"Restoring Internet Freedom", the latest FCC attempt to kill Net Neutrality

The FCC is attempting to kill Net Neutrality once again. Information on how to comment on this bill can be found here: https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/23/15681434/net-neutrality-how-to-comment-fcc-proposal-released

Created by @pmn, 2 months, 4 weeks ago

Questions about this document:

  • Anything interesting on this page?
Answer Questions

All Pages

Summary: The Commission Has Legal Authority to Classify Broadband Internet Access Service Access Service ............................................................................................................................... 55 C. Effects on Regulatory Structures Created by the Title II Order .................................................... 63 Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis................................................................................... 117 C. Other Procedural Matters............................................................................................................. 119 1.
People: Chairman Pai , Commissioner Clyburn
/business and industrial/advertising and marketing/public relations /law, govt and politics/legal issues/criminal law /law, govt and politics
Summary: President Clinton and a Republican Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which established the policy of the United States “to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet . The Internet became an ever-increasing part of the American economy, offering new and innovative changes in how we work, learn, receive medical care, and entertain ourselves.4 4 See, e.g., Aaron Smith, Pew Research Center, Searching for Work in the Digital Era at 2 (2015), http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/11/PI_2015-11-19-Internet-and-Job-Seeking_FINAL.pdf (detailing the importance of the Internet for job seekers); Lifeline & Link Up Reform & Modernization, Order on Reconsideration, 31 FCC Rcd 3962, 3967, para.
Citations: 47 U.S.C. 230(b)(2)
People: Aaron Smith , President Clinton
Companies: Facebook , Lifeline , Netflix , Google
/law, govt and politics/government /technology and computing/internet technology/isps /law, govt and politics/legal issues/legislation
Summary: consumers and infrastructure investment throughout our nation, to brighten the future of innovation both within networks and at their edge, and to close the digital divide.5 6 Regulatory and Policy Problems Presented by the Interdependence of Computer and Communication Services, Notice of Inquiry, 7 FCC 2d 11 (1966). 56 (1996) (describing the purpose of the 1996 Act as “[a]n Act [t]o promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies”).
Citations: 47 U.S.C. 153(24)
People: Co. , President Clinton
Organizations: Congress , Interdependence of Computer and Communication Services , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing /society/social institution/divorce /law, govt and politics
Summary: Ford, John F. Kerry, Spencer Abraham, and Ron Wyden—wrote the Commission that “[n]othing in the 1996 Act or its legislative history suggests that Congress intended to alter the current classification of Internet and other information services or to expand traditional telephone regulation to new and advanced services.”21 These five members further warned that if the Commission “subject[ed] some or all information service providers to telephone regulation, it seriously would chill the growth and development of advanced services to the detriment of our economic and educational well-being.”22 In the 1998 Stevens Report, the Commission comprehensively reviewed the Act’s definitions as they applied to the emerging technology of the Internet and concluded that Internet access service was properly classified as an information service.23 The Stevens Report exhaustively reviewed the text and legislative history of the Telecommunications Act, along with the agency’s own administrative precedent and the courts’ administration of antitrust law.24 Looking to the Act’s text, the Commission concluded that “Internet access providers do not offer a pure transmission path; they combine computer processing, information provision, and other computer- mediated offerings with data transport,”25 and it “recognize[d] the unique qualities of the Internet, and [did] not presume that legacy regulatory frameworks are appropriately applied to it.”26 Further, even “address[ing] the classification of Internet access service de novo” the Stevens Report reached the same conclusion: Internet access service is an information service according to the statute.27 The Stevens Report also found that subjecting Internet service providers and other information service providers to “the broad range of Title II constraints,” would “seriously curtail the regulatory freedom that the The Stevens Report also noted that “[s]ince Computer II, we have made it clear that offerings by non-facilities-based providers combining communications and computing components should always be deemed enhanced,” while “the matter is more complicated when it comes to offerings by facilities-based providers.” Id.
People: Ron Wyden , Ron Wyden—wrote , Wendell Ford , William E. Kennard , Spencer Abraham , John F. Kerry , John Ashcroft , Stevens
Companies: Ford
Summary: broadband Internet access service over wireline facilities as an information service.38 In reaching this conclusion, the Commission relied on the plain text of the Act, finding that “providers of wireline broadband Internet access service offer subscribers the ability to run a variety of applications that fit under the characteristics stated in the information service definition,”39 and that users of wireline 36 Michael K. Powell, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Preserving Internet Freedom: Guiding Principles for the Industry, Remarks at the Silicon Flatirons Symposium (Feb. 8, 2004), https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-243556A1.pdf. 38 See Appropriate Framework for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Wireline Facilities et al., CC Docket Nos.
People: Michael K. Powell
Companies: Time Warner Telecom
Organizations: Supreme Court , Rcd , Federal Communications Commission
/business and industrial /technology and computing/hardware/computer networking/router /technology and computing
Summary: In the 2006 BPL-Enabled Broadband Order, the Commission concluded that broadband Internet access service over power lines was properly classified as an information service.43 This decision established “a minimal regulatory environment” which promoted “ubiquitous availability of broadband to all Americans.”44 The Commission noted that broadband-powerline-enabled Internet access service “combines computer processing, information provision, and computer interactivity with data transport, [which] enable[es] end users to run a variety of applications,”45 and concluded that classification as an information service “encourage[es] the deployment of broadband Internet access services.”46 wireless broadband Internet access service as an information service, again recognizing the “minimal regulatory environment” that promoted the “ubiquitous availability of broadband to all Americans.”47 Consistent with its prior interpretations, the Commission concluded that “wireless broadband Internet access service offers a single, integrated service to end users, Internet access, that inextricably combines the transmission of data with computer processing, information provision, and computer interactivity, for the purpose of enabling end users to run a variety of applications.”48 The Commission also found that “mobile wireless broadband Internet access service is not a ‘commercial mobile radio service’ as that term is defined in the Act and implemented in the Commission’s rules.”49 47 See Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet Over Wireless Networks, Declaratory Ruling, 22 FCC Rcd 5901, 5902, para.
Companies: Comcast
Organizations: United Power Line Council , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing/hardware/computer networking/wireless technology /technology and computing/software /technology and computing
Summary: Circuit nonetheless upheld the transparency rule,57 claimed the Commission had authority to regulate broadband Internet access service providers under section 706 of the Telecommunications Act, and suggested that no-blocking and no-unreasonable-discrimination rules might be permissible if Internet service providers could engage in individualized bargaining.58 50 Formal Complaint of Free Press and Public Knowledge Against Comcast Corporation for Secretly Degrading Peer-to-Peer Applications; Broadband Industry Practices; Petition of Free Press et al. for Declaratory Ruling that Degrading an Internet Application Violates the FCC's Internet Policy Statement and Does Not Meet an Exception for “Reasonable Network Management,” File No. Among other things, the court held that section 706 of the 1996 Act could not serve as the source of direct authority to which the Commission’s action was ancillary because the Commission was bound in Comcast by a prior Commission determination that section 706 did not constitute a direct grant of authority.
Organizations: U.S. Court of Appeals , Commission , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing/software /technology and computing/internet technology/isps /technology and computing/networking/network monitoring and management
Summary: broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act.”60 Three months later, the Commission adopted the Title II Order, reclassifying broadband Internet access services from information services to telecommunications services.61 In doing so, the Commission found it necessary to forbear from enforcing the “vast majority of rules adopted under Title II,” including “30 statutory provisions[,]” and to render “over 700 codified rules inapplicable.”62 The Commission adopted no-blocking, no-throttling, and no- paid-prioritization rules, as well as a general Internet conduct standard and “enhancements” to the transparency rule.63 In 2016, a divided panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Title II Order in United States Telecom Ass’n v. FCC, with the D.C. Internet access service and return to the light-touch regulatory framework first established on a bipartisan basis during the Clinton Administration.
People: President Obama
Companies: United States Telecom
Organizations: Clinton Administration , Rcd , D.C. Circuit , Telecommunications Act. , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing/software /law, govt and politics/politics/foreign policy /law, govt and politics
Summary: Whether reading a newspaper’s website or browsing the results from a search engine, a broadband Internet user is able to acquire and retrieve information online. Whether uploading filtered photographs or translating text into a foreign language, a broadband Internet user is able to transform and process information online. often used services from third parties: “[S]ubscribers, by ‘click-through’ access, may obtain many functions from companies with whom the cable operator has not even a contractual relationship.
Companies: Microsoft , Netscape , Comcast
/technology and computing/hardware/computer networking/router /technology and computing/networking/vpn and remote access /style and fashion/clothing/lingerie
Summary: Instead, routing decisions are based on the architecture of the network, not on consumers’ instructions, and consumers are often unaware of where online content is stored. In short, broadband Internet users are paying for the access to information “with no knowledge of the physical location of the server where that information resides.”74 We believe that consumers want and pay for these functionalities that go beyond mere transmission—and that they have come to expect them as part and parcel of broadband Internet access service. 76 We note that the Title II Order asserted that “[i]t is not uncommon in the toll-free arena for a single number to route to multiple locations, and such a circumstance does not transform that service to something other than telecommunications.” Title II Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5761–62, para.
Organizations: Rcd , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing/software /technology and computing/networking/vpn and remote access /technology and computing/internet technology/isps
Page 1 of 8 next >
× About Pricing Contact Sign In Sign Up