Cooper was never informed of his alleged involvement in the bar fight, and a warrant for his arrest was issued shortly after. Moore was not aware of these developments until policemen picked him up months later while he was vacationing with his girlfriend.
Derek Byrd, attorney for Cooper Moore, states that the findings regarding his client and other suspects should have been turned over to a detective for the facts to be checked and eventually cleared. Cooper told his attorney that during the night in question, he was home and had records to prove that he never left his apartment.
With the help of his attorney, Derek Byrd, Moore was able to clear his name and no longer face 8 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. He hopes that the police find the right person responsible for this fight and is willing to help in any way he can.