Tag: title II

Posted on

Net Neutrality Harms are NOT Hypothetical: An open letter to Left, Right, and Center (and most other news shows)

This is a copy of a comment I sent to the producers of Left, Right, and Center. LRC is a weekly radio show/podcast from KCRW, featuring liberal and conservative pundits calmly and rationally discussing the top news stories of the week. This was originally submitted as a public comment on the LRC website, but was blocked with no reason stated. I am re-publishing this here as a resource for folks who want more information, and a fast cheat sheet, of real harm caused by eliminating Title II regulation of the Internet. The list at the end of this post links to events where carriers and ISPs have abused their power prior to enacting Net Neutrality.

***Update 12-19-2017 – My comment was finally reinstated. This post still stands as a starter collection of links for people tired of the “Where were the harms” arguments from conservatives.

Dear LRC,

I’m a huge fan. I’ve been a listener for years, and greatly appreciate the tone of your show. Tackling divisive political topics, in an even-handed fashion, is not easy. I believe your show succeeds in this mission more than most. However, when your show falls short, I also believe it’s the duty of your listeners to let you know.

Listening to the episode Is Alabama the beginning of a ‘blue wave’ of wins?, I was thrilled that you would be talking about the recent FCC vote repealing Title II regulation of the internet. There’s been a lot of vitriol and hot headedness surrounding this topic. Your program was high on my list for outlets bringing a more level-headed approach to this conversation. Unfortunately, all we received was a rushed chat, repeating fallacy and appealing to emotion.

Continue reading “Net Neutrality Harms are NOT Hypothetical: An open letter to Left, Right, and Center (and most other news shows)”

Posted on

FCC Publishes 400 Page Document Detailing Net Neutrality Rules and Objections

FCCThe FCC’s announcement that they would be reclassifying the Internet and regulating it as a utility came with a five page summary detailing the commission’s plans.

Yesterday the FCC quietly released the full set of rules to the public, and including the dissenting opinions from the Republican members, the document is 400 pages long.

We’re currently reading through the rules now to see if there are any surprises, but so far no red flags or severe changes from the initial summary. The rules seem focused on preventing ISP’s from throttling services, and blocking any actions towards creating a tiered internet with “fastlanes”.

There’s also a pretty healthy section on Forbearance, detailing all the things that the FCC wont be enforcing like public utility pricing. Still, even though this resembles the situation we found ourselves in when the cell phone industry was reclassified, which ultimately provided for more competition and better consumer experiences, we can expect the ISP’s and carriers to start mounting an attack now that the rules are available.

You can read the rules for yourself, instead of just accepting pundit’s opinions, at the link below.

In the Matter of Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet

Posted on

Explained! FCC Reclassifies Broadband as Utility, Defends Net Neutrality! We Answer Your Questions!

It was a landmark day yesterday for the FCC and advocates of a free and open internet. Two major rulings were delivered. One defending Tennessee and North Carolina efforts to build tax payer funded broadband, and the second reclassifying the entire Internet as a utility under Title II regulations. If you have questions about the announcements, Enobong Etteh from Booredatwork and I are here to answer them!

Read the FCC’s Statement on the new Broadband Internet Rules.

Posted on

FCC Reclassifies Internet as a Utility, Defends Net Neutrality

FCCThis has been a crazy trip.

From Verizon suing the Government over the Open Internet Order, to proposed “Fast Lane” rules, to now. The FCC has been busy today. First, announcing it will preempt state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina which were preventing community funded broadband efforts.

Second, approving rules which will reclassify broadband internet as a common carrier utility under Title II regulations. Thankfully, unlike the OIO, these new rules will also apply to mobile networks, not just wired ones. The vote was 3-2 in favor, on party lines with the Democrat majority winning the day.

“While I see no need for net neutrality rules, I am far more troubled by the dangerous course that the Commission is now charting on Title 2 and the consequences it will have for broadband investment, edge providers and consumers,”

-Republican FCC member Michael O’Rielly, who voted against the new rules.

We can also expect much crying and gnashing of teeth from the GOP in the House and Senate, with tired FUD and scare tactics, even though companies like Sprint have already pointed out that light touch regulation can be incredibly beneficial to a market as stagnant as our telecommunications industry. You would not have carriers like T-Mobile today, if the cell phone industry hadn’t been reclassified as Title II in the mid 1990’s. You can lead an elephant to water…

It’s a day many supporters of Net Neutrality thought we’d never see, and while there will still be a number of battles to fight over who regulates the internet, and what those actions should resemble, we can at least call today a victory for pretty much anyone who uses any kind of commerce or data driven service online.

The FCC has a five page write up, detailing the new rules.

FCC ADOPTS STRONG, SUSTAINABLE RULES TO PROTECT THE OPEN INTERNET

 

Posted on

Sprint Sends Letter to FCC in Support of Title II Reclassification

sprint logoMaybe a surprising way to wrap a week full of Net Neutrality news, but the country’s fourth place carrier yesterday sent a letter to the FCC explaining its position on reclassifying the internet as a common utility under Title II.

They’re stance? It probably wont affect their products and services much.

Now to be sure, the letter does support a “light touch” regulation, where the FCC through forbearance might opt out of regulating certain aspects of the wireless industry, and give “mobile carriers the flexibility to manage our networks and to differentiate our services in the market”.

Of course, drawing that regulation line is a sticky subject between Title II supporters and opponents. Still it’s refreshing to see a carrier buck current industry trends to point out that it’s entirely likely reclassification might have only a small impact on the way broadband business is currently handled, and drawing on the history of the wireless industry, would probably be a positive move for the industry in allowing more competition.

When first launched, the mobile market was a licensed duopoly. This system was a failure, resulting in slow deployment, high prices and little innovation. In 1993, Congress revised the Telecommunications Act to allow new carriers, including Sprint, to enter the market. This competition resulted in tremendous investment in the wireless industry, broader deployment, greater innovation, and falling prices. It is absolutely true that this explosion of growth occurred under a light touch regulatory regime. Some net neutrality debaters appear to have forgotten, however, that this light touch regulatory regime emanated from Title II common carrier regulation, including Sections 201, 202 and 208 of the Communications Act.

Well done Lil’ Yellow. You can read the whole letter from Sprint’s Chief Technology Officer, Stephen Bye here (PDF Download).

Posted on

If the Internet is Declared a Title II Utility, Verizon Will Only Have Itself to Blame

FCCThe fight over net neutrality is going to get uglier. President Obama recently voiced support for classifying the Internet as a common utility and ending 19 states laws preventing broadband competition, and FCC chairman Tom Wheeler might join the President after voicing support for Title II at this year’s CES.

On the other side, Conservatives are pushing another bill in the House which would completely strip the FCC of regulating Internet activity by classifying it as an “Information Service”. You can thank Congressman Bob Latta out of Ohio for that, who received around $80,000 in donations from the telecoms during the 2013-14 election year cycle.

Google is backing Title II, as the reclassification would mean they would have more access to public utility lines and infrastructure as opposed to always digging their own trenches. There’s been growing support for more publicly funded broadband at the local level, while traditional ISP’s have been lobbying to maintain their non-competitive status quo.

Verizon-logoFunnily enough we arrive at this point on the one year anniversary of an appellate court ruling in favor of Verizon in a lawsuit against the FCC and their Open Internet Order. The OIO would have enforced Net Neutrality rules on home internet and cabled broadband, but would have been pretty loose on wireless carriers.

Verizon alone sued the FCC over some fairly basic protections for keeping a level playing field, claiming it was their First Amendment right to degrade the quality of connection for competing services on their network. Other carriers have tried to circumvent Net Neutrality with “value add” benefits for consumers. People were up in arms about AT&T’s proposed Sponsored Data initiative, which would let third party companies pay to reduce the amount of data AT&T subscribers would be billed for, and T-Mobile found some success in cutting streaming music services off of customer’s bills.

Verizon’s actions a year ago in squashing the OIO means the worst possible option for carriers and ISP’s is the one gaining the most traction. It seems more likely now that in the wake of vocal opposition to the FCC’s “Fastlane” proposal, we might see an about face and a new proposal presented in favor of classifying the internet as a common utility.

Proudly powered by WordPress