On Jun 22, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
In case there was ever any doubt. Again, wondering what possessed the
Chairman to want to abolish Title II, with *nothing* to take its place.
Yup. The paid prioritization issue is important. Note that the survey question
"Actually, ISPs have said they do not oppose enforceable prohibitions on
blocking and throttling, though paid prioritization is a fuzzier area. What
ISPs do not want is the FCC to continue to define them as common carriers
subject to at least some of what they say are last-century rules that
discourage investment and innovation"
This part always sounds so lame. They *are* common carriers, in their new
role as ISPs. They are *not* mere entertainment nets, as they once used to
be. Just ask those who pay you month in and month out, for Internet
connectivity, for heaven's sake. As to rules that theoretically (although not
demonstrably) "discourage investment," address those with the FCC
individually, without attempting to play by the rules of mere entertainment
"ISPs also supported non-common carrier based net-neutrality rules under then
FCC chair Julius Genachowski, except for Verizon, which sued and began the
legal battle that resulted in FCC chair Tom Wheeler's Title II (common
carrier) redefinition in the 2015 Open Internet order, which also included
the bright line rules against blocking, throttling or paid prioritization, as
well a general conduct standard and applying Title II to business-to-business
interconnections as well as last-mile ISP connections to subs."
Well, I trust that the special interests don't expect much sympathy for this,
from their paying customers? Net neutrality existed when there were no
conflicts of interest, yet, between Internet service providers and the
Internet content they transferred, and also prior to that, when dialup ISP
competition was more than ample. There was a huge public outcry back in
2013-2014, when The People saw ISP misbehavior. No sense rehashing old news.
Nothing changed. People got fed up, and the courts upheld the people. And
that public outcry has now been repeated.
Before attempting to undo what The People clearly want, better have something
ready to take its place, Chairman. As opposed to hiding head in sand,
pretending that no problem exists.