FCC Chairman's Proposal Will Radically Change The Rules Of The Internet

[exlude]

Of course you aren't

That is quite literally the exact opposite of telling you what to expect.

[exlude]

Some initial comments.

In our little world, and in my decades of interaction with it, I’ve felt, and still feel, that the FCC has tried to stay focused on solving problems and avoided turning issues into dogma. Every chairman in my memory, including the current one, has faced political stampedes of one sort or another. Yet the agency has always tried to find a middle ground and a consensus win. They’ve understood that a win, unlike a fight, is the product of reaching out to both sides, and working in a bipartisan way to find a solution. A win is the product of compromise, thoughtful policy, and a genuine desire to find the answer to a complex set of issues.

We had such a situation – and a bipartisan win – in the 2010 net neutrality rule. Unfortunately, this was undone by a court decision, facing us with the same situation a second time. Today, an Administration and an FCC that appeared headed toward another bipartisan win on net neutrality were driven instead to a partisan fight. The 3-2 FCC vote, along party lines, for sweeping new regulation of the Internet, is a rejection of the compromise win and an embrace, however reluctant, of the political fight. It’s unfortunate that this single issue, more than any other, has over the course of ten years caused a divisive spirit to spread to an agency that has long sought unanimity on significant long term issues, and generally found it. A 5-0 decision doesn’t leave a lot of room for either side to continue the argument, while a 3-2 decision, particularly on issues of such broad scope, is an invitation to revisiting the decision, over and over and over.

We know that our business has grown and thrived because consumers want access to everything that the Internet makes possible, and we want to meet that demand. This is why we have no issue with the principles of transparency and the no blocking, no throttling, and no fast lanes rules incorporated in today’s FCC Order. But we remain deeply concerned that implementing those principles through Title II will do more harm to the vibrant Internet ecosystem than good.

While we don’t agree that using Title II is necessary, we are encouraged that the Commission has apparently forborne from numerous statutory provisions and cumbersome regulations, which will alleviate some of the most troubling aspects of using Title II. But we have not yet read the Order as adopted by the Commission, and we are concerned with what some have reported as incomplete legal forbearance in important areas. So we will need to await release of the Order so we – and everyone else – can review completely all of the actions taken through today’s important vote. Specifically, after seeing the Order, we’ll have to engage in additional internal scrutiny on what our investment plans with respect to broadband will be going forward.

After today, the only “certainty” in the Open Internet space is that we all face inevitable litigation and years of regulatory uncertainty challenging an Order that puts in place rules that most of us agree with. We believe that the best way to avoid this would be for Congress to act. We are confident this can be done in a bi-partisan manner with a consensus approach that accomplishes the common goals of stakeholders on all sides of the open Internet debate without the unnecessary focus on legal jurisdiction and the unnecessary regulatory overhang from 80 year-old language and provisions that were never intended to be applied to the Internet.

The Commission’s historic decision today to promote and protect an open Internet is vital to consumers and companies of all sizes – particularly small businesses, start-ups and entrepreneurs – that depend on the Internet to communicate, conduct business and serve their customers. Today’s action is a defeat for those companies that want to exert gatekeeper control over the Internet and a clear victory for individual choice, free expression, competition and the Internet-driven free market economy.

COMPTEL commends the Commission for ensuring an open Internet by prohibiting blocking, throttling, paid prioritization and unreasonable discrimination that would prohibit consumers from obtaining the online content, applications and services of their choice. Our broad membership – which includes top Internet companies, over-the-top providers, Internet backbone operators, wireless and enterprise service providers – praise the Commission for its strong action and clear commitment to the innovation, investment and pro-growth policy for an open Internet.

We are pleased that the Commission followed the evidence in the record and determined that ISPs have threatened and can continue to threaten the open Internet at the interconnection points they control. By providing a complaint process, the Commission can now ensure that interconnection is not used to evade the open Internet protections, and it will be able to address cases of abuse that are harming or threaten to harm ISPs’ customers and the virtuous circle of innovation and investment.

“It would be hard to overstate how big of a deal this is for consumers and the future of the Internet. It’s a huge win after years of fierce debates and massive opposition from the biggest providers of Internet service.

“We’re not out of the woods yet. We’re into the woods, really. We expect opponents to look for every angle they can to stop these rules, whether in court or in Congress. It should be obvious, with the millions of people who spoke out in favor of these rules, that the battle should end now. We’re going to keep the pressure on to preserve these consumer protections.”

“Today, the FCC took one of the most regulatory steps in its history. It began regulating the Internet, abruptly abandoning a bipartisan national commitment to limited government involvement that has reigned for decades.

“This extraordinary action has been justified by the desire to preserve net neutrality, but the FCC Order goes well beyond that reasonable objective. The FCC has taken the overwhelming support for an open Internet and pried open the door to heavy-handed government regulation in a space celebrated for its free enterprise. The Commission has breathed new life into the decayed telephone regulatory model and applied it to the most dynamic, free-wheeling and innovative platform in history.

“Since the dawn of broadband Internet service, consumers have enjoyed a fully open Internet. Our industry has always been committed to providing that experience to our customers. The day after this Order becomes law, consumers will see nothing different in their experience. However, they surely will bear the burden of new taxes and increased costs, and they will likely wait longer for faster and more innovative networks since investment will slow in the face of bureaucratic oversight.”

“The net neutrality debate is about who picks winners and losers online: Internet service providers or consumers. Today, the FCC settled it: Consumers win.

“Today’s order is a meaningful step towards ensuring ISPs cannot shift bad conduct upstream to where they interconnect with content providers like Netflix. Net neutrality rules are only as strong as their weakest link, and it’s incumbent on the FCC to ensure these interconnection points aren’t used to end-run the principles of an open Internet.

“Given the lack of competition among broadband providers, today’s other FCC decision preventing regulations that thwart local investment in new broadband infrastructure also is an important step toward ensuring greater consumer choice. These actions kick off a new era that puts the consumer, not litigious corporate giants, at the center of competition policy.”

“Today’s decision by the FCC to encumber broadband internet services with badly antiquated regulations is a radical step that presages a time of uncertainty for consumers, innovators and investors. Over the past two decades a bipartisan, light-touch policy approach unleashed unprecedented investment and enabled the broadband internet age consumers now enjoy.

The FCC today chose to change the way the commercial internet has operated since its creation. Changing a platform that has been so successful should be done, if at all, only after careful policy analysis, full transparency, and by the legislature, which is constitutionally charged with determining policy. As a result, it is likely that history will judge today’s actions as misguided.

“The FCC’s move is especially regrettable because it is wholly unnecessary,” continued the company that, once again, sued to have the old rules overturned and created the vacuum for the new ones. “The FCC had targeted tools available to preserve an open internet, but instead chose to use this order as an excuse to adopt 300-plus pages of broad and open-ended regulatory arcana that will have unintended negative consequences for consumers and various parts of the internet ecosystem for years to come.”

More compiled at: http://consumerist.com/2015/02/26/fr...utrality-vote/

[SS Junk]

"You like your cable service provider? You can keep it."

[Denny]

You like your porn? You can keep it.

[SS Junk]

I never said I didn't like it here.

Right. Those who complain are usually not satisfied. Only reason you say this is because in order to move elsewhere it would take money and balls...

You like your porn? You can keep it.

At least for another two years, until the wicked Religious Right takes office.

[exlude]

"You like your cable service provider? You can keep it."

I wish I had a choice, where I live it's Comcast or Charter. When I was living in VA, Comcast only. El Paso had TWC or AT&T.

[SS Junk]

Only choice is Comcast were I live as well, and we're getting railed.

[Craizie]

Only choice is Comcast were I live as well, and we're getting railed.

My only choice as well.

[lowthreeohz]

We get xfinity cable otherwise its shentel DSL out here. Fuck Comcast/xfinity.

[matts5.0]

I wish I had a choice, where I live it's Comcast or Charter. When I was living in VA, Comcast only. El Paso had TWC or AT&T.

Hell I liked Charter.

[exlude]

Hell I liked Charter.

I have Charter and they're the better of the two between them and Comcast, but I wouldn't consider them great. Service/pricing aside, their hardware is antiquated.

[racrguy]

Right. Those who complain are usually not satisfied. Only reason you say this is because in order to move elsewhere it would take money and balls...


At least for another two years, until the wicked Religious Right takes office.

News flash, asshole. People can be more than content with less than the best.

[SS Junk]

News flash, asshole. People can be more than content with less than the best.

Perhaps you should find a place that suits your needs so you don't wallow in misery and complain? The only ones I know of who whine about their surroundings yet do nothing about it, and then backpeddle when called on it are Liberals. Happened almost every day when I worked in DC.

[Craizie]

Perhaps you should find a place that suits your needs so you don't wallow in misery and complain? The only ones I know of who whine about their surroundings yet do nothing about it, and then backpeddle when called on it are Liberals. Happened almost every day when I worked in DC.

What the fuck are you talking about?

[racrguy]

What the fuck are you talking about?

I don't think he knows.