"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, 1 year, 9 months ago

Questions about this document:

  • Anything interesting on this page?
Answer Questions

All Pages

Summary: If not the protocol-processing for internetworking or other protocol-processing performed as part of Internet access service, how should we interpret this phase so it carries with it independent meaning and is not mere surplusage? We seek comment on this analysis, on the language of section 230, and on how it should impact our classification of broadband Internet access service. We seek comment on this analysis, on the language of section 231, and on how it should impact our classification of broadband Internet access service.
People: Mukasey
/law, govt and politics /technology and computing/networking/vpn and remote access /technology and computing/software
Summary: Congress passed the Telecommunications Act to “promote competition and reduce regulation”84 and “[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.”85 Or as Senator John McCain put it, “[i]t certainly was not Congress’s intent in enacting the supposedly pro-competitive, deregulatory 1996 Act to extend the burdens of current Title II regulation to Internet services, which historically have been excluded from regulation.”86 Or as Congress codified its intent in section 230: It is the policy of the United States “to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation.”87 An information service classification would “reduce regulation” and preserve a free market “unfettered by Federal or State regulation”—but a telecommunications service classification would not. First, the Title II Order claimed its interpretation sprang in part from a change in “broadband providers’ marketing and pricing strategies, which emphasize speed and reliability of transmission separately from and over the extra features of the service packages they offer.”89 It claimed this marketing “leaves a reasonable consumer with the impression that a certain level of transmission capability—measured in terms of ‘speed’ or ‘reliability’—is being offered in exchange for the subscription fee, even if 37 (quoting Letter from Senator John McCain to the Honorable William E. Kennard, Chairman, FCC).
Citations: 47 U.S.C. 230(b)(1)
People: William E. Kennard , Judge Brown , Senator John McCain
/law, govt and politics/government/legislative /law, govt and politics/legal issues/legislation /law, govt and politics
Summary: of information” but not a fast or reliable “capability for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or making available information.” Indeed, many of the advertisements discussed by the Title II Order speak directly to the capabilities offered through high-speed service.93 We seek comment on this analysis and on any other relevant facts regarding whether broadband Internet users receive the capabilities of an information service or the mere transmission between points of a user’s choosing of a telecommunications service. 356 & n.972 (defining DNS as services “most commonly used to translate domain names, [into] numerical IP addresses that are used by network equipment to locate the desired content”). 98 Petitions for Forbearance from the Application of Section 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, As Amended, to Certain Activities, Bell Operating Companies, CC Docket No.
Citations: 47 U.S.C. 153(24)
Companies: Timely Fashion , Bell Operating Companies
Organizations: D.C. Circuit , American Telecommunications Association , Rcd , FCC , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics /business and industrial/company/merger and acquisition /technology and computing/internet technology/isps
Summary: Did the Commission’s historical information service classification better enable flexibility in marketplace offerings?105 Did the regulatory certainty of maintaining the same regulatory environment for approximately three decades (since the Computer Inquiries) foster additional investment or innovative business models to benefit consumers? How should we evaluate the prior Commissions’ predictions of intermodal competition given the 4,559 Internet service providers now in the market? 72 (eliminating the Computer Inquiries requirement to offer broadband transmission on a common carrier basis “will make it more likely that wireline network operators will take more risks in investing in and deploying new technologies than they are willing and able to take under the existing regime”); Stevens Report, 13 FCC Rcd at 11524, para.
People: Genachowski , Chairman Martin , Chairman Powell , Chairman Kennard , Stevens
Companies: Wireline Broadband
Organizations: Congress , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics/legal issues/legislation /technology and computing/software /technology and computing
Summary: Did the court and the Department of Justice intend to exclude Internet access services from the prohibitions on what Bell Operating Companies could offer? The Supreme Court has said that statutory interpretation “must be guided to a degree by common sense as to the manner in which Congress is likely to delegate a policy decision of such economic and political magnitude to an administrative agency.”110 How is that canon relevant here? As providers have devoted more resources to complying with new regulations, the threat of regulatory enforcement of vague rules and standards has dampened providers’ incentive to invest and innovate.
Organizations: FDA , Department of Justice , Supreme Court , MFJ , Congress , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics/government /technology and computing/hardware/computer /law, govt and politics
Summary: 14-28 (Nov. 19, 2014) (attaching Kevin A. Hassett & Robert J. Shapiro, Sonecon, The Impact of Title II Regulation of Internet Providers on Their Capital Investment (Nov. 2014)); Letter from Laurence Brett Glass, d/b/a LARIAT to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket No. 14-28 (Jan. 16, 2015) (attaching Anna-Maria Kovacs, Regulatory Uncertainty: The FCC’s Open Internet Docket (Jan. 2015)); Martin H. Thelle & Dr. Bruno Basalisco, Copenhagen Economics, Europe Can Catch Up With the US: A Contrast of Two Contrary Broadband Models (June 2013), http://bit.ly/1zJritJ. 114 See George S. Ford, Net Neutrality, Reclassification and Investment: A Counterfactual Analysis, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies, Perspectives 17-02, at 2, http://www.phoenix- center.org/perspectives/Perspective17-02Final.pdf.
People: Dr. Bruno Basalisco , John Mayo , Martin H. Thelle , Cox , George S. Ford , Ajit Pai , Robert J. Shapiro , Matthew A. Brill , Kenneth Glueck , Laurence Brett Glass , Kevin A. Hassett , Patrick S. Brogan , Hal Singer , Marlene H. Dortch
Companies: Sprint , National Cable , Oracle , Free Press , Cisco , Reclassifying , AT&T , Comcast , CenturyLink , Qualcomm , Verizon , Ericsson , FCC
Organizations: EU , Telecommunications Association , Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy , ACA , Federal Communications Commission
/education/homework and study tips /business and industrial/company/merger and acquisition /technology and computing/internet technology/isps
Summary: 118 Letter from Barbara S. Esbin, Counsel, American Cable Association, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket No. 4, at 1–2 (Declaration of Michael Jensen, General Manager of Bagley, MN Public Utilities) (noting that Bagley Utilities offers broadband Internet access service to about 450 customers, and it has 7 full-time employees, and stating that in the past 3 years the company had invested approximately $400,000 in its network, but that those investments are now likely to be curtailed due to the effects of Title II reclassification); Letter from William Bottiggi, General Manager, BELD Broadband et al. to Ajit Pai, Chairman, FCC, WC Docket No. 6, at 4 (Declaration of Forbes H. Mercy, President of Washington Broadband, Inc.) (explaining that the Title II Order has forced Washington Broadband, Inc., a small ISP, to give up its existing business model of constructing new towers that cover small areas based on a return on investment model of light density return).
People: Nathan , Stooke , William Bottiggi , Stewart , Marlene H. Dortch , Herb Longware , Barbara S. Esbin , Wheeler , Michael Jensen , Wisper , Exh. , Ajit Pai
Companies: CTIA , AT&T Inc. , Willsboro, Inc. , CenturyLink , Bagley Utilities , Wisper ISP , FCC , BELD Broadband , Washington Broadband , SCS Broadband
Organizations: United States Telecom Association , Service Providers Association , National Cable & Telecommunications Association For Stay , American Cable Association , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics /technology and computing/internet technology/isps /business and industrial
Summary: 17-108 at 2 (filed May 4, 2017) (encouraging the Commission to “mov[e] forward in a way that allows for vigorous, continued investment in rural broadband networks, and at the same time ensure a smarter path to net neutrality”). 17-108 (filed May 11, 2017) (“The uncertainty surrounding the Title II regulatory framework for wireless broadband services hinders our ability to meet our customers’ needs, burdens our companies with unnecessary and costly obligations and inhibits our ability to build and operate networks in rural America.”); Petition of American Cable Association and National Cable & Telecommunications Association For Stay Pending Judicial Review, WC Docket No. 17-108, at 1 (filed May 9, 2017) (stating that “[o]ur challenges are exacerbated by the Title II Order the FCC adopted in 2015, which has significantly increased compliance burdens and regulatory risk through heavy-handed regulation that is rife with uncertainty.
People: Amplex , Ron Smith , L. Elizabeth Bowles , William D. Bauer , Michael Horney , Robert Hunt , Forbes H. Mercy , S. Jenell Trigg , Mark Radabaugh , Exh. , Ajit Pai , Marlene Dortch
Companies: Bluegrass Cellular , US Telecom , USTelecom , Aristotle Inc , FCC , Washington Broadband
Organizations: Free State Foundation , American Cable Association , National Cable & Telecommunications Association , WISPA , Wireless Internet Service Providers Association , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics/government /art and entertainment/visual art and design/design /technology and computing/internet technology/isps
Summary: Were pre-existing federal and state competition and consumer protection regimes, in addition to private sector initiatives, insufficient to address such isolated examples, and if so, why? 121 (stating that “the no-blocking rule will not be as effective because broadband providers might otherwise engage in conduct that harms the open Internet but falls short of outright blocking”); at 5656, para. 127 (stating that “because of the very real concerns about the chilling effects that preferential treatment arrangements could have on the virtuous cycle of innovation, consumer demand, and investment, we adopt a bright-line rule banning paid prioritization arrangements”).
People: Mary V. Harris
Companies: AT&T , EPA , Fox Television Stations , Comcast , Air Regulatory Group
Organizations: American Library , Supreme Court , D.C. Circuit , Federal Communications Commission
/technology and computing/internet technology/isps /education/adult education /law, govt and politics
Summary: We seek comment on this analysis and on our reasoning that the statutory interpretation proposed in this Notice more faithfully adheres to the Act and reflects the better reading of the relevant provisions than the views adopted in the Title II Order. at 701–04 (rejecting arguments that information service classification was unambiguously required based on the text, structure, and purpose of the Act); id. at 710– 11 (highlighting the limited ways in which USTelecom challenged the Title II Order for failing to demonstrate that the NARUC test for common carriage was met); id.
People: Bechtel
Companies: Gas Transmission Northwest Corp. , USTelecom
Organizations: NARUC , FERC , Federal Communications Commission
/law, govt and politics/legal issues /technology and computing/networking/vpn and remote access /law, govt and politics
< previous Page 2 of 8 next >
× About Pricing Contact Sign In Sign Up