UPDATE: Today, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski issued a statement declaring his intention to reassert the agency's authority over Internet Service Providers. His statement was followed by a more detailed plan from the FCC's general counsel. The "third way" plan, designed to appease Net Neutrality advocates - while not completely enraging the phone and cable companies - is good in some areas, and bad in others.
It will enable the FCC to enact many important provisions of their celebrated National Broadband Plan, including Net Neutrality and modifying government subsidy of Internet services. However, the new plan explicitly states that the FCC will not try to advance policies that promote more competition and affordability. Genachowski will use a technical process called "forbearance" to strip some of the agency's authority.
This approach mirrors the major shortfall in the original broadband plan: it is conspicuously missing tough provisions that would foster competition in a nation where 97% of markets have two or less broadband providers. Lack of competition is the primary reason the US has fallen from 4th to 22nd globally in broadband speed and adoption in the past ten years.
Fortunately, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps issued a strong statement today, cautioning the chairman from weakening the agency's authority by going on a "forbearance binge."
###
In response to widespread netroots backlash, the chairman of the FCC has decided to choose a path toward a broadband policy framework that will protect Net Neutrality and promote universal access.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Chairman plans to restore the status quo as it existed prior to the court decision in order to fulfill the agency's goals to bring broadband to all Americans and preserve a free and open Internet. The recent court decision determined that changed made by the Bush-era FCC had stripped the agency from authority to regulate Internet broadband providers like Comcast and ATT.
Assuming that the Chairman's proposal is reasonable, it is a clear signal that the FCC is backing away from the cliff, and charting a path toward a sensible broadband policy framework that will protect consumers and promote universal access.
That is welcome news, but we must not rush to judgment on whether the FCC has gone far enough to protect consumers with the new proposal. Public interest groups are awaiting details that will likely be released on Thursday. Stay tuned for more information as it becomes available.
Previously: Congress to FCC: Do Whatever It Takes to Protect the Internet.
Follow Josh Silver on Twitter: www.twitter.com/freepress
James Rucker: Mr. President: Time to Take the Wheel on Net Neutrality
The FCC still has the power to reverse the rejected reasoning of the Bush years, to re-establish its legal footing, and to protect the public interest.
Net Neutrality is good, but so is freedom on your PC. Mac OS X/Apple is far more restrictive than Microsoft/Windows is; but that's not far enough (for me). I HIGHLY recommend using Linux in one of it's many incarnations. If you are new to Linux, I suggest Linux Mint or Ubuntu.
• the statist veils his pursuits in moral indignation intoning in high dudgeon the injustices and inequities of liberty and life itself, for which only he can provide justice and bring a righteous resolution. and when the resolution proves elusive, as it undoubtedly does - whether the marxist promise of the workers paradise or the great societys war on poverty - the statist demands ever more authority to wring out the imperfections of mankinds existence. unconstrained by constitutional prohibitions, what is left to limit the statists ambitions but his own moral compass, which has already led him astray. he is never circumspect of his own shortcomings, failure is not a product of his beliefs but merely want of power and resources. thus are born endless rationalizations for seizing ever more governmental authority. mark levin
How is that preferable? Do you really want your ISP to control what you can and cannot access on the Web? Using Skype from Verizon? Not anymore! Comcast doesn't like Hulu, too bad! And with 97% of the country with only 1 or 2 choices for ISPs combines with a very high cost of entry, you can't count on competition to have any affect.
Oh, and by the way, we've had net neutrality since the ARPANET days, Comcast, Verizon and the other service providers want to end that. The Internet was built with taxpayers money, WE built it, and now the corporations want total control of what you can and cannot access.
in the interest of citizenship and self-government." Cass Sunstein, obama admin official.
"the glorious revolution, democratic revolution" mark lloyd discussing hugo chavez's abuse of power in closing all of the media.
there not radical.
and how exactly is your isp controlling what you post or download? mine doesnt.
This issue is similar to that of proprietary versus open software where proprietary software stifles growth while open software encourages standardization, growth, better security, etc.
Original:
"The recent court decision determined that changed made by the Bush-era FCC had stripped the agency from authority to regulate Internet broadband providers like Comcast and ATT."
Extra Crispy:
"The recent court decision determined that changes made by the Bush-era FCC had stripped the agency from authority to regulate Internet broadband providers like Comcast and ATT. "
The Internet was started by the US Dept of Defense Advanced Research Project Agency and the US has steadfastly refused to release control of the Domain Naming Service.
This oxymoron is kind of like saying 'keep government hands off my Medicare'.
Oddly, it is (or was) mostly run for free, by universities and companies, particularly Bell Labs and DEC. You may pay your ISP to connect to it, but they are not paying for your messages to be routed everywhere, like to another country. Nobody is.
Now businesses are trying to make money by routing some messages faster than others.
That would give big businesses advantages over small businesses, etc.
Even this explanation is way too simple, but hope it helps.
It's better than "it's a series of tubes" :-)
That's something we need to fix our legislator to do.
Which means we need to fix our problems with lobbying - mainly, that corporations can do it.