News Heading

772,000 AMERICANS TELL THE FCC— ‘DO NOT REGULATE THE INTERNET’

September 15, 2014

by American Commitment
Human Events

Washington, D.C.— Over three quarters of a million Americans have officially told the Federal Communications Commission they do not want the Internet regulated by Washington bureaucrats, according to American Commitment, a national advocacy organization who encouraged Americans opposed to proposed Internet regulations to speak out.

In the past three weeks, over 772,000 Americans filed comments opposing any regulation of the Internet. Read More…

Treating the Internet like a utility won’t promote competition, no matter what ‘clicktivist’ say

September 15, 2014

by L. Gordon Crovitz
The Wall Street Journal

Does the Internet make people stupid? This column has been on the optimistic side: Surely humans can still find a way to focus on and understand complex topics. But that faith is being sorely tested by the abysmal Washington debate over “net neutrality.”

Monday is the deadline for public comments on proposed Internet regulations to the Federal Communications Commission. More than one million comments have been posted, mostly sent by “clicktivists” and drafted by special-interest groups in Washington. As a sign of the confusion over the topic, many commenters say they want more Internet competition but then demand regulation that would stifle competition. Read More…

The FCC Must Reject the Title II Delusion

September 15, 2014

Evan Swarztrauber
TechFreedom and ICLE

WASHINGTON D.C. — Today, a diverse coalition of web entrepreneurs, investors, telecom and antitrust experts, and policy organizations wrote to FCC Chairman Thomas Wheeler urging him not to impose common carrier or public utility-style regulations on the Internet through Title II of the Communications Act. The letter also presents to the FCC a grassroots petition hosted at DontBreakThe.Net.

Led by TechFreedom and the International Center for Law & Economics, the coalition includes, among others, VoIP pioneer Jeff Pulver, venture capitalist Scott Banister, former FCC Commissioner Glen Robinson, leading legal scholar Richard Epstein, and a range of academics.

The coalition letter opens:

Attempting to retrofit the onerous set of regulations developed for the monopoly telephony network onto the Internet would be a disaster for Internet users everywhere. That’s why it has been rejected by four FCC Chairmen (of both parties), leading Democratic Senators as early as 1998, 74 House Democrats as late as 2010, all Congressional Republicans, and the entire broadband industry. Read More…

Tariffing the Internet

September 11, 2014

by Lawrence J. Spiwak
Hillicon Valley

Since the early days of the Internet, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has taken a largely “hands off” regulatory approach — a light touch widely held to be a key contributor to the rapid innovation, diffusion and adoption of Internet services in the United States. Facilitating this deregulatory approach to a vibrant new sector of the communications industry was the agency’s classification of broadband Internet access as an “information service” under Title I of the Communications Act. Despite the success of this approach, and in response to the agency’s struggles to construct legally sustainable “open Internet” rules, the FCC is coming under intense political pressure to reverse course and to reclassify broadband Internet access as a common carrier telecommunications service under Title II of that act. Doing so, it is argued, is the only way to provide the agency with sufficient legal authority to prevent broadband service providers (BSPs) from engaging in anticompetitive conduct. Read More…

Netflix, Reddit stage ‘Internet slowdown’ to protest new rules

September 10, 2014

by Julian Hattem
Hillicon Valley

Major websites and advocacy groups are launching their most public protest yet against proposed federal rules they warn could lead to “fast lanes” and “slow lanes” on the Internet.

Wednesday’s “Internet Slowdown” will have sites like Netflix, Etsy and Reddit teaming up with activist groups from the American Civil Liberties Union to Demand Progress to voice support for strong Federal Communications Commission regulations on net neutrality — the notion that Internet service providers like Comcast or Cox should treat all online traffic equally. Read More…

Decompetition Decompetition Decompetition

September 15, 2014

by Scott Cleland
The Daily Caller

The FCC’s new professed mantra is “competition competition competition.”

However, the FCC appears to be pursuing a de facto policy of decompetition rather than competition.

Decompetition is regulation that undermines competition in order to justify more regulation.

How could this perverse outcome happen?

It’s what one gets when one combines an obsolete communications law and regulators nostalgic for the regulatory power of a bygone era.

The FCC is increasingly acting like a 20th century regulator searching for relevance in a 21st century marketplace. Read More…

772,000 AMERICANS TELL THE FCC— ‘DO NOT REGULATE THE INTERNET’

September 15, 2014

by American Commitment
Human Events

Washington, D.C.— Over three quarters of a million Americans have officially told the Federal Communications Commission they do not want the Internet regulated by Washington bureaucrats, according to American Commitment, a national advocacy organization who encouraged Americans opposed to proposed Internet regulations to speak out.

In the past three weeks, over 772,000 Americans filed comments opposing any regulation of the Internet. Read More…

Net neutrality policy and the future of your Internet

September 15, 2014

by James E. Prieger
Hillicon Valley

Recently, the Chronicle published Thea Selby’s account of her letter to the Federal Communications Commission, one of more than a million comments filed in connection with its “net neutrality” proposal to regulate how Internet service providers manage traffic on their networks.

As Ev Erlich responded on July 24, at the heart of the controversy is how regulators should treat your ISP: as they always have – as an entity that supplies you broadband Internet service – or more like the way they regulate common carriers such as AT&T, Verizon and others. Read More…

Internet Command and Control Regulation

September 15, 2014

by Zach Christenson
The American Consumer

As many observers know by now, the FCC is contemplating reclassifying the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act, which would make the Internet a public utility rather than its current classification of Title I, which applies to information services. The FCC’s reply comments for this proceeding ended this Wednesday.

Though net neutrality proponents have lost in the courts, they’re now pushing the FCC for these new rule changes, effectively giving government command and control over how the Internet operates. Read More…

America needs a reality check on net neutrality

September 15, 2014

by Roslyn Layton
American Enterprise Institute

The Battle for the Net is asking you to join “Internet Slowdown Day,” its symbolic protest to “slow down” the Internet to raise awareness about net neutrality, the concept that all data on the Internet should be treated the same. They asserts that “Team Cable” (Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner Cable, only two of which offer cable) are “attacking the Internet with plans to charge websites arbitrary fees and slow any sites that won’t pay up. If they win, the Internet dies.” It’s a pretty serious charge. If the Internet died, it would be a bad thing not just for the U.S., but for the world.

But net neutrality advocates in the U.S. are only giving you part of the picture, and making the future look far more grim than it really is. We should call this Internet Reality Check Day instead.

Here are some key facts about the U.S.’s outsized role in the Internet ecosystem: Just 4 percent of the world’s population Read More…

Free-Market Advocates’ Comments to FCC, Opposing Internet Regulation

July 15, 2014

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of  Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet

GN Docket No. 14-28

Comments of

Free-Market Advocates Opposed to Internet Regulation

For 10 years officials at the Federal Communications Commission have told Americans that the Internet will “break” unless the agency steps in to keep it “free and open.”  All the while, the Internet’s privately driven development has been vibrant, relentless and universal.  Nevertheless, at points during this same period the Commission twice sought to encumber the Internet with restrictive common carrier-like, Net Neutrality regulations.  In response to each of these actions, the DC Circuit twice struck down the agency’s overreach.  In the latest DC Circuit ruling – Verizon v. FCC[1] – the Court struck down the main thrust of the Commission’s arguments, but found that the Commission had some authority under Section 706 of the Communications Act.   The Commission has apparently undertaken the present Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to once again establish a regulatory regime in the absence of a market failure or a clear Congressional grant of authority.

The Internet is “free and open,” making the vast “network of networks” an integral engine for societal growth, participatory democracy and global commerce.  Its healthy development came primarily through the lack of government regulation, not because of it.  Although the Court seems to have offered the FCC a very narrow pathway to impose some form of Net Neutrality regulation on the Internet, nothing demands that the FCC go forward with its present plans.

Read More…

IFC Reply Comments to FCC: Title II Reclassification Unjustified, Unnecessary

August 12, 2010

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of Framework for Broadband Internet Service                    

GN Docket No. 10-127

FCC Docket No. 10-114

 Reply Comments

of the Undersigned Members of the

INTERNET FREEDOM COALITION

Introduction

The Commission is being asked by Free Press and other organizations to pursue a radical course of action – reclassifying information services as telecommunications services in order to regulate the Internet for the first time.  We write to urge the Commission to keep the Internet free of new government regulation and taxation and to refrain from rushing into such a potentially disastrous course of action.

Analysts are only beginning to grasp the extent of the disruptive and destructive consequences of regulating the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act, and the Commission is in no position to predict the outcome, much less assure Americans it will be positive.  Americans have heard political leaders admit that we will not know the full extent or nature of massive health care and financial services regulations until after the underlying legislation has been passed.  Now, Americans are facing the imposition of an even lesser-understood regulatory regime over the Internet without the benefit of any legislative process whatsoever.

CLICK HERE FOR PDF

IFC Supplemental Reply Comments: FCC Lacks Authority, Justification for Reclassifying Internet as Title II Service

April 26, 2010

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of
Preserving the Open Internet              GN Docket No. 09-191                                  
Broadband Industry Practices            WC Docket No. 07-52

Supplemental Reply Comments of the Internet Freedom Coalition

Just two days prior to the Commission’s deadline for reply comments regarding the above Notice of Proposed Rulemakings, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in Comcast v. FCC that the Commission has no authority to enact Net Neutrality rules.  The deadline for comments was extended, particularly to facilitate discussion of other methods of promulgating Net Neutrality regulations.

 Beginning with comments on the National Broadband Plan filed by Public Knowledge in January, a small number of organizations have since proposed classifying the Internet as a Title II common carrier service as a way of asserting the Commission’s authority to enact Net Neutrality regulations.  The Internet Freedom Coalition respectfully submits these reply comments in strong opposition to any effort to reclassify the Internet as a Title II service.

Read More…

IFC Reply Comments to FCC: Refuting Free Press’ Arguments for Regulating the Internet

April 26, 2010

Before the

Federal Communications Commission

Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                                           
Preserving the Open Internet                      GN Docket No. 09-191
Broadband Industry Practices                    WC Docket No. 07-52

Reply Comments of the Internet Freedom Coalition

The following comments are submitted by the undersigned members of the Internet Freedom Coalition.  They are submitted in reply to comments filed by proponents of Network Neutrality regulations, and are attributable only to the signatories.

Read More…

Internet Freedom Coalition Comments to the FCC, Opposing Network Neutrality Regulations

February 23, 2010

Before the

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20554

In the Matter of
Preserving the Open Internet,                 GN Docket No. 09-191
Broadband Industry Practices                WC Docket No. 07–52; FCC 09–93
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

 Comments of the Internet Freedom Coalition

 Introduction

 The Internet Freedom Coalition is an ad hoc coalition of organizations and individuals committed to the continued growth and improvement of the Internet, who believe regulations and taxes are harmful to those ends. The Internet Freedom Coalition believes that a free and open Internet is beneficial, but argues that regulatory intervention in the well-functioning marketplace that has thus far produced a vast, free and open network would unnecessarily limit the current and future supply of bandwidth, and would harm both producers and consumers. These comments are attributable only to the individual signatories.

Read More…

Social Heading