Cybertelecom Federal Internet Law & Policy An Educational Project

Common Carriers: Reference

Legislation

• Interstate Commerce Act of 1887
• Cullom Report of 1886
• Codify Common Law Tort obligations. Turn something that needed to go to court for enforcement into something handled by agency
• See Interstate Commerce Commission
• Mann-Elkins Act of 1910
• See Interstate Commerce Commission
• 45 CONG. REc. 6976 (1910).
• The Communications Act of 1934
• Computer Inquiries (creating dichotomy between enhanced service and basic services (common carriage) )
• Telecommunications Act of 1996
• FCC Cable Modem Delcaratory Ruling (2002) Classified cable modem Ingternet access service as a Title I Information Service, creating shadow common carriage.
• Problems:
• Unavailability of communications services
• threatens financial viability of USPS
• Cascading failures among infrastructures

Hearings

• Decline of Regulated Common Carriage: Hearings Before the Surface Transportation Subcommittee of the Committee on Commerce, United States Senate, Eighty-seventh Congress, First Session, to Determine the Causes and Extent of the Relative Decline of Regulated Carriers as Against Other Types of Carriage and Evaluate the Resulting Effect on the Adequacy of Our National Transportation System, March 22-23, June 27-28, and August 30, 1961

Cases

Supreme Court

• FCC v. Midwest Video Corp., 440 U.S. 689 (1979)
• United States v. Southwestern Cable Co., 392 U.S. 157 (1968)
• Western Union v Esteve Bros 256 U.S. 566 (1921)
• Primrose v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 154 U.S. 1 , 14 Sup. Ct. 1098 (1894) ("classification of rates and the limitations upon the company's liability were declared to be reasonable and valid, in the absence of willful misconduct or gross negligence.")
• Interstate Commerce Commission v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., 145 U.S. 263, 275 (1892)
• Munn v. Illinois, 1876 Sup Ct Rev 313 (presence of monopoly justifies regulation)
• Western Union Telegraphy v. Pendleton, 122 U.S. 356, 7 Sup. Ct. 1126, 30 L.Ed. 1187
• The Propeller Niagara v. Cordes, 62 U.S. (21 How.) 7 (1858) (US Common Carriage law is taken from English common law precedent)

Appellate Court

• Cellco Partnership v. FCC, 700 F.3d 534 (D.C. Cir. 2012) ("“common carriage is not all or nothing—there is a gray area in which although a given regulation might be applied to common carriers, the obligations imposed are not common carriage per se.” Id. In this “space between per se common carriage and per se private carriage,” we continued, “the Commission’s determination that a regulation does or does not confer common carrier status warrants deference.” " p. 547)
• National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. FCC, 525 F.2d 630, 642 (D.C. Cir. 1976) (“NARUC I”)
• Muskogee Nat. Tel. Co. v. Hall, 118 Fed. 382, 55 CCA 208
• Sunset Teleph. & Teleg. Co. v. City of Eureka, 172 Fed. 755

State Court

• Re Pennsylvania Tel. Co., 48 NJ Eq. 91, 20 Atl. 846, 27 Am. St. Rep. 462
• NW Tel. Co. v. Chicago, 76 Minn. 334, 79 N.W. 315

English Cases

• Harris v. Packwood, 3 Taunt. 264, 128 Eng. Rep. 105 (1810).
• Allnut v. Inglis, 12 East 527, 104 Eng Rep. 206 (1810).
• Bolt v. Stennet, 8 TR 606, 101 Eng Rep 1572 (1800)
• Hyde v. Navigation Co., 5 TR 389, 101 Eng. Rep. 218 (1793)
• Foward v. Pittard [1 TR 27, 33, 99 Eng. Rep. 953, 956-57 (1785)
• Proprietors of Trent Navigation v. Ward, 3 Esp. 127, 131, 170 Eng. Rep. 562, 563 (1785)
• Dale v. Hall, 1 Wils. KB 281, 95 Eng. Rep. 619 (1750)
• Coggs v. Bernard [2 Ld. Raym. 909, 918, 92 Eng. Rep. 107, 112 (1703)
• Bastard v. Bastard, 2 Show. K.B. 81, 89 Eng. Rep. 807 (31 Chas. II, 1679).
• Morse v. Slue, 1 Vent 190, 238, 86 Eng. Rep. 129, 159 (24 and 25 Car. II 1672

Books

• Barbara Cherry, The Crisis in Telecommunications Carrier Liability (1999 Kluwer)
• Henk Brands, Evan Leo, The Law and Regulation of Telecommunications Carriers (Artech House 1999)
• Daniel Brenner, Law and Regulation of Common Carriers in the Communications Industry (West View Press 1998)
• John Thorne, Peter W. Huber, Michael K. Kellogg, Federal Broadband Law 289 (1995) (chapter on common carriage)

Papers

• J. ALLDREDGE, RATE-MAKING FOR COMMON CARRIERS § 69 (1929)
• 3 W Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England 219 (3d ed. 1770)
• Barbara Cherry
  • Barbara A. Cherry, Misusing Network Neutrality to Eliminate Common Carriage Threatens Free Speech and the Postal System, 484 N. Kentucky. L.R. 483 (2006)
  • Barbara A. Cherry, Utilizing "Essentiality of Access" Analyses to Mitigate Risky, Costly and Untimely Government Interventions in Converging Telecommunications Technologies and Markets, 11 COMMLAw CONSPECTUS 251 (2003).
  • Cherry, Barbara A., The Rise of Shadow Common Carriers: A Legacy of Deregulatory Broadband Policies (September 24, 2011). TPRC 2011. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1995162
• Kenneth A. Cox & William J Brynes, The Common Carrier Provisions - A Product of Evolutionary Development, in A Legislative History of the Communications Act of 1934, 25 (1989)
• Daniel Eldredge, Classifying Cruise Ships as Common Carriers under the Shipping Act, a Jurisdictional Struggle: American Association of Cruse Passengers v. Carnival Cruise Lines, 15 Tul Mar. L.J. 397, 399 (1991).
• FCC In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning Rates for Competitive Common Carrier Services and Facilities Authorizations Therefor, 1981 WL 158659, 84 FCC2d 445, NO. FCC 80-742, CC 79-252 Appendix B (Jan 16, 1981).
• Rob Frieden, Schizophrenia Among Carriers: How Common and Private Carriers Trade Places, 3 Mich. Telecomm. Tech. L. Rev. 19 (1997).
• Hargrave Law Tracts 77-78 (1787). See McCallister, Lord Hale and Business Affected with a Public Internet, 43 Harv. L. Rev. 759 (1930).
• Hale, A Treatise in Three Pars,in 1COLLECTION OF TRACTS RELATIVE TO THE LAW OF ENGLAND 1, 72 (F. Hargrave ed. 1787) (describing ports as common carriers)
• G. E. Hale and Rosemary D. Hale, Competition or Control I: The Chaos in the Cases, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 106, p. 641, 1958
• OW Holmes
  • OW Holmes, Common Carriers and the Common Law, 13 Am L Rev 40 (1879).
  • OW Holmes, The Common Law 180-205 (1881).
• Geoff Huston, The Uncommon Carrier, The ISP Column (Jan. 2002);
• Thomas J. Hutton, The Proposed Deregulation of Domestic Common Carrier Telecommunications, 69 Cal. L. Rev. 455 (1981)
• William Jones, The Common Carrier Concept as Applied to Telecom: A Historical Perspective (~1980) filled with the FCC as a part of the Competitive Carriers Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 79-252 (1980) and as a part of IBM's reply comments in Computer & Communications Industry Assoc. v. FCC, No. 80-1478 (filed 1982).
• James Kent, Commentaries on American Law, Lecture 40: of Bailment. (1826)
• The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon On * Common Carrier *
• Fiona Macmillan and Michael Blakeney, The Copyright Liability of Communications Carriers, Journal of Information, Law and Technology (31 October 1997) WORD
• New York
• New York State Public Service Commission, Opinion and Order Adopting Regulations Concerning Common Carriage, Case 89-C-099, Issued and Effective February 20, 1990. Proceedings initiated by the author when he served as a Public Service Commissioner for New York State.
• Press Release, Public Service Committion Invites Comments on Proposed Rules Codifying Common Carrier Obligations of Telephone Companies, C89C099 (New York October 11 1989)
• Phil Nichols, Redefining "Common Carrier": The FCC's Attempt at Deregulation through Redefinition, Duke Law Journal, Vol: 1987:500
• Eli M. Noam, Beyond Liberalization II: The Impending Doom of Common Carriage, 18 Telecomm. Pol'y 435 (1994).
• Pitsch, Peter K. and Bresnahan, Arthur W. (1996) "Common Carrier Regulation of Telecommunications Contracts and the Private Carrier Alternative," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 48: Iss. 3, Article 4.
• Gustavus H. Robinson, The Public Utility Concept in American Law, 41 Harv. L. Rev. 278, 281 (1928) (collecting cases).
• James B. Speta, A Common Carrier Approach to Internet Interconnections,  54 FCLJ 225 (2002)
• David Swarbrick, Common Carrier, law-bytes@swarb.co.uk (n.d.)
• Harry M. Trebing, Common Carrier Regulation - The Silent Crisis
• Trebing & Melody, An Evaluation of Domestic Communications Pricing Practices and Policies, in x PRSlDENT's TASK Fopc oN CoMmIurmcATIONs PoLicy, THE DoEsnc TELEcoMMuNcATIoNs CARRR INwusTmY (Staff papers, 1969).**

News

• Jettisoned: 8 Centuries of Common Carriage Law, Peerflow 3/13/2008