Remaining FCC Commissioners Promise To Gut Net Neutrality 'As Soon As Possible'

from the nice-knowin'-ya dept

We’ve already noted how large ISPs are licking their chops on reports that the incoming Trump-led FCC plans to not only gut net neutrality, but to defang and defund the FCC also. Most of Trump’s telecom advisors have direct ties to telecom; one, former Sprint lobbyist Mark Jamison, doesn’t think telecom monopolies are real. Verizon lawyer turned current FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai is rumored to be the most likely candidate for future FCC boss, and just last week proclaimed that net neutrality’s days are numbered under Trump.

Just in case the nation’s incumbent ISPs didn’t get the message that “happy days are here again” for Comcast, AT&T and friends, Pai and fellow FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly penned a letter this week to the telecom industry’s five largest lobbying groups, proudly proclaiming that the new FCC will attempt to put net neutrality on the chopping block “as soon as possible”:

“[W]e will seek to revisit [the disclosure] requirements, and the Title II Net Neutrality proceeding more broadly, as soon as possible,” they wrote, referring to the order that imposed net neutrality rules and reclassified ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. Pai and O’Rielly noted that they “dissented from the Commission’s February 2015 Net Neutrality decision, including the Order’s imposition of unnecessary and unjustified burdens on providers.”

Pai and O’Rielly will have a 2-1 Republican majority on the FCC after the departure of Democratic Chairman Tom Wheeler on January 20. Pai previously said that the Title II net neutrality order’s “days are numbered” under Trump, while O’Rielly said he intends to “undo harmful policies” such as the Title II reclassification.”

Of course if you’ve actually paid attention you’ll recall that net neutrality has broad, bipartisan support among consumers, and companies like Comcast have let slip that neutrality — and the shift to Title II — really have had little actual impact on their businesses despite ample hand-wringing among sector giants. And of course the rollback of Title II won’t just impact net neutrality, it would hamstring the FCC as broadband consumer watchdog entirely, demolishing efforts like the FCC’s recently passed privacy rules that simply require ISPs are transparent about data collection and provide working opt-out tools.

This disconnect between what consumers want and what ISPs want will prove tricky for Pai and friends, who’ll face major bureaucratic difficulties and a significant activist backlash in trying to roll back the rules. Doing so will require a lengthy, new comment period, during which the media and activists would only highlight how Pai and O’Rielly are undermining the very innovation they often pay empty lip service to.

As such, you can expect some impressive theatrics in the new year. This will likely come in the form of a Communications Act rewrite or another bill that professes to adore net neutrality, but actively works to undermine the entire concept via the law. Much like the eleventh hour faux-neutrality bill pushed last year by Senator John Thune and Representative Fred Upton, this legislation will almost certainly contain ample, intentional loopholes, will only ban the most egregious violations (like outright banning websites, which no ISPs would do), and will act to formally make non-net neutrality the law of the land.

It will then attempt to declare the matter settled, ignoring the lack of competition that makes such violations possible in the first place. This kind of net neutrality trojan horse is something Wheeler warned about last week when he announced his January 20 resignation as current boss of the agency:

“Wheeler mostly declined to speak about the Trump administration’s potential policies but said he hopes that net neutrality rules that forbid blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization will survive. One possibility is for Congress to eliminate Wheeler’s net neutrality rules and impose a new, weaker version. “I hope that if there is legislation, that it is net neutrality in more than name,” and “not some kind of false labeling where net neutrality rules are actually gutted under the name of being net neutrality,” Wheeler said.”

Whatever form this new proposal takes you can be certain it will feature breathless adoration of consumers, innovation, and broadband competition — while actively undermining all three.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Remaining FCC Commissioners Promise To Gut Net Neutrality 'As Soon As Possible'”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

“And of course the rollback of Title II won’t just impact net neutrality, it would hamstring the FCC as broadband consumer watchdog entirely, demolishing efforts like the FCC’s recently passed privacy rules that simply require ISPs are transparent about data collection and provide working opt-out tools.”

Cause they have been doing just a bang up job so far amiright? The FCC was originally designed to be a paid whore for the industry. Ever since ‘The Dingo’ tried to do something about it we all got a front row seat learning who really owns the FCC.

This problem is not going away because the solutions that are being proposed are just as bad or worse than the destruction of the FCC. The new rules sucked, the FCC was still weak, and the FTC did not give a shit. The industry ran over and wined to Congress and the FCC was blocked. The citizens bitch an moan, but still keep their congress critters for the most part and instead fawn and flop over who the next president will be like a bunch of obtuse and clueless political sycophants.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

You come to every comments section and bitch about how the FCC needs to be destroyed, but that you want a proper regulatory body in its place.
I really don’t understand how you are crazy enough to think that fixing the FCC is the less preferable alternative to tearing down and recreating a regulatory agency…

cabwest says:

Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

OK… so the popular position here is that the FCC’s “Net Neutrality” rules are wonderful & sacred — and must be constantly praised and reflexively defended.

What is ignored is that this Net-Neutrality is a major new expansion of Federal government power & control over the internet — which is exactly opposite to the claimed purposes of Net-Neutrality (an open internet with free expression, content and innovation).

The FCC now established that only “legal content” is permissible on U.S. fixed and mobile internet; “illegal” content will necessarily be prohibited and punished. Guess who now can decide what is legal & illegal content on the internet — a few unelected and unaccountable FCC chair-warmers.

Tremendous police powers of cultural & political censorship and internet economic control have now been handed to FCC employees. That is not an ‘open-internet’ recipe, as so many people believe Net-Neutrality will deliver.

If you completely trust the Federal government and love how the FCC has greatly benefited citizens over the past century… then all is well with Net-Neutrality.
But if you think otherwise… perhaps Net-Neutrality has a few serious flaws that must be fixed.

killthelawyers (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

Net neutrality is not focused on the content of the message and service; rather, it is focused on the competitive advantage an ISP gives to itself or those from whom it is able to extract a price. That has literally nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with preventing anti-competitive practices.

cabwest says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Regulators are Divine

… your opinion on the “focus” of Net-Neutrality carries no legal weight.

The exact wording of the Net-Neutrality legal documents does.

The FCC clearly states that “legal content” is now the only standard for permissible internet content. FCC tomorrow could declare all streaming-music on the internet as non-legal content, or same with R-rated movies, or Scientology teachings… the possibilities are endless with that kind of regulatory power.

You see no problem at all with that now because you are unfamiliar with the sordid history of FCC.

Power corrupts. Think 10 or 20 years down the road and what creative politicians could do with this open-ended power.

Baron von Robber says:

Re: Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

“Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication. 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.[1][2][3][4]”

CK20XX (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

I know, right? The government can’t do anything right, so it’s really bad when they’re allowed to regulate anything, like…

– The public power monopoly that provides us all our electricity
– The municipal water utilities that provide us clean water
– The national weather service that provides us regular forecasts
– The national aeronautics and space administration that launches satellites into space that perform all manner of useful functions
– The US department of agriculture that provides us safe food
– The food and drug administration that ensures we don’t kill ourselves with our pills
– The national institute of standards and technology, the US naval observatory, and the US congress that help ensure all our clocks run accurately
– The national highway traffic safety administration that makes sure all our cars do not come from Honest Jon’s Dealership
– The local, state, and federal departments of transportation that maintain our roadways
– The environmental protection agency that ensures our gasoline is of proper quality
– The federal reserve bank that issues legal tender
– The fire marshal’s inspections and the local and state building codes that make sure our houses remain standing
– The local police departments that ensure our houses are not mysteriously empty when we return to them

I mean, the only other explanation is that some political group has been pushing propaganda that all forms of government are bad and inherently corrupt, except for the forms they provide. And you’d have to be a real sucker to fall for something like that.

I.T. Guy says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Regulators are Divine

  • The public power monopoly that provides us all our electricity

    In case you didn’t know it has been deregulated and I highly suggest if you can, go choose another power provider. They will be more than happy to lock you into an “introductory rate” which happens to be a bit higher than the ole public power monopoly you were paying, then after the introductory period expires watch your bill increase 300%, and when asked why, the electric provider will cite “market fluctuations” but when called out on that no market had fluctuated 300 FUKING PERCENT… ahem, excuse me. That no market had changed to account for a 300% increase in the electric charge, they will then cite their representatives saying they said you were paying a varying rate. As if all utilities don’t have a varying rate.

    Long story long, and 3 reports to the FTC later the charges were reduced to a fair market rate and I was never so happy to go back to the public power monopoly that provides energy.

Michael (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

“What is ignored is that this Net-Neutrality is a major new expansion of Federal government power & control over the internet”

I’m not trying to pile on, because I am also a “less government / regulation is probably better” kind of person, but The umbrella that Title II put over the ISP’s was in an already heavily regulated area and did far less to expand the regulations than it did to simply add clarity to them. In addition, the ISP’s themselves had already been (and continued to) treat their services under Title II when it was beneficial to them but pretend it did not apply when it was inconvenient.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Regulators are Divine

If net neutrality is to be scrapped and an ISP is allowed to do what ever it so pleases, then it follows that all hurdles to ISP market entry by new entities will be removed and competition in the marketplace will be actively encouraged. Otherwise you are asking for an economic disaster.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Regulators are Divine

Wher to start, you do not understand want net neutrality is about.

It is a means whereby the ISP is stopped from from deciding what services and content you can get to over the connection that they give you. It has very little to directly do with provision of the connection, as without net neutrality, every provider of a connection could decide which services and content you can use, and divide up the Internet in such a fashion that you need a service from all of them to experience the complete Internet.

Also, and zero rating is the start, an ISP can create bundles of Internet services and content, and charge you for every bundle, and you can be sure that they will put the popular services in different bundles, so that they can sell you more bundles.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Not quite true; what you need to do is get in the habit of drafting up bills for Congress free of charge (or pay someone to do it for you), until they become dependent on you. THEN you just write the bill that has the changes you want, and insist that it’s important it get passed as-is.

Congress has shifted from being a group of elected lawmakers to being a group of elected gatekeepers… the lawmakers are mostly* now private lobbyists.

*Every once in a while, we get someone in the House who actually wants to make their mark on the country and write something themselves, but this is rare, as their resources are extremely limited these days.

Robert L says:

Telecom monopolies may not be real...

but when you compare the relatively few telecom players along with the fact that a vast majority of people live in areas where they have little or no choice of provider against the vast landscape of companies that rely on this infrastructure to reach their clients or provide their services, this infrastructure must be protected from abuse by those who control it. The amount of ‘innovation’ that takes place in the service provider space is almost insignificant in comparison to that which takes place or could possibly take place by those companies that rely on it.

Anonymous Coward says:

My guess is that the Trump administration and the Republicans will push through a truck load of heinous laws and rule changes and this gets buried underneath. I fully expect a multi pronged attack on all institutions with net neutrality being gutted under the guise of “across the aisle” compromise because no matter what happens the plutocracy always win.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Older Stuff
04:48 Dumb Telecom Take Of The Week: Because The Internet Didn't Explode, Killing Net Neutrality Must Not Have Mattered (23)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
04:55 Axios Parrots A Lot Of Dumb, Debunked Nonsense About Net Neutrality (54)
10:50 NY AG Proves Broadband Industry Funded Phony Public Support For Attack On Net Neutrality (10)
06:24 The GOP Is Using Veterans As Props To Demonize Net Neutrality (22)
06:03 Telecom Using Veterans As Props To Demonize California's New Net Neutrality Law (12)
09:32 AT&T Whines That California Net Neutrality Rules Are Forcing It To Behave (11)
06:23 The New York Times (Falsely) Informs Its 7 Million Readers Net Neutrality Is 'Pointless' (51)
15:34 Facebook's Australian News Ban Did Demonstrate The Evil Of Zero Rating (18)
04:58 'Net Neutrality Hurt Internet Infrastructure Investment' Is The Bad Faith Lie That Simply Won't Die (11)
05:48 Dumb New GOP Talking Point: If You Restore Net Neutrality, You HAVE To Kill Section 230. Just Because! (66)
06:31 DOJ Drops Ridiculous Trump-Era Lawsuit Against California For Passing Net Neutrality Rules (13)
06:27 The Wall Street Journal Kisses Big Telecom's Ass In Whiny Screed About 'Big Tech' (13)
10:45 New Interim FCC Boss Jessica Rosenworcel Will Likely Restore Net Neutrality, Just Not Yet (5)
15:30 Small Idaho ISP 'Punishes' Twitter And Facebook's 'Censorship' ... By Blocking Access To Them Entirely (81)
05:29 A Few Reminders Before The Tired Net Neutrality Debate Is Rekindled (13)
06:22 U.S. Broadband Speeds Jumped 90% in 2020. But No, It Had Nothing To Do With Killing Net Neutrality. (12)
12:10 FCC Ignores The Courts, Finalizes Facts-Optional Repeal Of Net Neutrality (19)
10:46 It's Opposite Day At The FCC: Rejects All Its Own Legal Arguments Against Net Neutrality To Claim It Can Be The Internet Speech Police (13)
12:05 Blatant Hypocrite Ajit Pai Decides To Move Forward With Bogus, Unconstitutional Rulemaking On Section 230 (178)
06:49 FCC's Pai Puts Final Bullet In Net Neutrality Ahead Of Potential Demotion (25)
06:31 The EU Makes It Clear That 'Zero Rating' Violates Net Neutrality (6)
06:22 DOJ Continues Its Quest To Kill Net Neutrality (And Consumer Protection In General) In California (11)
11:08 Hypocritical AT&T Makes A Mockery Of Itself; Says 230 Should Be Reformed For Real Net Neutrality (28)
06:20 Trump, Big Telecom Continue Quest To Ban States From Protecting Broadband Consumers (19)
06:11 Senators Wyden And Markey Make It Clear AT&T Is Violating Net Neutrality (13)
06:31 Net Neutrali-what? AT&T's New Streaming Service Won't Count Against Its Broadband Caps. But Netflix Will. (25)
06:23 Telecom's Latest Dumb Claim: The Internet Only Works During A Pandemic Because We Killed Net Neutrality (49)
13:36 Ex-FCC Staffer Says FCC Authority Given Up In Net Neutrality Repeal Sure Would Prove Handy In A Crisis (13)
06:27 Clarence Thomas Regrets Brand X Decision That Paved Way For The Net Neutrality Wars (11)
More arrow