What is Net Nutrality and the Effects on Us--*(THE FINAL VOTE IS IN)*

[ipfd320]

For Anyone Following the Redderick of this--on DEC 14th 2017 the FCC is Going to Vote and try and Repeal the Net Nutrality Law that was Signed by Ex-President Obama

From Wiki-Pedia below is just a Part of what Net Nutrality is--This is a Very Long READ so im Posting a Small Part and the LINK will be Posted BELOW the Story

====================================================================================

Net neutrality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia;

Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication. For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content.

The term was coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu in 2003, as an extension of the longstanding concept of a common carrier, which was used to describe the role of telephone systems.

A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast's secret slowing ("throttling") of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets. Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like Bit-Torrent, until the FCC ordered them to stop. In another minor example, The Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to Vonage, which was rivaling their own services. AT&T was also caught limiting access to FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application. In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on Netflix and Youtube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".

Research suggests that a combination of policy instruments will help realize the range of valued political and economic objectives central to the network neutrality debate. Combined with strong public opinion, this has led some governments to regulate broadband Internet services as a public utility, similar to the way electricity, gas, and the water supply are regulated, along with limiting providers and regulating the options those providers can offer.


****************************************For More on this Information Please Use LINK BELOW*******************************


                                                                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

[ipfd320]

NEW UPDATE from NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC T.SCHNEIDERMAN

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-fcc-igs-office-reverses-course-after-pressure-signals-intent

 December 4th 2017;

A.G. Schneiderman Announces FCC IG's Office Reverses Course After Pressure, Signals Intent To Assist With AG's Investigation Into Fake Comments Submitted During Net Neutrality Comment Process

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.G. and FCC Commissioner Rosenworcel Call for FCC Vote to be Halted, FCC’s Full Cooperation with AG Investigation – with One Million Americans’ Identities Potentially Misused


 *AG’s Office Reveals New Numbers on New Yorkers Whose IDs Were Taken to Submit Fake Comments

 *A.G. Encourages New Yorkers to Check if Their Identity was Misused and Report It to His Office at ag.ny.gov/FakeComments

 *New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel today called on the FCC to fully cooperate with Attorney General Schneiderman’s investigation, after the FCC Inspector General’s office reversed course and signaled its intent today to assist with Attorney General’s inquiry into one million fake comments submitted during the net neutrality comment process. Attorney General Schneiderman and Commissioner Rosenworcel also called for the FCC’s planned December 14th vote on net neutrality to be halted while these fake comments are investigated.

 *“Federal law guarantees every American a voice in shaping our policies. But my office’s investigation found that this process was deeply corrupted – with one million comments that may have been submitted using real people’s stolen identities,” said Attorney General Schneiderman. “For months the FCC refused to help us get to the bottom of what happened. That’s why we asked New Yorkers to help – and in the last few days alone, thousands of Americans and hundreds of New Yorkers have reported that their identities were misused. Finally, just this morning, the FCC Inspector General’s office indicated that it may help. We’re going to hold them to that – and, in the meantime, it’s vital that the FCC delay the vote until we know what happened.”

 *“Our Internet economy is the envy of the world because it is open to all. That is why I support net neutrality. But the FCC is on course to eliminate net neutrality guided by a record corrupted by hundreds of thousands of filings with stolen identities, close to half a million comments from Russian e-mail addresses, and an alleged distributed denial of service attack,” said FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel. “This is unacceptable. The integrity of the public record matters. The FCC needs to get to the bottom of this mess. No vote should take place until a responsible investigation is complete.”

 *In a November 21stopen letter to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, Attorney General Schneiderman announced that his office has – for six months – been investigating the submission of enormous numbers of fake comments on the possible repeal of neutrality rules, which used real Americans’ identities. An updated analysis by the Attorney General’s office found that approximately one million of these comments may have misused the real names and addresses of Americans – including tens of thousands of New Yorkers.

 *Prior to releasing the open letter, the Attorney General’s office had contacted the FCC and its top officials at least nine times to request assistance in its investigation. The FCC and the FCC Inspector General’s office had been unwilling to provide records necessary to investigate who may be behind the misused identities – a departure from past practice, where the FCC has cooperated with the Attorney General’s office on confidential investigations into practices that harmed New Yorkers and residents of other states. However, earlier today, the FCC’s Inspector General’s office reversed course, indicating that it will assist with the Attorney General’s investigation.

 *Last week, on Wednesday, Attorney General Schneiderman launched a new webpage for New Yorkers to check whether their identities were wrongfully used without their consent. In the last five days alone, over 3,200 people have reported misused identities to the Attorney General’s office, including nearly 350 New Yorkers from across the state.

 *Attorney General Schneiderman urges New Yorkers to continue to check whether their identity was misused and report it to his office in order to inform the investigation.

[ipfd320]

U.S. Regulators Ditch Net Neutrality Rules as Legal Battles Loom

FROM Reuters--49 minutes ago



******************************************(The FCC Voted 3-2 to Repeal the Rules)**********************************



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted along party lines on Thursday to repeal landmark 2015 rules aimed at ensuring a free and open internet, setting up a court fight over a move that could recast the digital landscape.

The approval of FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal marked a victory for internet service providers like AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc and hands them power over what content consumers can access.

Democrats, Hollywood and companies like Google parent Alphabet Inc and Facebook Inc had urged Pai, a Republican appointed by U.S. President Donald Trump, to keep the Obama-era rules barring service providers from blocking, slowing access to or charging more for certain content.

Consumer advocates and trade groups representing content providers have planned a legal challenge aimed at preserving those rules.

The meeting was evacuated before the vote for about 10 minutes due to an unspecified security threat, and resumed after law enforcement with sniffer dogs checked the room.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, a Democrat, said in a statement he will lead a multi-state lawsuit to challenge the reversal. He called the vote "a blow to New York consumers, and to everyone who cares about a free and open internet."

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat, said in the run-up to the vote that Republicans were “handing the keys to the Internet” to a “handful of multi-billion dollar corporations.”

Shares of Alphabet, Apple Inc and Microsoft Corp moved lower after the vote.

Pai has argued that the 2015 rules were heavy handed and stifled competition and innovation among service providers.

"The internet wasn’t broken in 2015. We weren’t living in a digital dystopia. To the contrary, the internet is perhaps the one thing in American society we can all agree has been a stunning success," he said on Thursday.

The FCC voted 3-2 to repeal the rules.

***************************************************(NEXT STEPS)*********************************************

Consumers are unlikely to see immediate changes resulting from the rule change, but smaller startups worry the lack of restrictions could drive up costs or lead to their content being blocked.

Internet service providers say they will not block or throttle legal content but that they may engage in paid prioritization. They say consumers will see no change and argue that the largely unregulated internet functioned well in the two decades before the 2015 order.

Democrats have pointed to polls showing a repeal is deeply unpopular and say they will prevail in protecting the rules, either in the courts or in U.S. Congress.

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, said in a written dissent released on Thursday that the decision grants internet providers "extraordinary new power" from the FCC.

"They have the technical ability and business incentive to discriminate and manipulate your internet traffic. And now this agency gives them the legal green light to go ahead," she said.

Several state attorneys general said before the vote they would work to oppose the ruling, citing problems with comments made to the FCC during the public comment period. Other critics have said they will consider challenging what they consider to be weaker enforcement.

Net neutrality supporters had rallied in front of the FCC building in Washington before the vote.

The 2015 rules were intended to give consumers equal access to web content and prevent broadband providers from favoring their own content. Pai proposes allowing those practices as long as they are disclosed.

Michael Powell, a former FCC chairman who heads a trade group representing major cable companies and broadcasters, told reporters earlier this week that internet providers would not block content because it would not make economic sense.

"They make a lot of money on an open internet," Powell said, adding it is "much more profitable" than a closed system. "This is not a pledge of good-heartedness, it's a pledge in the shareholders' interest."

The chief executive of USTelecom, a lobbying group that represents internet providers and the broadband industry, said in a statement the industry has "renewed confidence to make the investments required to strengthen the nation's networks and close the digital divide, especially in rural communities."

A University of Maryland poll released this week found that more than 80 percent of respondents opposed a repeal. The survey of 1,077 registered voters was conducted online by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland from Dec. 6-8.

[Greg9111]

not good

[ipfd320]

Reuters
JANUARY 16, 2018 / 10:30 AM / UPDATED 3 HOURS AGO

Senate Democrats close to winning majority backing to reverse net neutrality rollback
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

U.S. Senate Democrats said on Tuesday they had the backing of 50 members of the 100-person chamber to overturn the U.S. Federal Communications Commission’s reversal of landmark Obama administration net neutrality rules, but still faced an uphill battle.

Senator Ed Markey said in a statement all 49 Democrats backed the repeal. Earlier this month, Republican Senator Susan Collins said she would back the effort to overturn the FCC’s recent move.

The FCC voted in December along party lines to reverse rules introduced in 2015 that barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization. A group of state attorneys general immediately vowed to sue. The new rules will not take affect for several months, the FCC has said.

A reversal of the FCC vote would need the approval of the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House and President Donald Trump. Trump backed the FCC action, the White House said last month.

A trade group representing major tech companies including Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc and Amazon.com Inc said it would support legal challenges to the reversal.

The vote in December marked a victory for AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc and handed them power over what content consumers can access over the internet. It was the biggest win for FCC Chairman Ajit Pai in his sweeping effort to undo many telecommunications regulations.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said the issue would be a major motivating factor for young voters the party is courting. ”We’re going to let everyone know where we stand and they stand,” Schumer said this month.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, backs the FCC repeal.

The FCC order grants internet providers sweeping new powers to block, throttle or discriminate among internet content, but requires public disclosure of those practices. Internet providers have vowed not to change how consumers obtain online content.

House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Greg Walden, a Republican, said in an interview Tuesday he planned to hold a hearing on paid prioritization. He has urged Democrats to work constructively on a legislative solution to net neutrality “to bring certainty and clarity going forward and ban behaviors like blocking and throttling.”

He said it was unlikely a vote to overturn the FCC decision would get a majority in the U.S. House.

Paid prioritization is part of American life, Walden said. “Where do you want to sit on the airplane? Where do you want to sit on Amtrak?” Walden said. (Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Andrew Hay)

[Greg9111]

I'm on the fence on this one

[ipfd320]

https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/16/net-neutrality-restoration-picks-up-steam/

===================================================================================

 *The Fight to Restore Net Neutrality is Picking Up Steam
 *House Bill now has 80 Co-Sponsors and 22 State Attorneys General Take Legal Action.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yesterday, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer said that Senate Democrats now have a total of 50 votes in favor of restoring net neutrality. Today, the push back against the net neutrality repeal intensifies, as a companion House bill to reject the FCC's repeal now has 80 co-sponsors. What's more, 22 state attorneys general have also filed a lawsuit to block it from happening.

The companion House bill is by Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania and is designed to accompany the "resolution of disapproval" sent in by Senator Ed Markey (D-Massachusetts). Under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), the resolution needs simple majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives to pass Congress, though there's also a chance a veto could override that (which itself could be overridden).

The attorney general lawsuit, on the other hand, was brought by Eric T. Schneiderman of New York, who said to the New York Times that the net neutrality repeal would turn internet service providers into gatekeepers, "allowing them to put profits over consumers while controlling what we see, what we do, and what we say online." The lawsuit is the first legal challenge against the FCC's order to repeal net neutrality, though other lawsuits by Public Knowledge and the Free Press are expected.

In a statement, Free Press Action Fund President and CEO Craig Aaron said:

"FCC Chairman Ajit Pai ignited a firestorm of dissent when he and his Republican colleagues voted to gut popular Net Neutrality protections. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have told us they're getting a flood of phone calls opposing Pai's decision and supporting efforts to restore the Net Neutrality safeguards put in place in 2015."

 *(UPDATE)*-- Mozilla is the latest to file suit against the FCC to preserve net neutrality. It states: "Ending net neutrality could end the internet as we know it. That's why we are committed to fighting the order. In particular, we filed our petition today because we believe the recent FCC decision violates both federal law as well as harms internet users and innovators. In fact, it really only benefits large Internet Service Providers."

[Greg9111]

shut down the internet. Its going to be what destroys the world

[ipfd320]

                           http://www.lightreading.com/net-neutrality/net-neutrality-states-rights-vs-the-fcc/d/d-id/740545

==================================================================================

As net neutrality rules await their day in Congress and federal court, several states have taken the matter into their own hands. Hawaii and New Jersey are the latest to pass executive orders requiring that all state agencies only do business with service providers agreeing to follow net neutrality principles. The move follows the passage of similar orders in Montana and New York. New York, Hawaii and New Jersey are also among 23 states where the attorneys general are suing the Federal Communications Commission for repealing net neutrality rules put in place in 2015.

There is a big question, however, over whether states have the right to create their own Internet policy. Taking the matter to the courts is one thing, but implementing statewide rules that differ from federal policy is another.

According to Markham Erickson, the telecom attorney representing Incompas , the industry association for competitive communications carriers, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) may have backed itself into a corner on the states' rights issue. Although the agency said states couldn't override federal policy, it also renounced its own authority to impose net neutrality provisions, which would appear to leave the door open for states to impose them if they so choose.

"The states are an interesting dynamic," says Erickson. "The FCC, in the Restoring Internet Freedom Act (i.e., the repeal of net neutrality), preempted states from adopting net neutrality regulations, which is a bit of an odd posture because the FCC indicated that it didn't have the authority to adopt net neutrality regulations which typically would mean that the states have the authority to do so."

Meanwhile, Congress is still in the process of determining whether it will push forward with a Congressional Review Act (CRA) to try to overturn the FCC's recent order. Erickson believes if a CRA is successfully passed it would mean that Internet service providers would revert to Title II classification and immediately be subject to net neutrality rules again. But CRA proponents still need one more vote to secure a majority in the Senate, and Erickson acknowledges that Trump can still veto congressional action once it hits his desk. (See Net Neutrality Heads to Court & Congress.)

There is other legislation in play too. Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has introduced a bill banning blocking and throttling of Internet traffic, but leaving in place the possibility for paid prioritization, and maintaining the categorization of ISPs as Title 1 information service providers, which are regulated by the FTC rather than the FCC. Interestingly, Blackburn also calls for continued limitations on the FCC to preempt state net neutrality laws.

Representative Mike Coffman (R-CO) says he is also getting ready to introduce a net neutrality bill that would go further than Blackburn's proposal. Coffman wants to ensure blocking, throttling and paid prioritization are all illegal, and he wants to create a compromise in how ISPs are regulated that would keep them under FCC oversight, but not subject them to Title II governance.

"We don't need to shoehorn the Internet into a heavy-handed Title II regulatory regime. The Internet is too important," says Coffman. "My bill places broadband Internet access services under its own new title. Now the Internet is very complex, therefore my bill gives ISPs the room they need to take reasonable measures to manage the effective flow of data across their portion of the network. I also ensure that the FCC maintains oversight of such practices to prevent abuses from occurring so that consumers have meaningful choices."

So what happens next? Assuming no new legislation gains traction, the FCC order will likely get published to the Federal Register in the coming weeks, and then there will be a 60-day shot clock before the order goes into effect. Any lawsuits are likely to take one to two years before they're granted a decision by a federal court, and even after that, there would still undoubtedly be further appeals leading up to the Supreme Court.

"And we should not forget that there's a current... proceeding in front of this Supreme Court," says attorney Erickson, "a challenge from the losing side in the DC Circuit of the (previous FCC Chairman Tom) Wheeler net neutrality rules. So that has not been dismissed."

In the meantime, states will continue to promote the net neutrality cause in their own way. And unless new federal laws are passed, there's probably nothing the FCC or anybody else can effectively do about it.

[ipfd320]

WELL Here is the Latest UPDATE on this Tabacle from Endgadget News


                                 https://www.engadget.com/2018/02/22/net-neutrality-repeal-april-23rd-federal-register/


Net neutrality repeal goes into effect on April 23rd

Two months from now, net neutrality will officially be dead. Today, the Federal Communication Commission's revocation order was published in the Federal Register. The effective date is April 23rd.

That doesn't mean the next two months will be quiet; the attorney general of New York is set to sue the FCC over the repeal of net neutrality, and more states and advocacy groups will follow. Democrats in the Senate have the votes to restore net neutrality (but not the two-thirds majority required to override the president's veto, which would surely follow any action on their part.)

************************************************************************************************************

The FCC's recent action might be called "The Restoring Internet Freedom Order," but that is, of course, misleading. Net neutrality forced ISPs to treat all content equally; without these rules in place, providers can charge more for certain types of content and and throttle access to specific websites as they see fit.

************************************************************************************************************

If April 23rd hits and this order is still in place, we probably won't see an immediate shift in how we use the internet. But you can bet that, over the following months, internet providers will start introducing new tiered plans that allow them to pick and choose the content you see based on what you're paying. We still have a few months to ensure this doesn't happen, so let's hope our legislators make the best of them.

************************************************************************************************************

POSTED in the FEDERAL REGISTER----LINK BELOW

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/02/22/2018-03464/restoring-internet-freedom

[ipfd320]

                                            https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/10/net-neutrality-dies-june-11th/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HERE is the LATEST LAST DITCH NEWS to Try and RESTORE NET NEUTRALITY

Net Neutrality Dies June 11th
There's a Slim Chance the House and Senate Could Repeal, Though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Net Neutrality Officially Dies June 11th, almost three years to the day after it was put into law. In a press release (PDF) from Ajit Pai's office, the former Verizon counsel (above) repeated his rhetoric that the internet was never broken and bemoaned Title II rules as being "heavy handed" and "outdated."

"On June 11th, we will have a framework in place that encourages innovation and investment in our nation's networks so that all Americans, no matter where they live, can have access to better, cheaper and faster internet access and the jobs, opportunities and platform for free expression that it provides."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That last line is particularly grating when Pai chose to ignore comments from people asking to preserve Title II protections.

In a separate press release (PDF) from the FCC, commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel denounced Pai's moves, saying that the decision is "profoundly disappointing."

"The FCC is on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law and the wrong side of the American people," she said. "It deserves to have its handiwork revisited, reexamined and ultimately reversed." Rosenworcel promised to keep "raising a ruckus" to support net neutrality, urging others to join.

The US Senate has forced a vote, scheduled for next week, to overturn Pai's decision. If the Senate is successful, the House of Representatives will have to take similar measures before Pai's framework is overruled. Of course, that's not to say Donald Trump won't veto it once it lands on his desk. In the interim, a handful of states have passed their own bills upholding Title II provisions.

FCC PRESS RELEASE STATEMENT by CHAIRMAN AJIT PAI------
https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0510/DOC-350643A1.pdf

FCC PRESS RELEASE STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL----
https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2018/db0510/DOC-350644A1.pdf

[ipfd320]

        https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/16/after-senate-victory-house-announces-plans-to-force-its-own-vote-on-net-neutrality/

      AFTER THE SENATE VOTE VICTORY--THE HOUSE OF REPS ANNOUNCES PLANS to FORCE its OWN VOTE on NET NEUTRALITY
===================================================================================


Hot on the heels of a surprising 52-47 Senate disapproval of the FCC’s new, weaker net neutrality rules, the House of Representatives will soon attempt to force a similar vote under the Congressional Review Act. Representative Mike Doyle (D-PA) announced in a statement and at a press conference following the Senate vote that he will begin the process first thing tomorrow morning.

“I have introduced a companion CRA in the house,” Rep. Doyle said, “but I’m also going to begin a discharge petition which we will have open for signature tomorrow morning. And I urge every member who’s uproots a free and open internet to join me and sign this petition so we can bring this legislation to the floor.”

The CRA requires Senate and House to submit the resolution itself, in the former’s case Joint Resolution 52, after which a certain number of people to sign off on what’s called a discharge petition, actually forces a vote.

In the Senate this number is only 30, which makes it a useful tool for the minority party, which can easily gather that many votes if it’s an important issue (a full majority is still required to pass the resolution).

But in the House a majority is required, 218 at present. That’s a more difficult ask, since Democrats only hold 193 seats there. They’d need two dozen Republicans to switch sides, and while it’s clear from the defection of three Senators from the party line that such bipartisan support is possible, it’s far from a done deal. Today’s success may help move the needle, though.

Should the required votes be gathered, which could happen tomorrow, or take much longer, the vote will then be scheduled, though a congressional aide I talked to was unsure how quickly it would follow. It only took a week in the Senate to go from petition to floor vote, but that period could be longer in the House depending on how the schedule works out.

------------------------------------------------------------

And to TOP IT OFF Here is the Chairmans REPORT

WASHINGTON, May 16, 2018—Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai
released the following statement regarding the U.S. Senate’s vote on the Congressional Review
Act resolution regarding the FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order:

“It’s disappointing that Senate Democrats forced this resolution through by a narrow margin.
But ultimately, I'm confident that their effort to reinstate heavy-handed government regulation
of the Internet will fail.

“The Internet was free and open before 2015, when the prior FCC buckled to political pressure
from the White House and imposed utility-style regulation on the Internet. And it will continue
to be free and open once the Restoring Internet Freedom Order takes effect on June 11.

“Moreover, contrary to the scare tactics employed by Senate Democrats, which earned three
Pinocchios from the Washington Post’s fact-checker, our light-touch approach will deliver
better, faster, and cheaper Internet access and more broadband competition to the American
people—something that millions of consumers desperately want and something that should be
a top priority. The prior Administration’s regulatory overreach took us in the opposite
direction, reducing investment in broadband networks and particularly harming small Internet
service providers in rural and lower-income areas. Our approach will help promote digital
opportunity—that is, making high-speed Internet access available to every single American so
that they can be participants in, rather than spectators of, our digital economy.”

Office of Media Relations: (202) 418-0500
ASL Videophone: (844) 432-2275
TTY: (888) 835-5322
Twitter: @FCC
www.fcc.gov/media-relations

[ipfd320]

                           Representatives Rip FCC Chairman Pai's 'Lack of Candor' and Double Down on Net Neutrality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Thirteen members of Congress have written to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai criticizing his “repeated evasive responses to our inquiries” and “outright refusal to respond to some of the members of this Committee.” Unsatisfied with the answers or evasions he has offered to date, they reiterate questions related to net neutrality and other issues that they’ve sent over the past months.

  “While we appreciate your continued willingness to testify before our Committee, we are concerned that you have been unable to give complete responses to verbal questions, questions for the record, or oversight letters from our members,” reads the letter from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Democrats.

  “We take our oversight responsibilities very seriously, and we expect witnesses before the Committee and recipients of our letters to treat their responses the same way,” they wrote.

  These Representatives, led by Frank Pallone Jr (D-NJ) and Mike Doyle (D-CO), have sent multiple letters of inquiry to Pai over run-up to and aftermath of the net neutrality vote.

  In June, they questioned the nature of and response to the cyberattack on FCC systems during the net neutrality comment period. Pai responded saying that much of what they asked he could not answer because the threat was “ongoing” and revealing the measures they took would “undermine” them.

  Before the passage of the rules, they warned that the FCC’s proposal “fundamentally and profoundly runs counter to the law,” and that they spoke with the authority of people who had helped craft that particular law. Pai’s response to this may be considered the rule itself, which he clearly believes is completely lawful and justifies itself in its lengthy preamble.

  After the vote, they sent a letter asking about numerous problems relating to the comment system and why, for example, their own comments were not addressed. Pai responded to a number of letters taking issue with the FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom order with a form letter of his own that assured his august pen pals that everything was fine.

  The inadequate responses to these and many other letters (on such issues as media regulation and 911 issues) clearly got the Committee to the point where they felt they had to strike back. A sternly worded letter may not do any more now than it did over the last year, but a paper trail of displeasure and responses with a distinct “lack of candor,” as Rep. Pallone put it, could be useful down the road.

  You can read the full letters here,  https://democrats-energycommerce.house.gov/sites/democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/files/documents/FCC.20180.04.252.%20Letter%20re%20oversight%20and%20lack%20of%20responsiveness.%20CAT.pdf     

  To which is appended “a collection of letters that you have yet to answer completely, or at all.” Chairman Pai is requested to provide responses by June 4.

[ipfd320]

Well it Looks Like The FCC Commissioner is Pulling the Legal Card on California for Making their Own Net-Nutrality Law--
Here is the Story


FCC’s Ajit Pai labels California net neutrality law 'illegal'
The guy who killed net neutrality didn’t expect California to practice democracy.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/09/21/fcc-ajit-pai-net-neutrality-california-democracy/?yptr=yahoo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FCC head honcho, Ajit Pai, didn't mince words in comments regarding California's recent passing of a tough net neutrality bill. In his keynote speech for neoconservative policy organization Maine Heritage Policy Center, Pai called California's SB 822 "illegal" and said it "poses a risk to the rest of the country."

Pai also hinted that he'd be coming for California should SB 822, seen as the toughest net neutrality law in the nation, receive the governor's signature, as it's expected to in the next two weeks.

Suggesting that the FCC would pull federal rank over state's rights, he reminded his well-heeled audience: "In fact, just last week, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reaffirmed the well-established law that state regulation of information services is preempted by federal law. Last December, the FCC made clear that broadband is just such an information service."

As many are aware, the FCC chief is responsible for ending true net neutrality in such a way that facilitated scenarios like the throttling of California firefighters while they fought life-threatening blazes. As we wrote, "The incident hampered a fire department's response to California wildfires" (and is now part of a net neutrality lawsuit). So for California, the issue of net neutrality is also personal.

The legislation's author, California Senator Scott Weiner, immediately fired back in a statement saying "Since the FCC says it no longer has any authority to protect an open Internet, it's also the case that the FCC lacks the legal power to preempt states from protecting their residents and economy."

The Senator added, "When Verizon was caught throttling the data connection of a wildfire-fighting crew in California, Chairman Pai said nothing and did nothing. That silence says far more than his words today."

What also speaks volumes is the context of Pai's remarks, and who he was addressing as he headlined a fundraiser for the Maine Heritage Policy Center. If you're unaware, the MHPC is behind a failed attempt to rig taxation to shrink public services in Maine, opposes universal health care, and argue that raising the minimum wage harms everyone. The MHPC is part of the State Policy Network, a coordinated network of ultra-conservative and libertarian policy groups.

The State Policy Network is sponsored by entities including The Koch Institute, Heritage Foundation (currently taking credit for the Kavanaugh nomination), "religious liberty" orgs Sutherland Institute and 1st Amendment Partnership, and Facebook. Yes, Facebook. Go ahead and set a reminder for the time you learned that Facebook sponsors a US state policy clearinghouse for turning conservative ideas (like "faith-based healthcare") into state laws.

A Guardian investigation concluded that State Policy Network is a "nexus of funding arrangements behind radical right-wing campaigns" with "members in each of the 50 states." As in, the Maine Heritage Policy Center.

Another proud sponsor is NCTA — The Internet & Television Association, one of the largest political lobbying organizations in the United States, and a very vocal opponent of net neutrality. Their board includes Comcast, Cox Communications, Viacom Inc., Vyve Broadband, Charter Communications, and other usual suspects.

So, if you're in the mindset that Ajit Pai might be doing fundraisers for organizations that have a vested interest in watching him wield the federal weight of the FCC against California's actually-legal state net neutrality laws, then you may be onto something.

Anyway, as they say about the devil, she lives in the details. You'd think that as a member of the Republican party, Pai would be all about California enacting its own "state's rights" — fully within its jurisdiction by means of interstate commerce enforcement.

Federal only supersedes state law on specific issues which the US Constitution delegates to the federal government. That's the Tenth Amendment. In this instance, the FCC can't just roll in and pull rank on California, no matter what Pai promises his right-wing, internet-carpetbagging cronies.

But maybe Pai just didn't expect California to call his bluff and actually practice democracy about net neutrality. Pai, the FCC chief who has displayed open contempt for the public by mocking net neutrality supporters (smirking and dancing with a Pizzagate loon). He's the guy we can credit for formalizing the ISP definition of "open internet" as a pay-for-play scenario in which ISPs and telcos can now shake down companies for cash in order for consumers to get access to their websites and services.

Not the open internet where every website, person, and small business has equal access to the internet. Just ask California's firefighters what it means. They, and California fire victims, found out in the worst way possible.

Senator Weiner directly addressed this when he responded to Pai. The Senator also said his bill is to cement that "we as individuals get to decide where we go on the Internet, rather than having Internet service providers decide for us," and that "big telecom and cable companies can't force us to get our information only from favored websites."

As the Senator put it, "SB 822 is necessary and legal because Chairman Pai abdicated his responsibility to ensure an open internet."

So much of the early, free, and truly open internet was a celebration because it was the opposite of what Pai and his cronies represent. Pai and his merry band of dinosaurs want nothing more than for things to go back to the way they were, when corporations controlled what we saw, when we saw it, as well as the messages media contained (and who was allowed representation). They may have the backing of the current administration and billion-dollar corporate darknets like Facebook, but they're in for a surprise.

As a native Californian (and native San Franciscan) I can tell you we're quite used to the likes of Pai and the interests he fronts treating us like we're just the "land of fruits and nuts," like we're disposable, a wacky economic and environmental accessory. They've never really picked a fight with us until the Trump administration gave them (and America's fascists) the courage to "come out."

And while they've threatened us over things like sanctuary cities (among many other things we hold dear), guess what? We've quietly built a war chest. With which, if provoked, we could give Ajit Pai the mother of all headaches.

[ipfd320]

                                                                  **( NOE THE D.O.J. is GETTING INVOLVED)**           


US sues California over 'net neutrality'


Washington (AFP) - The US Justice Department on Sunday sued California to force it to abandon a law, passed earlier in the day, to protect "net neutrality" aimed at requiring all online data to be treated equally.

Rules governing online access have undergone numerous court challenges and regulatory moves over the past decade, and in December the Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 along party lines to reverse a 2015 order which established net neutrality.

On Sunday California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law that re-established net neutrality in his state, the country's largest and wealthiest.

The law also marks the latest challenge between Brown's administration and President Donald Trump's Republicans, who have already clashed over environmental and immigration regulations.

"Under the Constitution, states do not regulate interstate commerce -- the federal government does. Once again the California legislature has enacted an extreme and illegal state law attempting to frustrate federal policy," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

"We are confident that we will prevail in this case -- because the facts are on our side," Sessions said.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai described California's law as illegal and bad for consumers.

He has previously argued that ending net neutrality would give the private sector "greater incentives to invest" in the new generation of super-fast 5G wireless networks and ensure the United States keeps its technological edge over other nations.

Net neutrality prohibits the blocking of sites or services for competitive reasons, and bans "fast" and "slow" lanes for different kinds of online traffic.

Activists have protested the changes, saying dominant broadband providers could favor their own services, hinder those of rivals and charge more for certain kinds of access.

Internet giants Amazon, Facebook and Google are among the supporters of net neutrality.

A number of other US states would also like to implement their own rules to protect net neutrality, although the FCC's decision clearly forbids such moves.

As a result, the Trump administration wants to make an example of California.

USTelecom, which represents companies in the broadband sector, said it supports net neutrality but disagreed with the California law.

"Rather than 50 states stepping in with their own conflicting open internet solutions, we need Congress to step up with a national framework for the whole internet ecosystem and resolve this issue once and for all," the industry group said.