Telecommunications

Today, the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) issued a decision revising and clarifying its regulatory framework for providers of interconnected voice over Internet protocol (“iVoIP”) services.  Most notably, the decision reopens the window for iVoIP providers to demonstrate that they do not provide services subject to a new license type that would, among other things…

Continue Reading California Reopens Opt-Out Period for Certain Interconnected VoIP Licenses and Refines Associated Regulatory Framework

On June 3, the European Commission published its Tech Sovereignty Package, a set of legislative and policy initiatives designed to address what the Commission characterizes as Europe’s technological dependencies on non-European suppliers. The Package marks a further step in the evolution of the EU’s technology policy, with initiatives spanning the full tech stack—from chips and infrastructure to software, cloud, and artificial intelligence. Through this “ecosystem” approach, the Commission seeks to reduce supply-side dependencies by strengthening domestic capabilities in Europe and stimulating demand in downstream sectors.

The Package comprises four components: two legislative proposals—(i) the Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA), and (ii) the Chips Act 2.0—as well as two non-legislative initiatives—(iii) the EU Open Source Strategy and (iv) a Strategic Roadmap for Digitalisation and AI in Energy.

This blog post provides an initial, high-level overview of the four initiatives through which the Commission seeks to advance a “European way” to tech sovereignty, with potential implications for industrial ecosystems in Europe and beyond, including cloud, telecoms, automotive, aeronautics, and defense sectors.

Continue Reading EU Tech Sovereignty Package

On 27 May 2026, the European Commission (“Commission”) published its proposal for a Regulation on the authorisation of systems providing mobile satellite services (“MSSs”) in the harmonised 2 GHz frequency band (1980–2010 MHz and 2170–2200 MHz) (the “MSS Regulation Proposal”). The existing rights of use in the band are due to expire in May 2027, and the Commission is using that deadline to overhaul the framework for granting spectrum authorisations for MSS provides. This Proposal will therefore be of particular interest to MSS providers wishing to expand their footprint in the EU, as well as terrestrial mobile network operators contemplating satellite partnerships, and other space sector participants, as it may increase the number of operators in the European MSS sector.
Continue Reading A Single EU Authorisation for Satellite Spectrum: The Commission’s Proposal for a New 2 GHz Mobile Satellite Services Regulation

On 19 March 2026, Advocate-General Capeta issued an opinion in the case of Elisa Eesti AS v Estonian Government Security Committee (C-354/24). This case concerned, among other things, whether a 2022 order from the Estonian Government for Elisa Eesti AS—a 5G network operator—to remove Huawei components from its network for national security reasons was subject to EU law, constituted a lawful restriction on the right to offer an electronic communications network, and amounted to a “deprivation of property” requiring compensation. AG Capeta concluded that the relevant Estonian regime was within scope of EU law—specifically the European Electronic Communications Code (“EECC”)—even though that regime allowed for the imposition of orders on electronic communications network (“ECN”) providers for national security reasons. She also concluded that the requirement to obtain prior authorization from the Estonian government for use of network equipment constituted a restriction on the freedom to provide an ECN, but that this could be justified on national security grounds if the decision was based on a genuine risk assessment that meets the requirements for proportionality under EU law. She stated that this determination should be left to the referring court. Finally, she concluded that the Estonian Government’s order did not amount to a “deprivation” of property for which compensation would be required, as it was instead a mere “restriction” on the use of property. Below, we describe these non-binding conclusions in more detail. The Court’s final ruling in this case will have significant implications for the European Commission’s proposed revisions to the EU Cybersecurity Act, which as drafted would—among other things—allow the Commission to require ECN providers to remove and cease using components from designated high-risk jurisdictions in their networks. See our prior blog post on the proposal for a revised Cybersecurity Act here. … Continue Reading CJEU Advocate-General indicates that communications network operators can lawfully be required to remove Chinese components, and that compensation is not required

As consumers have embraced “smart home” technology and specifically advanced locks and entryway security systems, some door lock companies have asked permission from the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) to use ultra-wideband technology (“UWB”) in their devices.  UWB technology has unique characteristics that can be used to enhance entryway security systems by working with low-power Bluetooth…

Continue Reading FCC Seeks Comment on Petition to Update Ultra-Wideband (UWB) Part 15 Rules

In late December 2025, the FCC updated its “Covered List” to add foreign-produced unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), commonly known as drones, and their critical components after an Executive Branch interagency body determined that they pose “unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States and to the safety and security of U.S. persons.” Subsequently…

Continue Reading FCC “Covered List” Updated to Include Certain Drones and Related Components, Subject to an Exception

On January 9, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a circuit split over the FCC’s authority to impose monetary forfeiture penalties through its administrative process.  The outcome could have significant implications for the FCC’s ability to pursue civil penalties in its enforcement cases.  For more information on the issues at stake, including background…

Continue Reading Update: Supreme Court Grants Cert in Cases Involving the FCC’s Monetary Penalty Authority

In 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued fines to four major telecommunications carriers—Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile—for allegedly failing to protect the geolocation data of their subscribers, which the FCC claimed violated its Customer Proprietary Network Information (“CPNI”) rules. To challenge the action, all four carriers had to first pay the fines, which they did.  They then petitioned for review of the FCC’s decision in various U.S. courts of appeals, arguing that the FCC’s procedure for adjudicating monetary fines violated their right to a jury trial as guaranteed by the Seventh Amendment. Verizon sought relief in the Second Circuit, T-Mobile (which had merged with Sprint) sought relief in the D.C. Circuit, and AT&T sought relief in the Fifth Circuit.

The Second Circuit and the D.C. Circuit held in favor of the FCC, rejecting the carriers’ argument that the FCC violated their Seventh Amendment rights. But the Fifth Circuit reached a different conclusion, holding that the FCC’s procedure did in fact violate AT&T’s right to a jury trial. The FCC (which lost in the Fifth Circuit) and Verizon (which lost in the Second Circuit) each has filed a petition for certiorari at the Supreme Court.

With a 2-1 federal circuit split and two certiorari petitions pending, some are predicting that there is a good chance that the Supreme Court will decide to consider the appeals. The dispute raises a fundamental question about the FCC’s authority to impose monetary penalties through its in-house administrative enforcement procedures. If the Supreme Court grants certiorari, it will be called upon to determine whether the Communications Act violates the Seventh Amendment by authorizing the FCC to order the payment of monetary penalties for violations of the Act, without guaranteeing the right to a jury trial. The resolution of this dispute thus could have significant implications for how the FCC enforces the law against telecommunications carriers and other entities subject to its jurisdiction.

Both petitions for certiorari have been distributed for a January 9, 2026 conference.

Continue Reading FCC Privacy Enforcement May Face More Constitutional Scrutiny: Supreme Court Review of FCC CPNI Fines Sought Amid Circuit Split

Updated December 4, 2025.  Originally posted November 26, 2025.

In November, the Federal Communication Commission (“FCC”) released a Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“FNPRM”) proposing to eliminate or modify various broadband label rules for Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”).  The FCC’s primary rationale for these proposed changes is that the rules are cumbersome for ISPs…

Continue Reading FCC Seeks Comment on Proposed Changes to Broadband Label Transparency Rules

Updated December 4, 2025.  Originally posted November 13, 2025

At the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) Open Meeting in late October, the agency unanimously adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes to end certain legacy interconnection obligations of Local Exchange Carriers (LECs) to accelerate the transition to all Internet Protocol (IP) networks.

Currently, certain…

Continue Reading FCC Proposes Rule Changes to Accelerate Transition to IP Networks