Net Neutrality FCC Vote Today December 14, 2017

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by hmscott, Dec 14, 2017.

  1. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Ajit Pai knew DDoS claim was false in January, says he couldn’t tell Congress
    Pai appears in front of Senate after acknowledging FCC's false statements.
    JON BRODKIN - 8/16/2018, 1:00 PM
    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...lse-in-january-says-he-couldnt-tell-congress/

    "The Federal Communications Commission chairman has known that his agency's claims about being hit by DDoS attacks were false for more than six months, but he says he could not correct the record publicly because of an internal investigation that didn't wrap up until this month.
    ..."

    Comments

    'Complete Joke': Democrats Ripped for Totally Failing to Grill FCC Chair Ajit Pai Over Net Neutrality Cyberattack Lies
    "There were many opportunities to talk about how the FCC misled the press and mistreated reporters. That should have been the story of this hearing, but they didn't make Pai sweat nearly enough."
    by Jake Johnson, staff writer, Published on Thursday, August 16, 2018
    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2...lly-failing-grill-fcc-chair-ajit-pai-over-net
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
  2. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Twenty-two states ask U.S. appeals court to reinstate 'net neutrality' rules
    David Shepardson, AUGUST 21, 2018
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-reinstate-net-neutrality-rules-idUSKCN1L605W

    "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A group of 22 state attorneys general and the District of Columbia late Monday asked a U.S. appeals court to reinstate the Obama administration’s 2015 landmark net neutrality rules and reject the Trump administration’s efforts to preempt states from imposing their own rules guaranteeing an open internet.

    The states, led by New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, filed a lawsuit in January after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted in December along party lines to reverse rules that barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization.

    Several internet companies filed a separate legal challenge on Monday to overturn the FCC ruling, including Mozilla Corp, Vimeo Inc, Etsy Inc, and numerous media and technology advocacy groups.

    The FCC handed sweeping new powers to internet providers to recast how Americans use the internet — as long as they disclose any changes. The new rules took effect in early June but major providers have made no changes in internet access.

    The states argue the FCC reversal will harm consumers.

    The states also suggested the FCC failed to identify any “valid authority” for preempting state and local laws that would protect net neutrality.

    Governors in six states have signed executive orders on net neutrality, while three states have enacted net neutrality legislation.

    FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has repeatedly said he believes the rules will be upheld and will encourage additional investment by providers. A spokesman for Pai did not immediately comment late Monday.

    The revised rules were a win for internet service providers, like Comcast Corp, AT&T Inc and Verizon Communications Inc, whose practices faced significant government oversight and FCC investigations under the 2015 order, but the rules were opposed by internet firms like Facebook Inc, Amazon.com Inc and Alphabet Inc.

    The FCC failed to offer a “meaningful defense of its decision to uncritically accept industry promises that are untethered to any enforcement mechanism,” the states said.

    The U.S. Senate voted in May to keep the Obama-era internet rules, but the measure is unlikely to be approved by the House of Representatives or the White House.

    The state attorney generals suing represent states with 165 million people — more than half the United States population — and include California, Illinois, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia.

    The states argue the FCC action could harm public safety, citing electrical grids as an example. They argue “the absence of open internet rules jeopardizes the ability to reduce load in times of extreme energy grid stress. Consequently, the order threatens the reliability of the electric grid.”"
     
  3. saturnotaku

    saturnotaku Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    3,691
    Messages:
    6,910
    Likes Received:
    2,301
    Trophy Points:
    331
    My response to this is two-fold:

    1) Are ISPs not private companies as well? Do they not have a right to impose whatever terms of service they want in order to maximize your enjoyment of their service and to make a profit? Usage of the Internet comes similarly with the expectation that you not break any laws nor do anything that's costly beyond reason, like downloading massive amounts of data, sending/received DDoS attacks, etc.

    2) A private entity that acts like a government body and performs a public function is beholden to the Constitution. This is codified in the SCOTUS case Marsh v. Alabama, 1946. Your kid receiving his schedule and more via Facebook, government officials interacting with constituents and law enforcement agencies receiving tips via Twitter I would say fall easily under these terms.

    Alex Jones also has a constitutional right to due process. If he has been found to guilty of civil and/or criminal violations, then by all means go after his entire operation. Until that time or he is issued a restraining order by the court, his freedom of expression should not be suppressed.

    On this point, we agree. Declaring social media a public utility has the potential to create a whole other set of issues. I'm not sure what the answer is. Perhaps an Internet Bill of Rights (not one crafted by the ISPs, so don't go there) is part of it.
     
  4. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    "Net Neutrality. “Net neutrality” is the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) must treat online data equally, by not discriminating based on user or content. It is essential to the free, open internet that we know and love.
    ...
    In May 2016, the FCC proposed a rule that would rescind the “common carrier” classification. That would give a few large corporations the authority to control access to the internet, and it would open the way to pay-to-play “fast lanes” for those who can afford it. The FCC sought public comment on the proposal. The ACLU submitted an initial comment followed by a reply comment, both times urging the FCC to reject final adoption of the proposal."
    https://www.aclu.org/issues/free-speech/internet-speech/net-neutrality

    Net Neutrality doesn't specifically concern the free speech topic you are discussing.

    Net Neutrality is not a "free speech" protection directly, it's directly concerning the ability of ISP's to differentiate service based on traffic and end points.

    Please start another thread to discuss Free Speech on Social Media as it is off topic here. :)

    Indirectly Net Neutrality affects Social Media, discussed here:

    https://postradam.us/blog/how-the-n...mpletely_New_Social_Media_Marketing_Landscape

    "With the ISPs ability to block, throttle and give paid prioritization, it’s likely to drastically change social media marketing."
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
  5. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Verizon throttled fire department’s “unlimited” data during Calif. wildfire
    Fire dep't had to pay twice as much to lift throttling during wildfire response.
    JON BRODKIN - 8/21/2018, 12:49 PM
    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/08/veriz
    "on-throttled-fire-departments-unlimited-data-during-calif-wildfire/

    "Verizon Wireless' throttling of a fire department that uses its data services has been submitted as evidence in a lawsuit that seeks to reinstate federal net neutrality rules.

    "County Fire has experienced throttling by its ISP, Verizon," Santa Clara County Fire Chief Anthony Bowden wrote in a declaration. "This throttling has had a significant impact on our ability to provide emergency services.

    Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire's ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services."

    Bowden's declaration was submitted in an addendum to a brief filed by 22 state attorneys general, the District of Columbia, Santa Clara County, Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, and the California Public Utilities Commission.

    The government agencies are seeking to overturn the recent repeal of net neutrality rules in a lawsuit they filed against the Federal Communications Commission in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

    Throttling affected response to wildfire
    "The Internet has become an essential tool in providing fire and emergency response, particularly for events like large fires which require the rapid deployment and organization of thousands of personnel and hundreds of fire engines, aircraft, and bulldozers," Bowden wrote.

    Santa Clara Fire paid Verizon for "unlimited" data but suffered from heavy throttling until the department paid Verizon more, according to Bowden's declaration and emails between the fire department and Verizon that were submitted as evidence.
    ..."

    "UPDATE: In a statement to Ars three hours after this article was published, Verizon acknowledged that it shouldn't have continued throttling the fire department's data service after the department asked Verizon to lift the throttling restrictions."
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
  6. saturnotaku

    saturnotaku Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    3,691
    Messages:
    6,910
    Likes Received:
    2,301
    Trophy Points:
    331
    Calling out the hypocrisy of big tech wanting a “free and open Internet” while they actively censor people on their platforms is completely germane to this topic.

    But have it your way. I’ll leave you in your echo chamber.

    /out


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    That's why the "Big Tech" ISP's started up the mantra "wanting a free and open Internet”, to divert attention from the real issues involved with "Net Neutrality". Don't fall for their ploy and be led off topic.

    If you want to discuss Internet Freedom of Speech issues please open a new thread, and post the link to it here so others can follow. :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
  8. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    California's Resurrected Net Neutrality Bill Just Passed a Major Hurdle
    The state senate Communications and Conveyance Committee voted 8-2 in favor of net neutrality bill SB-822.
    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...et-neutrality-bill-just-passed-a-major-hurdle

    "California’s resurrected net neutrality bill just passed a major hurdle and is now on its way to be voted on in the state assembly.

    Senate Bill 822 was originally introduced earlier this summer and would introduce some of the most robust net neutrality protections in the country, including prohibiting blocking and throttling of data, as well as limits on zero rating—a practice where companies provide access to certain parts of the internet for “free” and charge for others. But on the first go around, when being considered by the state senate Communications and Conveyance Committee, the bill was dramatically gutted,thanks to heavy lobbying from major telecom companies like AT&T. In response, the bill’s supporters scrapped it.

    The bill’s author, democratic state senator Scott Wiener, went back to the drawing board and, with the help of the bill’s proponents, managed to get more committee members to back it, including state assemblyperson Miguel Santiago, who led the original effort to dismantle the bill. He then brought the bill back from the dead.

    On Wednesday, the committee held a second hearing on the bill, which drew dozens of members of the public in support. After a mild debate, which included telecom lobbyists claiming the bill was anti-competitive and would have devastating impacts on consumers (while also misrepresenting the bill’s language and taking weird digs at the Netherlands), the committee voted 8-2 to adopt the bill. It will now go to the state assembly for a vote.

    The state bill is designed to replace federal net neutrality protections enacted under President Barack Obama that the Federal Communications Commission repealed last year, despite widespread public support for the protections."
     
  9. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Pissed Off by Verizon, Firefighters Join the Fight to Restore Net Neutrality
    First responders join a chorus of angry Americans tired of big telecom’s nonsense.

    NET NEUTRALITY | By Karl Bode, Aug 30 2018, 8:20pm
    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...irefighters-join-fight-restore-net-neutrality
    https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/9bn7sr/_/

    "As if the repeal of net neutrality weren’t unpopular enough, Verizon’s decision to slow down the cellular connection used by firefighters as they battled a recent wildfire appears to have taken the longstanding fight to yet another level.

    In the wake of Verizon’s latest face-plant, a coalition of more than 1,000 firefighters, EMTs, paramedics, and other first responders have signed an open letter urging Congress to restore meaningful net neutrality rules.
    “We routinely place ourselves in dangerous situations to assist others and save lives,” the first responders said. “But since the Federal Communications Commission repealed net neutrality, the communication services we rely on to do our jobs are no longer meaningfully protected from being arbitrarily slowed, blocked, or otherwise degraded by internet service providers.”

    Read More: Verizon Incompetence and Greed Leaves Firefighters Throttled During Wildfire

    The problem came to light when Santa Clara County Fire Department in California found its command and control vehicle’s cellular connection throttled to dial-up speeds, hindering its ability to coordinate a fire response. The department said the 50 Mbps “unlimited” Verizon data connection it purchased was routinely being slowed to speeds as low as 30 Kbps.

    “Throttling affects our ability to provide real-time updates and coordination of resources at these large fires,” said Adam Cosner of the California Professional Firefighters in a Reddit AMA. “When we were throttled we lost our IP phones, our ability to check the state database of resources, our ability to update the status of resources within the incident, and all of our situational tools.”

    While net neutrality rules allow for “reasonable network management” by cellular carriers during times of congestion, the firefighters say their connection was routinely throttled for no reason. When Santa Clara Fire Department complained to Verizon, Verizon’s first instinct wasn’t to fix the problem, but to upsell the department to a far more expensive plan.

    After the story gained nationwide attention, Verizon admitted that the throttling of first responders was in violation of Verizon’s own policies, but in a statement to Motherboard denied that the fracas had anything to do with net neutrality.

    In a report for NBC News, former FCC lawyer Gigi Sohn stated the FCC’s elimination of net neutrality rules also eliminated the first responders’ ability to complain to the FCC. If the rules had still been intact, the department could have complained that Verizon was unreasonably interfering with its ability to use broadband under the “general conduct rule,” Sohn noted.

    “Verizon’s actions demonstrate plainly why net neutrality rules are needed: In the absence of rules, Verizon and other broadband providers will put profits over people even when it comes to matters of life and limb,” Sohn said.

    The first responders, with some help from the net neutrality activist group Fight For the Future, are attempting to force Congress to restore the rules using the Congressional Review Act, which allows any regulatory action to be overturned by a majority Congressional vote.

    While the CRA effort passed the Senate with a vote of 52-47 in May, it has faced a far steeper uphill climb in the House, where a discharge petition will need 218 votes to even see floor time, and another 218 votes to pass the measure. Should that succeed, it would still need to avoid a veto by President Trump.

    Should the CRA gambit fail, activists will be shifting their focus toward passing state-level net neutrality laws that largely mirror the discarded federal rules. California lawmakers are expected to vote on one such law (SB822) sometime this week, though broadband providers have been working overtime to scuttle the effort.
    Meanwhile, consumer groups, Mozilla, and 23 state attorneys general have also sued the FCC, highlighting how agency head Ajit Pai ignored hard data, countless experts, and the public interest in the ham-fisted repeal of the popular consumer protections.

    With firefighters, EMTs, and paramedics now joining the overwhelming majority of bipartisan Americans in support of net neutrality, the momentum to reverse the FCC’s handout to big telecom is only gaining steam as state-level battles escalate and this fall’s court battle looms."

    California net neutrality bill moves closer to becoming law
    By LEVI SUMAGAYSAY | lsumagaysay@bayareanewsgroup.com | Bay Area News Group
    PUBLISHED: August 30, 2018 at 3:18 pm | UPDATED: August 30, 2018 at 6:35 pm
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/08/30/california-net-neutrality-bill-moves-closer-to-becoming-law/

    "After a hard-fought battle, California’s net neutrality bill is now all but certain to make it to the finish line that is Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk — where a signature from the governor will restore tight internet regulations to the nation’s most important market.

    The Assembly on Thursday voted 61-18 to pass what has been called the most comprehensive net neutrality bill in the nation, an answer to the Federal Communications Commission’s repeal of Obama-era regulations. Going into the legislative session this week, it was unclear whether the measure would get 41 votes, the minimum required to pass. But six Republicans voted for the bill after a contentious debate.

    SB 822 now heads back to the state Senate, which must look at amendments introduced to the bill after senators endorsed it in May. The Senate is expected to pass it Friday, the last day of the legislative session, and the governor will have about a month to consider it.

    Gov. Brown’s office said he would not be commenting on SB 822. He has not taken a public position on net neutrality.
    ..."
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2018
  10. hmscott

    hmscott Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    4,925
    Messages:
    17,318
    Likes Received:
    21,270
    Trophy Points:
    931
Loading...

Share This Page