Today AT&T and several other broadband providers asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn “net neutrality” a rule that bars internet service providers from slowing or blocking rival’s content.
“The practical stakes are immense,” AT&T said in its appeal of a ruling that upheld “net neutrality.” The company pointed to a dissenting opinion that said the regulation “fundamentally transforms the internet” and will have a “staggering” impact on infrastructure investment.
The current net neutrality rules are backed by tech companies such as Alphabet Inc.’s Google, and Facebook Inc.
AT&T is not the only group trying to get this ruling overturned. Filing a separate appeal from AT&T where the United States Telecom Association, a trade group, and broadband service provider CenturyLink Inc.
The FCC is already considering overturning net neutrality or at least weakening it as it currently stands. Yet it looks like the AT&T and others do not want to wait for the FCC.
Here is what the FCC is proposing:
1) “Proposing to return the classification of broadband service from a Title II telecommunications service to a Title I information service— in short that returns the internet to the light-touch regulation drawn from the Clinton Administration;
2) “proposing to eliminate the so-called Internet conduct standard,” which he called a “roving mandate to micromanage the Internet”
3) Seeking comment on what to do about the “so-called bright-line rules adopted in 2015,” which are no blocking or throttling of content and no paid prioritization.”
In short moving internet service providers to Title I does NOT necessarily mean the end to net neutrality.
“Repealing Title II will simply restore the FTC’s authority to police broadband providers’ privacy practices,” he said. “That means the nation’s most expert and experienced privacy regulator will once again be a cop on the beat protecting Americans’ online privacy. In short, we will return to the tried-and-true approach that protected our digital privacy effectively before 2015.”
“The next thing you’ll hear is that Title II is necessary to protect free speech,” he said. “That’s right: some will argue that government control is the key to the ability to speak your mind on the Internet. Most Americans should recognize this absurdity for what it is. For government regulation is no friend to free speech, but its enemy.”
“And where do the people who are driving this closing of the American mind stand on greater government regulation of the Internet? They don’t just favor it; they strongly demand it. They raise money off of it. And we are somehow supposed to believe that their true motive is to protect free speech on the Internet? Please. ”
What do you think of these changes? Leave us a comment and let us know what you think.
Need cord cutting tech support? Join our new Cord Cutting Tech Support Facebook Group for help.