Net Neutrality Brainstorm (Define net neutality (Net neutrality framwork…
Net Neutrality Brainstorm
Title I and Title II: Sections of Communications act of 1934 which allows regulation or wired and wireless comm
Title I: Information Service
Proposal lifts ISP bans and requires less reporting
ISPs must disclose blocking, throttling, prioritization,etc. If ISPs are slowing down or speeding up specific data, they have to explain why.
ISPs no longer have to report geographically specific network performance metrics, such as dropped packets, upload and download rates at peak times.
ISPs can throttle, content that they don't like and prioritize content that they like as long as they disclosed. Banned under Title II
Advocates say FCC will be able to differentiate between fair and unfair throttling
Privacy and anti-competitive practices be regulated by FTC and one set of rules, not rules form different FAA regulators.
Advocates claim that innovation is being stifled because government can control rates under title II
Decline in Capex between 2014 and 2015 is 1B, however, thiis is well year-to-year variance. See figure. No such loss reported in SEC filings, where companies can be sued for misstating losses.
Pre 2015 rules for net neutrality could still be implemented without using the highly regulatory Title II classification
May allow prioritization of Video or VOIP to lower latency
Title II: Common Carrier
Filed in 2015: ISPs are common carriers and expressly banned activities like throttling, blocking and paid prioritization.
Common carriage is not a new concept. They have long been applied to facilities central to the public life and economy of our nation, including canal systems, railroads, public highways, and telegraph and telephone networks.
Throttling and prioritization
Partners of ISPs allowed broadcast content uninhibited. Non-affiliated companies slowed down
Customers gravitate to faster services
2007 ATT censors Pearl Jam's political language
2007: Comcast blocks peer-to-peer file sharing
2007 Verizon cuts off text messaging program to pro-choice group
Define net neutality
Net neutrality framwork enacted in 2015
Vote on Dec 14 to remove and instate "Restoring Internet Freedom Order"
FCC voted to enact "Open Internet Order"
The internet and companies that provide it should be neutral to content. Reliability and service should not depend on content viewed
In November 2014 Pres. Obama made a video supporting net neutrality
Over 76% of americans support net neutrality
Comment period closed Aug 16, 2017. The FCC claims that 21 million public comments critical on repealing Open Internet order could not be considered because they were spam or posted by bots. Comments only count if they can prove economic benefit of keeping the Open Internet Order
FCC rejects duplicate responses that don't introduce new facts.
Disingenuious to claim they don't know that public majority wants net neutrality.
Board 3 republicans, and 2 Deomocrats. Vote expected to be on party lines. Majority rules
Chairmain Ajit Pai argued we are regulating against "hypothetical harms". Title II classification means higher broadband prices (because Title II opens the door to more taxes); less broadband deployment (because investing companies won’t know whether they can profit from their investments); and less innovative experimentation in services and in choice for consumers.
In many areas of the country, people have only 1 or 2 broadband options
ISPs compete with web services: netflix, hulu, etc
Will have to make a strong case to eliminate net neutrality rules that have been in effect since 2005, not just weaken them.
A "Stay" could be filed to prevent portions of the Restoring Internet Freedom Order" from being implemented if immediate harm is proven. So ISPs are unlikely to implement any radical new business practices that benefit them to prevent a stay.
Supreme court: Could be a long legal battle that goes to the supreme court many years form now
Supreme court: Government agencies not free to change longstanding rules without substantial reason. A change in ideaology is not enough.