FCC chairman reportedly tweaks proposed net neutrality rules following backlash

[Himanshu Arora]

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has revised the proposed net neutrality rules to include assurances that the agency will not allow ISPs to segregate Internet traffic into fast and slow lanes, according to a Wall Street Journal report.

The news comes just days after more than 150 internet companies including tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, and more wrote a letter (PDF) to the FCC, asking for a "free and open Internet" and a law to safeguard Net Neutrality.

As per the report, the new draft, which the chairman is expected to reveal today, will include language that would allow the FCC to scrutinize the deals to make sure that the broadband providers don't unfairly degrade the traffic of nonpaying customers.

The draft would seek comment on whether "paid prioritization" should be banned outright, and whether broadband Internet service should be considered a public utility. It would also look to prohibit broadband giants like Comcast and AT&T from striking deals with some content companies on terms that they aren't offering to others.

The FCC also plans to seek comment on two other net neutrality proposals offered by the Mozilla Foundation and Tim Wu, the Columbian law professor who coined the term "net neutrality".

Earlier, the commission's proposed net neutrality plan drew harsh criticism on the Internet after it was revealed that the federal agency would allow Internet service providers to charge companies for a faster lane of service.

The new draft will be voted on by the four other FCC commissioners at the agency's open meeting on Thursday.

Image via T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/56718-fcc-chairman-reportedly-tweaks-proposed-net-neutrality-rules-following-backlash.html

 

[jackal2687]

We shall see what happens.

 

[RustyTech]

"...will include language that would allow the FCC to scrutinize the deals..."

This FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is so far behind the 8-ball that he can't even see the pool table. With this "new" revision, I'll NOT change anything but will just add verbiage that will allow FCC to police and monitor. So they'll be monitoring all the thousands upon thousands or deals between large corporations? and/or will they be monitoring all the deals between every single individual account?

This Wheeler if far removed from reality.
Or rather, he's enjoying the newly found cash lining his pockets?

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

I'm not in favor of the govt taking applying regulations to the internet, or in favor of them choosing which companies get to pay for faster connections etc. But let's call a spade a spade on this one and not kid ourselves about the following ....

The news comes just days after more than 150 internet companies including tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, and more wrote a letter (PDF) to the FCC, asking for a "free and open Internet" and a law to safeguard Net Neutrality.

They all want a 'free and open internet' huh? Or more like, they want an internet they don't have to pay the FCC for their customers to be able to use like they do today. If the FCC allows companies to pay for faster service, then some will. Once some do, then all will have to follow, and that means more expense for all these companies.

By writing a letter to the FCC now, they can all collude, er, sorry, agree that it's better for everyone if play on a level field instead of trying to one-up each other. It's much better to get ahead of something like this than to try to work out details to play fair later. Often that 'playing fair' is illegal.

 

[p51d007]

Trust me...they will STILL do what they want. Here is how government works now (sadly).
Instead of creating new laws & regulations, within the confines of the U.S. Constitution, they
do this:

1. Float a trial balloon in the media on something they ultimately want.
2. Let the media spread the information.
3. Wait for any public backlash from said information.
4. If there is no backlash, they proceed.
5. If there IS a public backlash, they back down, think of a new idea, and float that.
6. Propose the new idea, via step 2, wait for step 3 & then do step 4.
7. At a later date, say 6 months to 2 years later, do a document dump the Friday before
a major public holiday stating they are going to do what they wanted from step 1.
8. Silently implement what they wanted in step 1.
9. When the public discovers it, they will use the media in step 2 to feed information
to people clueless how things work, that this is nothing, and a similar idea has been
going on for the past (however long step 6 has been going on), and it's no big deal.
10. Finally achieve what they wanted in step 1 in the first place.

 

[cmbjive]

I'm not in favor of the govt taking applying regulations to the internet, or in favor of them choosing which companies get to pay for faster connections etc. But let's call a spade a spade on this one and not kid ourselves about the following ....

The news comes just days after more than 150 internet companies including tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, and more wrote a letter (PDF) to the FCC, asking for a "free and open Internet" and a law to safeguard Net Neutrality.

They all want a 'free and open internet' huh? Or more like, they want an internet they don't have to pay the FCC for their customers to be able to use like they do today. If the FCC allows companies to pay for faster service, then some will. Once some do, then all will have to follow, and that means more expense for all these companies.

By writing a letter to the FCC now, they can all collude, er, sorry, agree that it's better for everyone if play on a level field instead of trying to one-up each other. It's much better to get ahead of something like this than to try to work out details to play fair later. Often that 'playing fair' is illegal.

It's always been a choice between siding with the telcos or siding with the giant tech firms. People who argue otherwise are being disingenuous.

 

[psycros]

I'm not in favor of the govt taking applying regulations to the internet, or in favor of them choosing which companies get to pay for faster connections etc. But let's call a spade a spade on this one and not kid ourselves about the following ....

The news comes just days after more than 150 internet companies including tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, and more wrote a letter (PDF) to the FCC, asking for a "free and open Internet" and a law to safeguard Net Neutrality.

They all want a 'free and open internet' huh? Or more like, they want an internet they don't have to pay the FCC for their customers to be able to use like they do today. If the FCC allows companies to pay for faster service, then some will. Once some do, then all will have to follow, and that means more expense for all these companies.

By writing a letter to the FCC now, they can all collude, er, sorry, agree that it's better for everyone if play on a level field instead of trying to one-up each other. It's much better to get ahead of something like this than to try to work out details to play fair later. Often that 'playing fair' is illegal.

Yep. If the big boys could all get exemptions from the new rules just like all of Obama's buddies did with Obamacare, they would do so. They'd happily leave the small fry stuck in the slow lane. Of course there's no telling how many executives at those companies are plotting their own startups in the near future, so maybe their worried about being among the small fry. Can't ignore that angle.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Trust me...they will STILL do what they want. Here is how government works now (sadly).
Instead of creating new laws & regulations, within the confines of the U.S. Constitution, they
do this:

1. Float a trial balloon in the media on something they ultimately want.
2. Let the media spread the information.
3. Wait for any public backlash from said information.
4. If there is no backlash, they proceed.
5. If there IS a public backlash, they back down, think of a new idea, and float that.
6. Propose the new idea, via step 2, wait for step 3 & then do step 4.
7. At a later date, say 6 months to 2 years later, do a document dump the Friday before
a major public holiday stating they are going to do what they wanted from step 1.
8. Silently implement what they wanted in step 1.
9. When the public discovers it, they will use the media in step 2 to feed information
to people clueless how things work, that this is nothing, and a similar idea has been
going on for the past (however long step 6 has been going on), and it's no big deal.
10. Finally achieve what they wanted in step 1 in the first place.

Good list (my fav is #7), but you forgot the part where the regulations cause a whole bunch of unintended consequences that the govt will then hide under piles of fuzzy statistics and misleading statements. Eventually we'll realize that instead of taking the promised step forward, we've taken a big step backward, spent a ton of money in the process and now have extra problems to fix that weren't foreseen.

You have to laugh at it to keep from crying.

 

[Guest]

I love that list too, and mikes added bit is definitely needed.
Gone are the days where people would get their hands dirty and fight for liberty.
Sad days are these, most humans, brainwashed puppets, sat at their screen that keeps them in there place. Oh wait thats me also I guess.
I will just have to hope that this old fart croaks, like all the other old farts, fed with silver spoons, who are not taught, about the real world and the rest of us, but only how to keep the money flowing incestuously around their kind, who then get these governmental jobs... and do mental things that quite frankly make no sense to us. But of course it wouldn't make sense to use, we aren't in the silver spoon clique.

 

[Guest]

5 people decide what is done with OUR communications. Since this is a Federal branch, and people in that branch are regular american citizens, why not allow these proposals to be put on the table and voted on by the internet companies who are to be under these rules. It would make sense if instead of a letter to the FCC the company can actually have a vote on these rulings. Allowing 5 completely disconnected individuals run this show will take our internet into the stone ages. Net Neutrality is as important as important as having clean running water.

 

[Guest]

It is not only the ISPs who are effected by any regulations, all users of the internet ate best served by net neatrality, except those readied to profit from prefferential allotment of bandwidth.

To allow only the ISPs to vote on things, is akin to letting the fox in the hen house.

 

[Hewhowaits]

Don't tweak it,TRASH IT.