U.S. court to hear oral arguments in net neutrality case on September 9 | Reuters The federal appeals court in Washington on Tuesday set September 9 as the date for oral arguments in the so-called net neutrality case that could be seminal for federal regulation of Internet traffic. The highly anticipated hearings, originally expected to take place this past spring, will pit Verizon Communications Inc against the Federal Communications Commission as the biggest U.S. wireless provider challenges the FCC's order that guides how Internet service providers manage their networks. The ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will have major implications for the increasingly partisan debate over the degree of regulatory power possessed by the federal communications agency. Net neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be able to access any Web content and use any applications they choose, without restrictions or varying charges imposed by the Internet service provider or the government. Judges Judith Rogers, Laurence Silberman and David Tatel will hear the arguments in the case, according to the order issued on Tuesday. The FCC's 2011 open Internet rules require Internet providers to treat all Web traffic equally and give consumers equal access to all lawful content, even if, for instance, it comes from a competitor or disagrees with their political views. Verizon and other critics argue that the FCC's rules are an unwarranted government intrusion into regulating the Internet, including which content consumers may access and which companies may provide that content, and should be thrown out. Continued at www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/25/net-us-usa-internet-neutrality-idUSBRE95O1HD20130625 Open Internet | FCC.gov www.fcc.gov/openinternet
http://www.freepress.net/press-release/105543/court-strikes-down-fcc-open-internet-order http://www.savetheinternet.com/ Read the full 81 page ruling: http://gizmodo.com/federal-court-invalidates-net-neutrality-rules-sides-w-1501028467
Blarg, seems scary. I imagine content filters linked to throttling algorithms so money can buy truth. We will have to cleverly make sure this doesn't happen.
This might be of interest to readers on this thread: https://whyweprotest.net/community/threads/the-day-we-fight-back-org-internet-protest-feb-11.116476/
The Fight to Save Net Neutrality: 1 Million Signatures and Counting A group of 86 organizations, with the support of more than one million signatures from online petitions, asked the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday to stand up for net neutrality. http://mashable.com/2014/01/30/fcc-net-neutrality-petition/
Speaking as someone with only a superficial understanding of the problem of Internet privacy, Imma guessing #3 gives us the most bang for our buck. Because ISP or proxy services that could assign IPs randomly and then purge their IP assignment logs after, say 3 days, would give pretty good privacy and a small window for LE to nab a bad guy doing something bad if spotted immediately. If LE presented the ISP with a warrant, IP logs for that one person could be kept while everything else was dumped. I think back when I first started surfing the webs, my ISP gave me a random IP that changed every time I dialed in. Could we just go back to that kind of thing?
http://cryptome.org/2014/01/odni-14-0129.pdf Clapper's report on National Defense including cyber threats (apparently including bitcoin, 3D printing and the Internet of Things) all of which will require firewalls and nationalization of the Internet. This report is on threats and you can see where this is going.
The first two names on that report: Clapper and Feinstein. The report should be called "Lies I Told My Nation."
FCC's New Rules Could Threaten Net Neutrality | Electronic Frontier Foundation By April Glaser and Corynne McSherry, April 24, 2014 Federal Communications Commission Chairman Wheeler is circulating a proposal for new FCC rules on the issue of network neutrality, the idea that Internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data that travels over their networks equally. Unfortunately, early reports suggest those rules may do more harm than good. The new rules were prompted by last January’s federal court ruling rejecting the bulk of the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet Order on the grounds that they exceeded the FCC’s authority, sending the FCC back to the drawing board. According to reports, Chairman Wheeler’s new proposal embraces a “commercially reasonable” standard for network management. That standard could allow ISPs to charge companies for preferential treatment, such as charging web-based companies like Netflix or Amazon to reach consumers at faster speeds. This kind of “pay to play” model would be profoundly dangerous for competition. New innovators often cannot afford to pay to reach consumers at the same speeds as well-established web companies. That means ISPs could effectively become gatekeepers to their subscribers. The FCC issued a statement this morning that claims that the new network neutrality proposal will not allow ISPs to, “act in a commercially unreasonable manner to harm the Internet, including favoring the traffic from an affiliated entity.” But we have no idea as to how “commercially reasonable” will actually be interpreted. The devil will be in the details. While all we have now is a statement that a proposal for what the proposed rules might look like is being circulated in private within the FCC, the public should be poised to act. In an FCC rulemaking process, the commission issues what’s called a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). After the NPRM is issued, the public is invited to comment to the FCC about how their proposal will affect the interest of the public. The FCC is required by law to respond to public comments, so it’s extremely important that we let the FCC know that rules that let ISPs pick and choose how certain companies reach consumers will not be tolerated. The problem is that most people don’t know about this extremely opaque process, and so they don’t participate. Let’s change that. Stay tuned. We’ll let you know when it’s time to raise your voice and add your testimony during the FCC’s public comment window when the new proposed rules are announced. Source: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/04/fccs-new-rules-could-threaten-net-neutrality
FCC Hears the Public Outcry for Net Neutrality, Continues to Consider Pay-to-Play Rules | Electronic Frontier Foundation There’s good news: the nationwide outcry against the Federal Communications Commission’s troublesome proposal for new Open Internet rules is clearly having an impact. At a public meeting this morning, commissioners were factoring in questions that — according to previous accounts — weren’t on the table only days ago. The bad news: the FCC still is considering a set of rules that will allow Internet providers to discriminate how we access websites with only vague and uncertain limits, endangering network neutrality and threatening the vibrant growth of the Internet. Continued at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/05/fcc-hears-public-outcry-continues-consider-pay-play-rules
The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday voted in favor of advancing a proposal that could dramatically reshape the way consumers experience the Internet, opening the possibility of Internet service providers charging Web sites for higher-quality delivery of their content to American consumers. The plan, approved in a three-to-two vote along party lines, could unleash a new economy on the Web where an Internet service provider such as Verizon would charge a Web site such as Netflix for faster video streaming. The proposal is not a final rule, but the vote on Thursday is a significant step forward on a controversial idea that has invited fierce opposition from consumer advocates, Silicon Valley heavyweights, and Democratic lawmakers. The FCC will now open the proposal to a total 120 days of public comment. Final rules, aimed for the end of the year, could be rewritten after the agency reviews the public comments. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-plan-to-allow-for-paid-priority-on-internet/
Amid protests, U.S. FCC proposes new 'net neutrality' rules | Reuters U.S. regulators on Thursday advanced a "net neutrality" proposal that would ban Internet providers from blocking or slowing down access to websites but may let them charge content companies for faster and more reliable delivery of their traffic to users. For four months now, the public can weigh in on the rules proposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in what promises to be an intense tug-of-war between some tech companies and consumer advocates on one side and Republicans and broadband providers on the other, over the extent to which the agency can regulate Internet traffic. Dozens protested the vote at the FCC on Thursday as many consumer advocates have rejected FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal that may allow some "commercially reasonable" deals in which content companies could pay broadband providers to prioritize traffic on their networks. Critics worry the rules would create "fast lanes" for companies that pay up and mean slower traffic for others. Wheeler pledged to use all of his powers to prevent "acts to divide the Internet between 'haves' and 'have nots.'" "I will not allow the national asset of an open Internet to be compromised," Wheeler said. "The prospect of a gatekeeper choosing winners and losers on the Internet is unacceptable." Consumer advocates want the FCC to instead reclassify Internet providers as utilities, like telephone companies, rather than as the less-regulated information services they are now. Broadband companies and Republicans, both in Congress and at the FCC, vehemently oppose the plan. The advanced proposal seeks comment on benefits of reclassification, which critics say would throw the industry into legal limbo, discourage investment in network infrastructure and still not prevent pay-for-priority deals. Wheeler's two fellow Democrats at the FCC expressed misgivings about his proposal, with Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel saying the FCC moved "too fast to be fair." But she and Mignon Clyburn concurred with Wheeler for a 3-2 vote to begin the process of collecting public comment on the proposal. "The real call to action begins after the vote today," Clyburn said. "You have the ear of the entire FCC. The eyes of the world are on all of us." Continued at http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/15/us-usa-internet-neutrality-idUSBREA4C0SF20140515
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO): Net Neutrality Published by Last Week Tonight with John Oliver on June 1, 2014 Cable companies are trying to create an unequal playing field for internet speeds, but they're doing it so boringly that most news outlets aren't covering it. John Oliver explains the controversy and lets viewers know how they can voice their displeasure to the FCC. (www.fcc.gov/comments, for any interested parties)
^ FCC comment site breaks after comedian asks trolls to fight “fast lanes” | Ars Technica The FCC has received tens of thousands of comments on a proposal that would let ISPs charge Web services for Internet "fast lanes," but yesterday the commission's comment site struggled for a good part of the day. The problem happened after comedian John Oliver spent 13 minutes on his HBO show, "Last Week Tonight," ripping the FCC's proposal apart. He proposed changing the name "network neutrality" to "Preventing cable company fuckery," and finished by calling Internet trolls to action: <snipped> With Oliver's trolls having been activated, the FCC's Twitter account said yesterday, "We’ve been experiencing technical difficulties with our comment system due to heavy traffic. We’re working to resolve these issues quickly." FCC CIO David Bray noted last night that the system is more than 10 years old and pointed to an article on how the FCC is trying to modernize infrastructure badly in need of upgrades. The comments site (fcc.gov/comments) seems to be back in working order this morning. The net neutrality proceeding has received more than 47,000 comments in the past 30 days. Bray and an FCC spokesperson contacted by Ars said it isn't clear whether the website's problem was caused by John Oliver's call for comments, but the spokesperson said, "it was down for a couple of hours yesterday due to high volumes of traffic." Bray said today that the "team checked this morning [and] all looked fine internally." The FCC is also accepting comments via e-mail at openinternet@fcc.gov. Initial comments are being accepted until July 15 and reply comments will be accepted until September 10. More at http://arstechnica.com/information-...ter-comedian-asks-trolls-to-fight-fast-lanes/
Verizon Demands Netflix Take Down The Message Calling Its Internet Slow Verizon sent Netflix a cease and desist Thursday afternoon telling the streaming service to take down the following notice to users. Continued at www.businessinsider.com/verizon-netflix-cease-and-desist-2014-6
Dear FCC, It's Our Internet, and We'll Fight to Protect It | Electronic Frontier Foundation The FCC has asked for public comment on new rules about net neutrality. Use this form to submit a comment to the FCC. Learn more about the FCC rulemaking process Continued at https://dearfcc.org/
It says: "These comments are a matter of public record and are viewable online, including name and address, one day after being submitted to the FCC public docket." I don't like the sound of that.
Neutrality Begins At Home: What U.S. Mayors Can Do Right Now to Support a Neutral Internet By April Glaser and Corynne McSherry, Electronic Frontier Foundation This weekend at the U.S. Conference of Mayors annual meeting in Dallas, some mayors will take a strong stand in support of net neutrality. According to an op-ed by Mayors Ed Lee of San Francisco and Ed Murray of Seattle, the city leaders are unveiling a resolution calling on the FCC to preserve an open Internet. This is good and welcomed news. The mayors get it: a free and open Internet is critically important for the health of U.S. cities. “The Internet has thrived because of its openness and equality of access,” reads the mayors’ op-ed. “It has spurred great innovation, while providing a level playing field for its users. It allows everyone the same chance to interact, to participate, to compete.” Here’s some even better news: while the FCC may have a role to play in promoting and protecting a neutral Internet, city governments don’t have to rely entirely on the FCC. In fact, there are two things Mayor Lee can do right now to protect the future of our open Internet: strongly support municipal wireless and light up the dark fiber that weaves its way under the city of San Francisco. And other mayors around the country have the same opportunity, if they’ve got the will to take it. Continued at www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/06/neutrality-begins-home-what-us-mayors-can-do-right-now-support-neutral-internet
The FCC and Net Neutrality: A Way Forward | Electronic Frontier Foundation By Corynne McSherry, Electronic Frontier Foundation www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/06/fcc-and-net-neutrality-way-forward
What on Earth Is Going On at the FCC? A Guide to the Proposed Net Neutrality Rules By Mitch Stoltz, Electronic Frontier Foundation The main battlefield for the net neutrality fight right now is at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in a “rulemaking” underway this summer, which asks for public comment about a new set of proposed rules that the FCC claims will protect the open Internet. This process is one of the most important ways Internet users, businesses, trade groups, and public interest organizations can make their voice heard in this critically important national debate. To help that along, let's take a close look at the process and the proposal the FCC has put on the table. The quick version This isn't the FCC's first neutrality rodeo. Time and again, the FCC has proposed open Internet rules but they keep getting knocked down in court. The FCC's latest proposed rules are intended to replace a prior set of regulations that a court threw out in January. The new proposal has three main parts. The first is a transparency rule that requires Internet access providers to disclose how they manage traffic and price their services. The second is a ban on blocking websites or other Internet services, and the third is a “no commercially unreasonable practices” rule that the FCC says will stop the sort of non-neutral practices by Internet providers that many people are concerned about. EFF and many others believe the “commercially unreasonable practices” rule won’t stop non-neutral practices like special access deals, pay-for-play, and preferential treatment for privileged Internet users. And we continue to have the same concern about the proposed rules that we raised about the 2010 rules - namely, that the exceptions are too broad. The public can comment on the FCC’s new proposal. Public comments are due July 15th, and “reply” comments in response to other commenters are due September 10th. EFF will be weighing in, and you should too. Now for a slightly longer explanation. Continued at www.eff.org/guide-to-the-fcc-net-neutrality-proposal
Act Immediately to Stop Congress’s Sneaky Move to Shut Down Broadband Competition By April Glaser, Electronic Frontier Foundation In the flurry of activity yesterday surrounding the FCC’s comment deadline on the net neutrality debate, members of Congress are quietly trying to slip through a bill that will block the development of real alternatives for high-speed Internet. Representative Marsha Blackburn introduced an amendment late last night that aims to limit FCC authority to preempt state laws that restrict or prohibit municipal and community high-speed Internet projects or investment. Blackburn’s amendment will go up for a vote today, so we must act now to tell our representatives how important it is that cities and communities maintain their right to build their own communications infrastructure. Visit DearFCC.org/call to take action right now! A quick phone call can go a long way, and we’ve made it simple with our call tool. Continued at https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/...s-sneaky-move-shut-down-broadband-competition
There's a related post here: http://whyweprotest.net/threads/rio...oot-michael-brown.119831/page-17#post-2479627
Google silent on support for group opposing net neutrality and muni broadband | Ars Technica Nonprofit that Google is part of also supports Comcast/Time Warner Cable merger http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...p-opposing-net-neutrality-and-muni-broadband/
Hey guys, Eric from Netflix, letting you know we're joining reddit and others for ‘Internet Slowdown’ Day Sept. 10th to protect Net Neutrality. http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2fui0k/hey_guys_eric_from_netflix_letting_you_know_were/
From reddit to Pornhub, Websites Slow Down for Net Neutrality on September 10 https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/09/reddit-pornhub-websites-slow-down-net-neutrality-september-10
www.nationaljournal.com FCC May Expand Net Neutrality to Cell Phones The Federal Communications Commission is eyeing an expansion of its net neutrality rules to cover cell phone service. In a speech Tuesday, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said that Internet access on smartphones is a "key component" of the investment and innovation that net neutrality regulations are intended to protect. "Although the comment cycle has not yet closed, we are already closely examining the issues and the record," he said at a wireless industry conference in Las Vegas, according to a copy of his prepared remarks. "One of the constant themes on the record is how consumers increasingly rely on mobile broadband as an important pathway to access the Internet." In 2010, the FCC enacted net neutrality regulations that barred home broadband providers like Comcast from blocking or "unreasonably" discriminating against any Internet traffic. But the rules were much weaker for Internet service on smartphones. Wireless providers like Verizon and AT&T couldn't outright block websites, but they were free to speed up or slow down certain services or exempt others from monthly data caps. A federal court struck the rules down earlier this year, and the FCC is now trying to come up with new regulations that can survive future court challenges. Wheeler's initial proposal sparked a major backlash because it would allow landline broadband providers to charge websites for access to special "fast lanes" in some cases. In the new proposal, the FCC asked for input on whether to expand the rules to wireless networks, but tentatively concluded that the lighter regulatory scheme should stay in place. Wheeler appears to be revisiting that decision.
Net neutrality just broke the FCC's all-time commenting record By Kevin Collier Now that the Internet Slowdown has let off the brakes, and the site of the battle for the net has cleared, you might be interested in just how many regular people told people in power that they want net neutrality. We've got the stats. According to Fight for the Future, one of the principal organizers of the protest, their protest site, combined with efforts with Tumblr, dropped for a whopping 728,096 comments to the Federal Communications Commission, practically all of them from Wednesday, when the protest went live. The protest garnered more than 300,000 phone calls to the FCC, by FFTF's most current count. More than 10,000 sites ended up displaying the Internet slowdown widget or banner, including heavy-hitters like Reddit, Foursquare, Vimeo, Netflix, and PornHub. One Facebook explanation of the protest was shared over 1 million times. Google included its own net neutrality page, too, breaking a years-long silence on the topic, and posted a "take action" message. The Internet giant declined to share exact figures, but told the Daily Dot that "thousands of people" signed up for their Take Action list. Yes, of course, the protesters did briefly crash the FCC website. The FCC itself told the Daily Dot that as of Thursday morning, it had received 1,750,435 comments on net neutrality, finally surpassing the approximately 1.4 million complaints it saw from when a traumatized, football-loving America briefly witnessed Janet Jackson in a state of moderate undress during Super Bowl XXXVIII in 2004. Perhaps most impressive is how many members of Congress took note. As noted by Politico, at least eight engaged in one way or another, either putting the widget on their personal site, changing their avatar to the buffering logo for the day, blogging about it, or at least tweeting their support. They are: Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Reps. Mike Honda (D-Calif.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). Sen. Jeff Merkley, weirdly, tweeted his support, then deleted it. If you missed out on the fun, you've still got until Monday to email openinternet@fcc.gov, when the FCC finally plans to stop taking listening and start deliberating. Source: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/internet-slowdown-fcc-net-neutrality/
ISPs Mislead Public, FCC About Protecting the Open Internet Electronic Frontier Foundation Takes on Net Neutrality's Critics in New Comments to FCC https://www.eff.org/press/releases/isps-mislead-public-fcc-about-protecting-open-internet
General Motors Comes Out In Favor Of Wireless Net Neutrality The idea that every site, every service, every bit of data that flows through the wondrous tubes of the Internet should be treated fairly is what Net Neutrality is all about. And GM has signed on to keep it that way, at least for mobile data. GM's rationale isn't entirely altruistic, of course. It needs data to power it current and next generation connected systems. If there's an artificial bottleneck set by mobile providers that throttles data speeds and requires GM to spend more to get on the "fast lane" for service, it's a costly impediment. That's the case GM's Global Connected Consumer exec, Harry Lightsey III, made in a letter to the FCC that was viewed by both Reuters and The Hill last week. "The coming years will see rapid innovation at the intersection of cars and mobile communications," Lightsey said in the letter. "By needlessly constraining the latitude our mobile network operator suppliers have in delivering their connectivity to owners of our vehicles, you would also constrain the innovations we are seeking to provide to our customers." Continued here: http://jalopnik.com/gm-comes-out-in-favor-of-wireless-net-neutrality-1646906826
