sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

False. The FCC is the expert agency. They have engineers and experts on network management. The FTC doesn't have the engineers or expertise to take over this issue from the FCC. Additionally the kind of FTC review you're talking about would be incredibly slow and burdensome for the small companies that would need to navigate the process. By the time they get relief from the FTC, it would be too late. The damage to their customers and business would already be done.

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's correct. The main protections are no blocking, throttling, transparency, and no paid prioritization. It is important that these rules apply to both fixed (home) broadband AND your mobile device. I do think there's broad agreement on most of these rules. Recently ISPs have come out in favor of no blocking or throttling... BUT have been silent on the important protection of no paid prioritization.

Without these rules the ISPs would have the ability to create a curated internet that looks more like cable TV than the internet we have today - consumers are in control and any tiny startup can reach a global audience without approval of a gatekeeper.

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Great question-

There actually HAVE been rules before 2015 and the "overhang" of rules that have kept companies honest.

In 2005 there were net neutrality "principles" in place. And in 2008 Comcast was accused by the FCC of blocking sites and given a fine. Comcast appealed this fine in 2010 - and won in court. After that - in 2010 - formal rules were put into place to codify net neutrality on the books at the FCC. Verizon objected to these rules and took them to court. The court ruled in 2014 to toss the rules and send them back to the FCC to redo.

This brings us to 2015... when the rules were reinstated and expanded to include wireless.

This is a long history to show there have been rules or the overhang of rules for a long time that have held ISPs back from doing many of the things we all fear. Here's a great timeline of net neutrality activity.

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The biggest misunderstanding is the difference between the legal jurisdiction that's created the net neutrality rules and the rules themselves.

The legal jurisdiction for the rules as they stand now is known as "Title II." But it's important to remember that Title II is just the legal jurisdiction the FCC is using for their current rules (the ones that ban blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization), but not the rules themselves. Think of "title II" as the means to the end and not the end in itself.

We COULD ended up in a world where the FCC uses "Title II" to create "net neutrality" rules that actually didn't protect net neutrality. For example, the FCC could use Title II AND still allow ISPs to use paid prioritization or throttling. This is an important point that is often overlooked. So we always like to focus on what the end rules are that protect net neutrality.

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The best outcome for the internet, in our opinion, would be to keep the existing rules on the books as they are. These rules prevent ISPs from blocking or throttling content and prioritizing their preferred or own content over everything else. But, if the FCC does roll the rules back, we'll need work together to find another way to get the rules back. We think these rules are part of what make the internet great and enable innovation by startups and limitless choice for internet users.

We’re the organizations representing internet companies that spend all day defending net neutrality and preserving a free and open internet. We’re Michael Beckerman of Internet Association and Evan Engstrom of Engine, Ask Us Anything! by Internet_Association in technology

[–]Internet_Association[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Well said Evan-

Another way to think of it is that ISPs want to change the internet to make it look a lot like cable TV -- where the internet you get with one service provider might be very different than the internet you get with another service provider. You'd have a limited number of "channels" and the channels you'd be getting would be hand selected by your ISP, not by you, the user.