Net Neutrality

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 25849
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Net Neutrality

#101

Post by RTH10260 »

Download of the PDF requires a signup.
Net neutrality: All the details you need to know (free PDF)
TechRepublic

Now that net neutrality rules have been rolled back, it’s critical to understand how that will affect consumers, IT, and businesses. This ebook offers a comprehensive overview of the biggest impacts and likely changes you can expect down the road.

From the ebook:

The Obama-era net neutrality rules, passed in 2015, are defunct. This time it’s for real.

Though some minor elements of the proposal by the Republican-led FCC to roll back those net neutrality rules went into effect last month, most aspects still required approval from the Office of Management and Budget. That’s now been taken care of, with the Federal Communications Commission declaring June 11 as the date the proposal takes effect.

While many people agree with the basic principles of net neutrality, the specific rules enforcing the idea have been a lightning rod for controversy. That’s because to get the rules to hold up in court, an earlier, Democrat-led FCC reclassified broadband networks so that they fell under the same strict regulations that govern telephone networks.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has called the Obama-era rules “heavy-handed” and “a mistake,” and he’s argued that they deterred innovation and depressed investment in building and expanding broadband networks. (Read his op-ed on CNET here.) To set things right, he says, he’s taking the FCC back to a “light touch” approach to regulation, a move that Republicans and internet service providers have applauded.

But supporters of net neutrality—such as big tech companies like Google and Facebook, as well as consumer groups and pioneers of the internet like World Wide Web creator Tim Berners-Lee—say the internet as we know it may not exist without these protections.

“We need a referee on the field who can throw a flag,” former FCC Chairman and Obama appointee Tom Wheeler said at MIT during a panel discussion in support of rules like those he championed. Wheeler was chairman when the rules passed three years ago. (You can read his op-ed in CNET regarding internet privacy here.)

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 25849
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Net Neutrality

#102

Post by RTH10260 »

Lawmakers ask Ajit Pai about false DDoS claims
They want to know when the FCC became aware a DDoS attack was unlikely.

Mallory Locklear

A handful of Democratic lawmakers have some questions for FCC Chairman Ajit Pai regarding claims of a DDoS attack that the Inspector General recently concluded were false. Specifically, they want to know when Pai became aware that disruption to the agency's net neutrality comment system may not have been due to a DDoS attack and why the agency didn't correct its public statements alleging a DDoS attack before now. "It is troubling that you allowed the public myth created by the FCC to persist and your misrepresentations to remain uncorrected for over a year," they wrote in a letter to Pai today. The letter was signed by Representatives Frank Pallone Jr. (NJ), Mike Doyle (PA), Jerry McNerney (CA) and Debbie Dingell (MI).

To recap, following a segment of John Oliver's Last Week Tonight wherein the host directed viewers to the FCC's net neutrality comment section, the agency's website crashed. But the agency claimed at the time that the issue wasn't an influx of comments but rather multiple DDoS attacks -- a claim the FCC has stuck by in many subsequent statements made to the public and Congress. But last week, the Inspector General released a report that found no evidence of such an attack and concluded that FCC officials misrepresented facts in responses to Congressional inquiries.

"Given the significant media, public and Congressional attention this alleged cyberattack received for over a year, it is hard to believe that the release of the IG's report was the first time that you and your staff realized that no cyberattack occurred," wrote the lawmakers. "Such ignorance would signify a dereliction of your duty as the head of the FCC, particularly due to the severity of the allegations and the blatant lack of evidence."


https://www.engadget.com/2018/08/14/law ... os-claims/

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 9933
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 1 dog, 1 cat, and 1 horse, 4 granddogs, and one grandcat.

Re: Net Neutrality

#103

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer »

NY AG Underwood
@NewYorkStateAG
We just took another big step in our court fight to save #NetNeutrality.

I’m proud to lead our coalition in a new brief, calling on the DC Circuit to vacate and reverse the
@FCC's illegal rollback. (link: https://on.ny.gov/2nSHvzW) on.ny.gov/2nSHvzW
From link:
The government petitioners’ brief focuses on two critical issues: first, that the FCC’s order is arbitrary and capricious because it puts consumers at risk of abusive practices by broadband providers, jeopardizes public safety, and more; and second, that the FCC’s order unlawfully purports to preempt state and local regulation of broadband service.

“For more than fifteen years, the Federal Communications Commission has agreed that an open Internet free from blocking, throttling, or other interference by service providers is critical to ensure that all Americans have access to the advanced telecommunications services that have become essential for daily life. The recent Order represents a dramatic and unjustified departure from this long-standing commitment,” the brief states.
A 19th Amendment Centennial Moment:
The 19th Amendment was first introduced to Congress in 1878, yet it was not approved by Congress until 1919 – 41 years later.
- https://legaldictionary.net/19th-amendment/

User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 3344
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:36 pm
Location: Twin Cities

Re: Net Neutrality

#104

Post by MN-Skeptic »

The Hill -
California governor signs nation's strictest net neutrality bill

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) on Sunday signed into law the country's strictest net neutrality bill, marking the state's latest rebellion against the Trump administration's agenda.

The legislation bars internet service providers from slowing down website speeds, blocking access to certain websites and charging extra for large sites like Netflix, according to The Sacramento Bee.
And also from The Hill -
DOJ sues California over net neutrality law

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Sunday night sued California over its new new neutrality law, a little over an hour after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed the bill.

The lawsuit claims the California bill is "unlawful and anti-consumer" because it goes against the federal government's "deregulatory approach to the Internet."
MAGA - Morons Are Governing America

TexasFilly
Posts: 20463
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Re: Net Neutrality

#105

Post by TexasFilly »

Apparently the DOJ has lots of time and resources to sue California. What happened to the 10th Amendment lovers?
I love the poorly educated!!!

Kevin McCarthy: Paul Ryan playing with a head injury -- Jon Lovett

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 17970
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Net Neutrality

#106

Post by Suranis »

TexasFilly wrote:
Sun Sep 30, 2018 11:11 pm
Apparently the DOJ has lots of time and resources to sue California. What happened to the 10th Amendment lovers?
Some states exercised their freedom to ban slavery.
The difference between the Middle Ages, and the Age of the Internet, is that in the Middle Ages no-one thought the Earth was flat.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 25849
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Net Neutrality

#107

Post by RTH10260 »

U.S. appeals court will not reconsider net neutrality repeal case

Feb 6 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court said late on Thursday it will not reconsider an October ruling that largely upheld the repeal of landmark net neutrality rules, rejecting requests by more than a dozen U.S. states and tech groups.

The Federal Communications Commission in December 2017 reversed Obama-era rules prohibiting internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, a blow to large tech companies and consumer groups that had championed net neutrality.

In orders issued Thursday, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia declined without comment to rehear the decision as did the three-judge panel that issued the ruling in October.


https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-int ... SL1N2A62BA

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 25849
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Net Neutrality

#108

Post by RTH10260 »

crosspost
FCC forced by court to ask the public (again) if they think tearing up net neutrality was a really good idea or not
US regulator tries to hide embarrassment behind series of sudden announcements
By Kieren McCarthy in San Francisco 21 Feb 2020 at 03:04

Comment
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is asking the American public to tell it if its decision in 2017 to scrap net neutrality regulations was dumb or not.

In a striking piece of irony – and one that the FCC is distinctly unhappy about – the watchdog is legally obliged to seek public comment on three issues: how its decision has threatened public safety, damaged broadband infrastructure rollout, and prevented poor people from getting access to fast internet access.

That obligation is the result of a legal challenge to the FCC's decision to tear up net neutrality rules covering internet access in America. That attempt last year failed in court, largely because federal regulators are given significant leeway to decide their own rules, even when it comprises overturning their own rules made just two years earlier, in 2015.

However, the court noted some serious concerns about the FCC scrapping its own rules, and so told the regulator it needs to gather public feedback on those issues and to consider what it needs to do to alleviate concerns. Normally this wouldn’t be a problem. It is simply a case of the judicial process carrying out its proper function: identifying issues, and seeking to get them rectified.


https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/2 ... eutrality/

Post Reply

Return to “Computers & Internet”