February 2015

FCC Adopts Strong, Sustainable Rules To Protect The Open Internet

Ending lingering uncertainty about the future of the Open Internet, the Federal Communications Commission set sustainable rules of the roads that will protect free expression and innovation on the Internet and promote investment in the nation’s broadband networks. The Commission enacts strong, sustainable rules, grounded in multiple sources of legal authority, to ensure that Americans reap the economic, social, and civic benefits of an Open Internet today and into the future. These new rules are guided by three principles: America’s broadband networks must be fast, fair and open -- principles shared by the overwhelming majority of the nearly 4 million commenters who participated in the FCC’s Open Internet proceeding. The Order protects consumers no matter how they access the Internet, whether on a desktop computer or a mobile device. The first three rules ban practices that are known to harm the Open Internet:

No Blocking: broadband providers may not block access to legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
No Throttling: broadband providers may not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.
No Paid Prioritization: broadband providers may not favor some lawful Internet traffic over other lawful traffic in exchange for consideration of any kind -- in other words, no “fast lanes.” This rule also bans ISPs from prioritizing content and services of their affiliates.

A Standard for Future Conduct: Because the Internet is always growing and changing, there must be a known standard by which to address any concerns that arise with new practices. The Order establishes that ISPs cannot “unreasonably interfere with or unreasonably disadvantage” the ability of consumers to select, access, and use the lawful content, applications, services, or devices of their choosing; or of edge providers to make lawful content, applications, services, or devices available to consumers. This Order ensures that the FCC will have authority to address questionable practices on a case-by-case basis, and provides guidance in the form of factors on how the FCC will apply the standard in practice.
Greater Transparency: The rules described above will restore the tools necessary to address specific conduct by broadband providers that might harm the Open Internet. But the Order recognizes the critical role of transparency in a well-functioning broadband ecosystem. In addition to the existing transparency rule, which was not struck down by the court, the Order requires that broadband providers disclose, in a consistent format, promotional rates, fees and surcharges and data caps. Disclosures must also include packet loss as a measure of network performance, and provide notice of network management practices that can affect service. To further consider the concerns of small ISPs, the Order adopts a temporary exemption from the transparency enhancements for fixed and mobile providers with 100,000 or fewer subscribers, and delegates authority to our Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau to determine whether to retain the exception and, if so, at what level. The Order also creates for all providers a “safe harbor” process for the format and nature of the required
disclosure to consumers, which the Commission believes will lead to more effective presentation of consumer-focused information by broadband providers.
Reasonable Network Management: For the purposes of the rules, other than paid prioritization, an ISP may engage in reasonable network management. This recognizes the need of broadband providers to manage the technical and engineering aspects of their networks.
In assessing reasonable network management, the Commission’s standard takes account of the particular engineering attributes of the technology involved -- whether it be fiber, DSL, cable, unlicensed Wi-Fi, mobile, or another network medium.
However, the network practice must be primarily used for and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management -- and not business -- purpose.

FCC Grants Petitions to Preempt State Laws Restricting Community Broadband in North Carolina, Tennessee

The Federal Communications Commission opened the door for two community broadband providers to expand service, preempting state laws in Tennessee and North Carolina that prevented these and similar broadband providers in the two states from meeting local demand for broadband service. A Memorandum Opinion and Order adopted by the Commission finds that provisions of the laws in North Carolina and Tennessee are barriers to broadband deployment, investment and competition, and conflict with the FCC’s mandate to promote these goals. The state laws had effectively prevented the cities from expanding broadband service outside their current footprints despite numerous requests from neighboring unserved and underserved communities.
FCC votes 3-2 to override state bans of municipal broadband

Good News for Consumers, Innovators and Financial Markets

Thank you to the over four million Americans who participated in the Open Internet proceeding. Thanks to them, this decision on Internet openness was itself the most open proceeding in the history of the Federal Communications Commission. As a result, the FCC has taken an important step that should reassure consumers, innovators and the financial markets about the broadband future of our nation. Consumers now know that lawful content will not be blocked or their service throttled. Today’s action puts in place bright line rules to ban these practices outright.

Innovators now know they will have open access to consumers without worrying about pay-for-preference fast lanes. This, too, is a bright line rule to ban paid prioritization. Financial markets now know that rate regulation, tariffing and forced unbundling -- the old-style utility regulation -- has been superseded by a modernized regulatory approach that has already been demonstrated to work. The rules under which the wireless industry invested $300 billion to build a vibrant and growing business are the pro-investment model for the rules we adopted Feb 26. Today is a red letter day both for an Open Internet, and for a broadband future of investment and expansion.

Senate panel to grill FCC on Internet rules

According to Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-SD), the Committee is slated to grill all five Federal Communications Commission members during an oversight hearing on March 18. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and the four other commissioners will answer questions about the agency's "over-reaching" network neutrality order. Chairman Thune left open the option of blocking the regulations through the appropriations process. He also said there would be interest in pushing a vote of disapproval. "We are going to keep all those options available, and I think a resolution of disapproval is something that there will be some interest in if in fact we can't find some Democrats to work with us on this," he said.

Chairman Thune said he still prefers to pass legislation that could override the FCC's plan. "As stakeholders and lawmakers alike see the FCC proposal mired by legal challenges, it will become increasingly clear that a legislative proposal is the only way to ensure that protections go into effect quickly and survive any legal challenge," Chairman Thune said. While his Committee is in talks with Democrats in Congress, he lamented that he has "not found a willing partner at the FCC or the White House."

90,000 Californians Sign Petition Calling on PUC to Block Comcast Merger

Consumer groups renewed their call today for the California Public Utilities Commission to reject the proposed Comcast–Time Warner Cable merger and announced that they had collected 90,000 petition signatures from Californians opposed to the deal. This announcement coincided with the California PUC’s All-Party meeting on the merger scheduled to begin at 2pm in San Francisco (CA). "Californians are adamantly opposed to this mega merger,” said Michael McCauley, spokesperson for Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy division of Consumer Reports. “They know that giving Comcast so much control over the broadband market is a bad deal for consumers that should be rejected outright. If Comcast gets its way, Californians can expect higher prices, fewer choices, and even worse customer service.”

March 11, 2015
5:45-8:30 pm
Kaufman Center
New York, NY
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/upcoming-debates/item/1252-the-...

In 2014, the European Union’s Court of Justice determined that individuals have a right to be forgotten, “the right—under certain conditions—to ask search engines to remove links with personal information about them.” It is not absolute, but meant to be balanced against other fundamental rights, like freedom of expression. In a half year following the Court’s decision, Google received over 180,000 removal requests. Of those reviewed and processed, 40.5% were granted. Largely seen as a victory in Europe, in the U.S., the reaction has been overwhelmingly negative. Was this ruling a blow to free speech and public information, or a win for privacy and human dignity?

Read more about The US Should Adopt the "Right to be Forgotten" Online

How We Won Net Neutrality

[Commentary] Credit Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler for listening to his critics and changing his mind about how to best protect the open Internet. Praise President Barack Obama for using his bully pulpit. Thank John Oliver for coining the memorable phrase "cable company f--kery." But know that none of this happens without a relentless push from the grassroots.

The real story here was dozens of public interest groups, new civil rights leaders and netroots organizers coordinating actions online and off, inside and outside Washington. Artists, musicians, faith leaders and legal scholars bolstered their efforts. And about a dozen mostly unsung advocates in DC pushed back daily against the phone and cable lobby. This diverse coalition broke the FCC's website, jammed switchboards on Capitol Hill, and forged new alliances that are transforming how telecommunications and technology policy is made. With this victory, and the ones like SOPA that came before it, a new political force has awakened. But we've only just scratched the surface of what a well-organized Internet constituency can accomplish. Now we must figure out how to turn this exciting moment into a lasting political movement.

[Craig Aaron is the President and CEO of Free Press]

Protect the Open Internet

[Commentary] The claims by US House and Senate Republicans that the Obama Administration strong-armed the Federal Communications Commission in its rulemaking are offensive to the millions of Americans who have helped shape the FCC's order by participating in the rulemaking process. The federal rulemaking process is more transparent, responsive, and nonpartisan than congressional solutions to net neutrality or ad hoc litigation.

The time for strong net neutrality rules is now. Americans overwhelmingly support strong net neutrality rules, and the entire Internet ecosystem -- consumers, content providers, and Internet service providers alike -- stands to benefit from strong, bright-line rules that encourage the virtuous cycle of domestic capital investment, innovation and competition through an open Internet. I strongly support the FCC’s efforts to ensure this virtuous cycle of innovation and competition by issuing strong rules to protect the open Internet, and I call on my Republican colleagues to stop playing games. The stakes are too high for anything less.

Net Neutrality May Face an Uphill Battle If History Tells Us Anything

The Federal Communications Commission is scheduled to vote on a proposal today that effectively bars Internet companies from prioritizing some Internet traffic over others. As John Oliver famously explained “ending net neutrality would allow big companies to buy their way into the fast lane, leaving everyone else in the slow lane.” The FCC’s proposal faces plenty of opposition from telecom companies and others, but it’s just the latest round in a long fight. Here is a brief history of attempts to enact net neutrality and the often successful push against it.

Net Neutrality Fight Rife With Interests Connected to Commissioners

The two Republican members of the Federal Communications Commission who have asked for a delay in the FCC's Feb 26 vote on net neutrality rules both have past connections to big money interests opposed to the rules. On the other hand, so does FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, whose proposal is on the table. Commissioner Ajit Pai, for his part, used to be a lawyer for Verizon, a company that has been on the front lines fighting FCC net neutrality guidelines in the past. Commissioner Michael O’Reilly’s previous positions were in the public sector, where his bosses were favored recipients of campaign cash by companies opposing the current proposal. Each of the elected officials Commissioner O’Reilly worked for count broadband cable companies among their top 20 donors. But money and past ties don’t always rule the day.

Democratic Chairman Wheeler spent much of his career heading the National Cable and Telecommunications Association and the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association, both of which oppose his current proposal. Chairman Wheeler’s position, though, has evolved -- he was previously in favor of an approach more to the Internet service providers’ liking.

Benton

Search