Dispelling misconceptions in the Open Internet debate

Author: Daniel Lyons
Coverage Type: op-ed
American Enterprise Institute (AEI), 1150 Seventeenth Street, Washington, DC, 20036, United States

[Commenatary] Several misconceptions about the Open Internet rules are in circulation...this blog post is a first stab at dispelling the most problematic issues:
The Open Internet Order is not a First Amendment issue: Sen Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sen Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Public Knowledge President Gene Kimmelman all suggested that the Open Internet Order is a First Amendment issue. It is not. The First Amendment prevents the government from infringing upon freedom of speech. The Federal Communications Commission’s Open Internet Rules are not designed to curb government limits on speech, so the First Amendment rights of speakers are simply not implicated.
Repealing Title II reclassification is not the same as eliminating the Open Internet.
The Open Internet Order does not protect against higher prices.
The ultimate answer lies with Congress.

[Daniel Lyons is an associate professor at Boston College Law School]


... The open nternet order and nternet privacy order do nothing except acknowledge the nternet is nothing but interconnected telecommunications by wire, like these have always been.
These arguments seen mentioned HERE by John Eggerton note a constitutional scholar, Laurence Tribe, and a ridiculous, egregious academic failure. The cited case this alleged scholar filed an amicus curiae in does not remotely apply.

... There is no disparate treatment of ISPs and end users of the same speech the scholar alleges use of histories to display relevant ads is not protected against and only disclosure of histories to others parties is protected. The trouble with this is that end users who visit GOOG or MSFT and regularly search for hats have their privacy violated when the ISP is allowed to offer any additional service outside telecommunications like a hat.

.. This would be like Mayberry's operator Sarah listening to Deputy Fife and Thelma-Lou and recommending a movie Sarah enjoyed for a date. - - Telephone Operators may be compared to ISPs with the similar duty of transporting communications without becoming aware of the content of this speech.

... Yes; Connect the call but don't listen in or claim its a First Amendment right to listen in.

CurtisNeeley on February 17, 2017 - 5:13pm.



Login to rate this headline.