Net Neutrality

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I live in a micropolitan area (population fluctuates between 20 and 25K depending upon whether college is in session) and the principle ISP provider is Spectrum (Charter). Yes, we have Verizon, AT&T and the others, but, for the most part, cable and Internet are provided by Spectrum. My bill each month for cable and Internet is about $135 and this does not include any premium channels.

I do hope that one of the by products of net neutrality is increased competition which would in turn drive down costs.

 

[Future]

I live in a micropolitan area (population fluctuates between 20 and 25K depending upon whether college is in session) and the principle ISP provider is Spectrum (Charter). Yes, we have Verizon, AT&T and the others, but, for the most part, cable and Internet are provided by Spectrum. My bill each month for cable and Internet is about $135 and this does not include any premium channels.

I do hope that one of the by products of net neutrality is increased competition which would in turn drive down costs.

Exactly the same plan I have ...since spectrum has taken over ....have had many service failures ...though I did get money back when the failures happened ....

 

[vantexan]

Really DriveInDriveOut, you're disagreeing with listening to all sides of the argument? Does that mean you want to control the argument, to only have your opinion and others who agree with you heard? Just curious, are you a communist? Seriously, not kidding. Would explain a lot.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Really DriveInDriveOut, you're disagreeing with listening to all sides of the argument? Does that mean you want to control the argument, to only have your opinion and others who agree with you heard? Just curious, are you a communist? Seriously, not kidding. Would explain a lot.

That's not the part of your post I was disagreeing with. I think it'd be a great idea for you to hear both sides of the argument... because the more you post, the clearer it becomes that you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[vantexan]

I live in a micropolitan area (population fluctuates between 20 and 25K depending upon whether college is in session) and the principle ISP provider is Spectrum (Charter). Yes, we have Verizon, AT&T and the others, but, for the most part, cable and Internet are provided by Spectrum. My bill each month for cable and Internet is about $135 and this does not include any premium channels.

I do hope that one of the by products of net neutrality is increased competition which would in turn drive down costs.

But you have net neutrality now and it hasn't. I pay $126 a month to Dish for their 250 channel pkg. It does give me some movie channels but the main thing is it has some channels my dad likes, have it set up at his place. And it gives me the Dish Anywhere app, which amazingly enough allows me to watch tv on my tablet in Mexico with few hiccups. Just finding it hard to believe the net neutrality issue will affect average consumers, but if it does I'll gladly admit it.

 

[vantexan]

That's not the part of your post I was disagreeing with. I think it'd be a great idea for you to hear both sides of the argument... because the more you post, the clearer it becomes that you have no idea what you're talking about.

And the more you post the more it comes clear you try to shut down anyone who disagrees with your point of view. I've been following technology for years, read magazines and websites. Love gadgets. Can you say the same?

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

I've been following technology for years, read magazines and websites. Love gadgets. Can you say the same?

 

[vantexan]

So, are you a communist?

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

So, are you a communist?

 

[vantexan]

Maybe just a wannabe?

 

[cheryl]

The FCC’s case against net neutrality rests on a deliberate misrepresentation of how the internet works - TechCrunch

The FCC has just published the notice of proposed rulemaking that would roll back the 2015 Open Internet Order establishing net neutrality. Its first and primary justification for doing this is a way of defining broadband access that’s so backwards it’s ridiculous. It would be funny, if the future of the internet didn’t depend on this incredibly disingenuous maneuvering.

 

[cheryl]

2.6 million comments in, the FCC has changed almost nothing about its net neutrality proposal - The Verge

Since taking over the FCC earlier this year, commission chairman Ajit Pai has released the text of most proposals a month before they’re voted on. This is done in the name of transparency, so the public knows what the commission is up to. But it’s also done so that the commission can begin receiving comments and factor them in to the revised version of each proposal that it ends up voting on.

This is the same process that happened with the commission’s proposal to kill the 2015 net neutrality rules. An initial draft was published last month, and yesterday we got to see the revised draft that ended up being voted on. In between, there were plenty of comments made for the FCC to look at: 2.6 million as of today. (Though tens of thousands appear to be fake.)

 

[cheryl]

'Pretty ridiculous': thousands of names stolen to attack net neutrality rules - The Guardian

• Letter says 450,000 comments may have been spam from net neutrality enemies
• New FCC head wants to roll back Obama-era rules that govern open internet

Last Tuesday, Joel Mullaney, a software engineer from Watertwin, Massachusetts, was browsing Reddit when he spotted a thread about people whose names and postal addresses had been falsely used to post comments on a government website attacking Obama-era open internet regulation.

Mullaney, 43, popped his address into the search bar on the Federal Communications Commission’s website and found his name attached to a comment that started: “The unprecedented regulatory power the Obama administration imposed on the internet is smothering innovation, damaging the American economy and obstructing job creation.”

“It was pretty ridiculous,” said Mullaney. “That’s pretty much the exact opposite of what I think.”

 

[cheryl]

Net neutrality: 'Dead people' signing FCC consultation - BBC

'Questionable comments'

Almost 2.8 million comments have been filed on the FCC's plans since the consultation opened at the end of April.

Last week it was reported that hundreds of thousands of comments supporting the proposals had been posted by bots.

After the FCC vote on 18 May, chairman Ajit Pai told reporters there was "a tension between having an open process where it's easy to comment and preventing questionable comments from being filed", but that the regulator "erred on the side of openness".

 

[cheryl]

A Bad Broadband Market Begs for Net Neutrality Protections - EFF

Anyone who has spent hours on the phone with their cable company can tell you that in the broadband market, the customer is not always right.

When it comes to Internet access wired into your home, the major ISPs like Comcast, Charter, and Verizon don’t have to play nice because they know that most customers aren’t able to switch to another provider.

Thanks to policies at the federal, state, and local levels, as well as some careful planning by the major ISPs, there is no meaningful competition in the broadband market in most parts of the country. Instead, consumers are stuck with government-backed monopolistic ISPs that can get away with anti-consumer business practices.

 

[Catatonic]

Dear Mr. Butt:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the ongoing debate over net neutrality. I appreciate your thoughts on this issue.

Currently, there are over 215 million internet users in America, and many of these individuals rely on the internet to conduct their business, to research and study, and for leisure. Recently there has been substantial debate over whether action to ensure unrestricted access to the internet is necessary. As you may know, broadband internet access is governed by the Communications Act of 1934 as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. These laws authorize the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) jurisdiction over interstate communication conducted via radio and wire. Specifically, Title I and II of the Communications Act permit the FCC to regulate broadband services, with Title II providing more stringent parameters for telecommunications services.



As you may know, on Mar 12, 2015, the FCC issued new open Internet rules. According to the FCC, the order applies to mobile as well as fixed broadband and relies on Title II of the Communications Act and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and, for mobile broadband, Title III for its legal authority. The order reclassifies "broadband Internet access service" as a telecommunications service under Title II and bans blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. Among other things, the order applies major provisions of Title II such as no unjust and unreasonable practices or discrimination, consumer privacy, disability access, consumer complaint and enforcement processes, and fair access to poles and conduits in order to protect the interests of consumers. For more information regarding the new rules voted upon by the FCC, I encourage you to https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-open-internet-order.



In your letter, you expressed support for Congressional legislation that codifies net neutrality rules. At this time, rules regarding net neutrality and an open internet are governed by the FCC and as such are often at the will of the Chairman. Currently there has been no legislation introduced in the House of Representatives regarding net neutrality. Please rest assured I will pay close attention to this issue and will keep your views in mind should legislation be introduced.

Again, I thank you for sharing your views with me. I hope you will continue to give me the benefit of your opinion in the future. In addition, I encourage you to visit my web site, where you can view the latest news and obtain information on issues and legislation that is important to you. You can also sign up for my electronic newsletter, and receive periodic updates on my activities as your representative in Washington. Thank you again for contacting me, and I look forward to continuing to serve you.

Sincerely,

Nancy Pelosi

Member of Congress

 

[wkmac]

Not sure what the details are at this moment but earlier today, progressive website Counterpunch posted as article that Google was censoring them as well as several other progressive sites. Again, don't know the details but if true, an interesting as well as troubling event. The censoring does not seem to be about them being progressive as much as they aren't carrying water of the official narrative. This also places conservative or any alternative website at risk who dares to counter the official story. One speculation is the warfare State is getting out front of a strike against North Korea so the warfare State can control the official narrative without any challenges.

Keep watching.

 

[cheryl]

FCC extends net neutrality comment period by two weeks - The Verge

It now ends August 30th

You’ll have two extra weeks to file your thoughts with the FCC on its plan to get rid of net neutrality. The proposal’s comment period was originally scheduled to end next week, on August 16th, but the commission just pushed the date out to August 30th.

The extension was granted in response to 10 groups asking for more time to respond. They had been looking for an additional eight weeks, but the commission said an additional two weeks would be more in line with the type of extensions granted in the past.

 

[cheryl]

Dear Ms. Ferraro,

Thank you for contacting me to express your support for net neutrality. I always appreciate hearing from California constituents and welcome the opportunity to respond on this important issue.

Nearly fifty years ago, California researchers built a prototype interoperable computer network. Today, that network is the internet—an engine of unprecedented innovation, creativity, and prosperity. The internet has transformed our society, connecting us with loved ones, enabling entrepreneurship on a level playing field, and providing instant access to a global audience. A free and open internet is a powerful tool, particularly for historically disadvantaged communities. Anyone can use the internet to make their voice heard, regardless of their gender, the color of their skin, who they love, or where they were born. And any business, no matter how small or new, can use the internet to connect with consumers and thrive.

In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted commonsense rules to protect the internet’s openness. Those net neutrality rules, called the Open Internet Order, provide that the gatekeepers to the internet—cable companies and wireless providers, for example—cannot block, slow down, or otherwise interfere with lawful online services. Those rules guarantee that the online marketplace remains a level playing field, where you—not your service provider—get to choose the next global sensation.

The new leadership at the FCC recently proposed a radical regulatory reversal, effectively eliminating the Open Internet Order. I strongly oppose the proposal, and as your senator, I will fight to protect net neutrality. Just as importantly, I have exercised my right as a member of the public to comment on the FCC’s proposal—joining the over 700,000 Californians who have urged the FCC to maintain net neutrality. I encourage you to continue making your voice heard.

The internet is one of California’s greatest gifts to the nation, and to the world. As Californians, I believe we have a special responsibility to safeguard the internet’s freedom and openness.

Once again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3553.

Sincerely,

Kamala D. Harris
United States Senator

 

[cheryl]

Dear Ms. Ferraro:

Thank you for writing to express your support for open access to the Internet. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue, and I apologize for the delay in my response.

I understand that you are concerned about Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai’s views on net neutrality and that you oppose loosening regulations on Internet providers.

As you know, in 2015 the FCC approved rules that allow the agency to regulate Internet service providers. The rules are based on Title II of the Communications Act and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In developing its rules, the FCC stated: “Together Title II and Section 706 support clear rules of the road, providing the certainty needed for innovators and investors, and the competitive choices and freedom demanded by consumers.” The FCC also stated that, under the rules, “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.’” In June 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, ruled in favor of the FCC’s net neutrality rules, allowing the agency to regulate Internet service providers.

On May 18, 2017, the FCC voted in favor of starting the rule making process to overturn the net neutrality rules. You can find more information regarding this vote at: FCC Proposes Ending Utility-Style Regulation of the Internet

You may be interested to know that I recently sent a letter to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai highlighting the importance of net neutrality, specifically for women owned businesses. You may view the letter at: Senators Lead Letter to FCC Chairman Highlighting Importance of Net Neutrality to Women Across America

Please be assured that I will keep your opinions in mind as the FCC begins the process to overturn these rules, and if the Senate considers any relevant legislation.

Once again, thank you for writing. Should you have any other questions or comments, please call my Washington office at (202) 224-3841 or visit my website at feinstein.senate.gov. You can also follow me online at YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, and you can sign up for my email newsletter at feinstein.senate.gov/newsletter.

Best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator