FCC to make waves again This Week!

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by Gass, May 15, 2017.

  1. Gass

    Gass Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    437
    Listen up Americans, you have a small window (till Thursday May 18th when they vote or close the comments down - I'm not sure of which), to tell FCC your opinions to the further cuts their going to undertake just This Week. Your Voice could make a Big difference and reprieve these harms to us by the Broadband industry, if the FCC is to succeed or not is up to YOU.

    Tell the FCC to Keep Title II and Not Undermine Net Neutrality !
    But before FCC Chairman Ajit Pai can enact this terrible plan, he has to make the proposal publicly available and accept comments from regular people about how it would affect them.
    That’s where all of you come in. Make a stand and have your voice counted. . .

    The FCC has asked for public comment on new rules about net neutrality. Use this form to submit your comment to the FCC.
    https://dearfcc.org/

    Well, after the change in leadership came a change to the Lifeline Broadband in the way these service providers could fast stream their enrollment in the Lifeline program and get approved to supply that feature to the low-income households and individuals that are eligible, the FCC then reversed the rules on ISP’s privacy for broadband subscribers. Moving down the line now, FCC under it's current administrator hopes to eliminate (gut) all of the prior advances that low-income Americans and that of all Americans had seen of benefits and/or advantages of the broadband industry regulations in general to them personally in 2015 policy changes.

    As it stands Now in regards to Broadband in the US with the FCC's powers:
    Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, a service (as in Broadband Internet) can be labeled either a “TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE,” like telephone service, that lets the SUBSCRIBER choose the content they receive and send without INTERENCE from the SERVICE PROVIDER, or it can be an “INFORMATION SERVICE,” like cable television or an old Prodigy service, that curates and selects what content-channels will be available to subscribers.

    In the 1996 law, it's provided that “Telecommunications Services” are governed by “Title II” of the Communications Act of 1934, which includes nondiscrimination requirements of/by/to the service provider.

    On the other hand “Information Services” are not subject to Title II’s requirements. (In other words FCC current Rules for Information Services are not protected by the 1996 law and have no Courts support or judicial scrutiny). ISP's can fight any enforcement of FCC rules or the rules themselves, which most like they will - if Broadband is to be labeled as an Informational service once again.

    Under this current law, the FCC has the power and can put either label on Broadband Internet service – but that choice does have it's consequences. (To the subscriber base of ISP's)
    The legal mandate was clear (the Courts decision): if FCC wanted meaningful open Internet rules to pass judicial scrutiny (in the Courts favor), the FCC had to reclassify broadband service under Title II provisions.

    This was also clear to neutral observers that reclassification of Broadband just made sense. Broadband looks a lot more like a “Telecommunications Service” than that of an “Information Service.” Broadband Internet service entails delivering information of the subscriber’s choosing, not information curated or altered by the service provider.

    It took an Internet uprising (Peoples Voices) to persuade the FCC that reclassification made practical and legal sense. In the end, the cry’s of many people had succeeded, in 2015 at the end of a lengthy rulemaking process, the FCC reclassified Broadband as a Title II Telecommunications Service and issued Net Neutrality Rules on that basis. Resting at last on a proper legal foundation in the Courts, and those rules finally passed all the judicial scrutiny of the Courts.

    Read more here-
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/05/why-losing-title-ii-means-losing-net-neutrality-and-privacy

    Now on the chopping block is your benefit/advantage to Net Neutrality.
    FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has proposed to reverse that 2015 decision that puts Broadband back under the regime and classification for “Information Services” – the same regime and classification that we already know won’t support real Net Neutrality rules in the Courts.

    By abandoning Title II stature of Broadband, now is to mean the end of meaningful, enforceable Net Neutrality protections by the FCC, paving the way for companies like Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable, AT&T and many others to slice up your Internet experience into favored, disfavored, and “premium” content, or slow, fast lanes and in choosing which websites you can and can’t access and how fast those websites will load.
    Those of you who knew what a throttled internet meant – please read on.

    What's more, Broadband in a Title II status, is to offers more regulatory limits than the alternative of treating Broadband as an Information Service, at least when it comes to Net Neutrality. Where Title II grants specific, clear, and bounded powers that can protect Net Neutrality, - theories proposed that do not rely on Title II provisions have to infer powers that aren’t clearly granted to the FCC. As proponents of limited regulation, these theories concern the Electronic Frontier Foundation (The leading nonprofit defending digital privacy, free speech, and innovation).

    The proper way to protect Net Neutrality is not to expand FCC discretion by stretching the general provisions of the Telecommunications Act by labeling Broadband once again as an “INFORMATION SERVICE”, (an approach already rejected in judicial court), but to use a limited subset of the clear authorities laid out in Title II provisions of the Communications Act of 1934, and keep Broadband as it's status now by the label of being a Telecommunications Service.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  2. Boo Berry

    Boo Berry Moderator + Beta Tester Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,792
    I don't think telling the FCC anything is going to change anything. They're still going to do what they're going to do and us customers are going to get screwed in the end. It's sad, but true.
     
  3. Gass

    Gass Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    437
    Under this administrator who knows, but it made all the difference in the last 2015 vote and policy to move Broadband from an "Information Service" to a "TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE” status. Checks and balances still must be in place and the more uproar in comments - the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Be squeaky and make that wheel get the grease, save Net Neutrality.

    [Meant to all Americans]
    Dear one is the glass half full or half empty, I'd like to think of it as half full, (meaning it can be topped off to gain full status again).
    I have commented to FCC and hope you will to – as one voice is only a yell, but many together becomes a trumpet in a penetrating tone.
    How highs the water Mama? Do we sandbag yet, or procrastinate and let the water wipe us out by the flood of FCC reversals?
    Gass :D
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  4. Boo Berry

    Boo Berry Moderator + Beta Tester Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,792
    Ultimately the people got Trump elected (though going with Hillary was just a 'lesser-of-two-evils' type of thing, IMO - I wish Bernie would got the nomination instead), so everyone has to just deal with things like this happening.

    Broadband in the US is considered, what, around 25Mbit down now? I don't even get 1/5th of that speed. It's like I'm on the dial-up of 'high speed Internet'. Sadly I don't ever see any telecoms/ISPs (e.g. the only one around here) doing anything about this regardless of the FCC.

    Privacy in this day and age is a pipe dream, in my most honest opinion. EVERYTHING is spying on you. It's the age of "screw the customers and citizens in the US of A!". Actually, it's more like everyone in the world gets screwed and loses in the end, one way or another (unless you're super rich).

    Dark days are ahead.
     
  5. Gass

    Gass Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    437
    [Comcast Paid Civil Rights Groups To Support Killing Broadband Privacy Rules]

    For years, one of the greasier lobbying and PR tactics by the telecom industry has been the use of minority groups to parrot awful policy positions. Historically, such groups are happy to take financing from a company like Comcast, in exchange for repeating whatever talking point memos are thrust in their general direction, even if the policy being supported may dramatically hurt their constituents. This strategy has played a starring role in supporting anti-consumer mega-mergers, killing attempts to make the cable box market being more competitive, and efforts to eliminate net neutrality.

    The goal is to provide an artificial wave of "support" for bad policies, used to then justify bad policy votes. And despite this being something the press has highlighted for the better part of several decades, the practice continues to work wonders. Heck, pretending to serve minority communities while effectively undermining them with bad internet policy is part of the reason Comcast now calls top lobbyist David Cohen the company's Chief Diversity Officer - something the folks at Comcast hate when it's out, by the way.

    It's noted how Congress voted to kill relatively modest, but necessary FCC privacy protections. You'd be hard pressed to find a single, financially-objective group or person that supports such a move. Even Donald Trump's most obnoxious supporters were relatively disgusted by the vote. Yet this notes that groups like the League of United Latin American Citizens and the OCA (Asian Pacific American Advocates) breathlessly urged the FCC to kill the privacy rules, arguing that snoopvertising and data collection would be a great boon to low income families was told to the FCC that “many consumers, especially households with limited incomes, appreciate receiving relevant advertising that is keyed to their interests and provides them with discounts on the products and services they use."

    Of course, folks like Senator Ted Cruz then used this entirely-farmed support to insist there were "strenuous objections from throughout the internet community" at the creation of the rules, which simply wasn't true. Most people understood that the rules were a direct response to some reckless and irresponsible privacy practices at major ISPs -- ranging from charging consumers more to keep their data private, or using customers credit data to provide even worse customer support than they usually do.
    Yes, what consumer (minority or otherwise) wants to pay significantly more money for absolutely no coherent reason?

    This kind of co-opting still somehow doesn't get much attention in the press lately or policy circles, so it continues to work wonders. And it will continue to work wonders as the administration shifts its gaze from gutting privacy protections to killing net neutrality.
    Most of Trumps supports were shocked as to the FCC's Privacy rules reversal too.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  6. Boo Berry

    Boo Berry Moderator + Beta Tester Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,792
    Didn't the FCC try to classify broadband as title 1 a few years ago, then a court told them they only could under title 2, which they did or something like that? It's been a while, so my memory isn't up to date. :p

    Internet access prices from telecoms and ISPs are ABSURD in this country, to say the least. It costs me about $150 a month for around 4Mbit down and 0.5 Mbit up on a DSL connection, where other locations are getting GIGABIT for less than $100 a month! I have honestly never seen in person Internet speeds of over 20Mbit, I can only imagine what 250 Mbit would look like! Granted, I (currently) don't have any caps, so I can download all I want on my slow connection. ;)

    I really hope the FCC reverses this course, but I'm not holding my breath.
     
  7. vasily_bagirov

    vasily_bagirov Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,902
    Guys, let's not go into politics. Online privacy is one thing, but calling names is unacceptable. Don't make me edit or delete your comments.
     
  8. Gass

    Gass Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    437
    I'm not sure - it might of been in a Title 1 status as it was under the classification as a "Information Service" back then, only with the classification as a TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE” did the court upheld it's rules and then had some teeth to chew away.
    See my OP "Spoiler" it's got details of what was and where it's now - at least right now.

    Can't you see what's going on here? 5G is right around the corner and then $200.+ just for an internet bill comin!
    Yes other countries have higher speeds, better service and as well lower prices - It's the USA ISP monopoly here that's killing us and rules all this stagnation in offering a better internet to us and now the FCC wants to give away what little rights and benefits we've seen from the policy change in 2015.

    If you can receive Sprint signals in your neighborhood and your poor like me - check out PCs For People (modem-Hotspot) and a years service for under $200. / then next up is 4GCommunity internet - no restrictions as in eligibility as the prior but costs more , both run on Sprints Data signal (no calls) unless you do VoIP or something like that over data signals. Loose the phone service to your home (save more) and do the mobile internet on Sprint in these offers if you like and $$$ave there too. Then like Tello for mobile phone calls on a PayGo balance (one call/SMS/Internet usage in 6 months to keep your balance and carry over to next 6) for calls when no data signal for like VoIP calls.

    If your income is below the 150-200% federal guidelines requirement and then some other eligibility stuff check cable internet by Comcast’s Internet Essentials , Access from AT&T, Cox Low-Income Internet, Spectrum Internet Assist: Low-Income Internet, CenturyLink’s Internet Basics, Mediacom Low-Income Internet, Bright House Networks Low-Income Internet, Suddenlink .

    These depends on where you live and your income mostly and doing a web search for EveryoneOn or Connect2Compete coalition would help you find something lower than $150. a month in your neighborhood.

    Hope this helps you and others :)
    Gass :D
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  9. Gass

    Gass Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2015
    Messages:
    437
    Sorry the term I used I though to be like describing something as in slow or rude or tall maybe even a three legged chair (examples) - I don't see a political connection here and I've edited out what I thought you meant - OK / No argument from me on politics and the site policy, just trying to understand and didn't mean for you to come down on us - Sir :)
     
  10. Boo Berry

    Boo Berry Moderator + Beta Tester Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,792
    Totally agree. Talking politics is one way to quickly overwhelm a site with negativity - I've seen that happen multiple times.

    Come on FCC, do the right thing!
     
  11. avatar

    avatar Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    13,135
    It appears they opted to undo the right thing instead :(
     
    Gass likes this.