FCC Will Approve Neutrality Rules Tomorrow

Genachowski's plan is reportedly based on a net neutrality compromise brokered by outgoing House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat. Waxman met behind closed doors with broadband providers, Web-based companies and net neutrality advocates earlier this year, but the compromise fell apart in Congress after committee Republicans declined to endorse it.

Under Genachowski's proposal, the FCC would prohibit broadband providers from blocking customer access to legal Web content. The FCC would also require providers to disclose their network management practices to customers.

The proposal would bar wireline-based broadband providers from "unreasonable discrimination" against Web traffic, but it would not impose that same rule on mobile broadband providers. The FCC would watch mobile broadband providers closely and act if it sees evidence of anticonsumer or anticompetitive conduct, Genachowski said in a speech.

The proposal would not reclassify broadband as regulated, common-carrier service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act, as Genachowski proposed earlier this year. Broadband would stay classified as a lightly regulated information service under Title I.

With the two Republicans already saying they will vote against the proposal, Genachowski may need to strengthen the proposal to get Copps' support.

So who supports the plan?

Several groups have expressed support, including previously mentioned Comcast. Also expressing support in recent days were the Minority Media and Telecom Council, the Communications Workers of America, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

The American Cable Association, the Consumer Electronics Association, and Sprint Nextel are also among the groups that have praised the proposal.

Tomorrow morning the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will mark the winter solstice by taking an unprecedented step to expand government's reach into the Internet by attempting to regulate its inner workings. In doing so, the agency will circumvent Congress and disregard a recent court ruling.

By moving forward with Internet rules anyway, the FCC is not living up to its promise of being "data driven" in its pursuit of mandates—i.e., listening to the needs of the market.

FCC lawyers told the federal court of appeals in Washington, D.C., that their theory gave the agency the authority to regulate broadband rates, even though Congress has never given the FCC the power to regulate the Internet. FCC leaders seemed caught off guard by the extent of the court's April 6 rebuke of the commission's regulatory overreach.

More than 300 members of Congress, including 86 Democrats, contacted the FCC to implore it to stop pursuing Internet regulation and to defer to Capitol Hill.

The FCC's action will spark a billable-hours bonanza as lawyers litigate the meaning of "reasonable" network management for years to come. How's that for regulatory certainty?

To date, the FCC hasn't ruled out increasing its power further by using the phone monopoly laws, directly or indirectly regulating rates someday, or expanding its reach deeper into mobile broadband services. The most expansive regulatory regimes frequently started out modest and innocuous before incrementally growing into heavy-handed behemoths.

On this winter solstice, we will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation. The darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter's night for Internet freedom.

Internet service giants like Comcast and Verizon want to offer premium and privileged access to the Internet for corporations who can afford to pay for it.

The good news is that the Federal Communications Commission has the power to issue regulations that protect net neutrality. The bad news is that draft regulations written by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski don't do that at all. They're worse than nothing.

Although Chairman Genachowski's draft Order has not been made public, early reports make clear that it falls far short of protecting net neutrality.

For many Americans -- particularly those who live in rural areas -- the future of the Internet lies in mobile services. But the draft Order would effectively permit Internet providers to block lawful content, applications, and devices on mobile Internet connections.

Mobile networks like AT&T and Verizon Wireless would be able to shut off your access to content or applications for any reason. For instance, Verizon could prevent you from accessing Google Maps on your phone, forcing you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it costs money to use and isn't nearly as good.

The FCC has never before explicitly allowed discrimination on the Internet -- but the draft Order takes a step backwards, merely stating that so-called "paid prioritization" (the creation of a "fast lane" for big corporations who can afford to pay for it) is cause for concern.

It sure is -- but that's exactly why the FCC should ban it. Instead, the draft Order would have the effect of actually relaxing restrictions on this kind of discrimination.

That's why net neutrality is the most important free speech issue of our time. And that's why, this Tuesday, when the FCC meets to discuss this badly flawed proposal, I'll be watching. If they approve it as is, I'll be outraged. And you should be, too.

Most of the Senators and most of the House agree with the compromise Genachowski is putting forward Tuesday.

Your Google news links are welcome but not particularly useful for genuine context.

How do we keep Time Warner from putting Netflix out of business?

There is no shortage of bandwidth. It is an artificial shortage necessitated by our full-blown commercial approach to what should be a heavily regulated public utility.

If they don't want to be neutral they should contribute to a fund which provides REAL internet to those people who don't want Bugs Bunny Roadrunner internet lite, or NBC Universal Comcast internet right.

This is the screwiest mess I've seen in a while; this is what happens when you turn public utilities over to the bean counters. Comcast and TWC have no choice but to try to put all competitors down, it's in their DNA.

If this was electricity, would they ration it? Or would they keep building more power plants to satisfy the demand? There is no shortage of bandwidth. It is an artificial shortage necessitated by our full-blown commercial approach to what should be a heavily regulated public utility. As long as the great unwashed thinks there's a scarcity they will give up their rights to the first shiny logo company that offers a "solution".

Your Google news links are welcome but not particularly useful for genuine context.

Disclose the truth? Pathetic. Karl's posts come as close to painting the truth as any blogger or "news" organization out there.

Any disagreement you might have is purely ideological, falling into the "useful idiot" (wiki it before you censor mods) paradigm.

I hate to tell you this, but Karl adds WAY too much opinion into his "news" which pretty much makes them blogs.

Odd. Any time Karl rightfully criticizes ISP for their corrupt way or ripping off the customers, you come up immediately in the defense of the megacorps.

Be prepared to be called scum when you behave like one.

He doesn't accept an opinion

I personally can see good and bad out of the "evil mega corps".. they are hungry for money - that's their job. They also built out resources with their size and large amounts of money.. lets see what this country would be like if every phone and cable company, and cell provider, was still "mom-and-pop" small business. We'd still be barely pushing out 1.5 meg internet

Consistent activities aimed at defrauding customers and corrupting government agencies are clear, no matter how squiggly you want a clear line between black and white to be.

Why are we reading an opinion of a comedian who stole his election?

On this winter solstice, we will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation. The darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter's night for Internet freedom.

Genachowski's plan is reportedly based on a net neutrality compromise brokered by outgoing House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat. Waxman met behind closed doors with broadband providers, Web-based companies and net neutrality advocates earlier this year, but the compromise fell apart in Congress after committee Republicans declined to endorse it.

How much is this BS going to end up costing us.

Except the big providers want to do metered billing all on their own, regardless of the constantly lowering costs of providing services. Comes from an environment that has little real competition.

I guess people will have to live without the internet if all this gets any worse.