Today, Representative Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) introduced the “Truth-In-Billing, Remedies, and User Empowerment over Fees” (TRUE Fees) Act to ensure that pay TV, cellular service, and broadband providers include “below-the-line” fee items in their advertised price for service.

Yesterday, Representatives Doug Collins (R-GA) and Mike Quigley (D-IL) introduced the “Electronic Court Records Reform Act” (ECRRA) to remove any and all paywalls on public court records. Currently, users must pay to obtain public court records through the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system. The ECRRA would guarantee free public access to these records through PACER by waiving all fees. Furthermore, the bill would also mandate updates to the PACER system, including a search function for court documents.

Today, the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission reached a political agreement on the proposed Copyright Directive. If enacted as currently reported, this EU-wide legislation will impose draconian copyright obligations on nearly all internet services and companies, requiring content-upload filters, convoluted and uncertain licensing agreements with the entertainment industries, and the payment of a link tax to news incumbents. Public Knowledge strongly opposes the mandates found in Article 13 and Article 11.

Today, Public Knowledge joined 43 other public interest, civil rights, racial justice, and consumer groups in a letter urging Congress to prioritize civil rights concerns when developing consumer privacy legislation. In the letter, Public Knowledge and other organizations argue that anti-discrimination principles need to be extended to the online economy in order to protect marginalized communities, especially communities of color.

Public Knowledge Senior Policy Counsel Phillip Berenbroick will testify before the U.S. House Committee on Energy & Commerce Wednesday, February 13 at 10:00 a.m. His testimony in the hearing on “Protecting Consumers and Competition: An Examination of the T-Mobile and Sprint Merger” will argue that the proposed merger is a bad deal for consumers, competition, and America’s wireless future -- and would increase wireless prices and fail to deliver any verifiable or merger-specific benefits.