HOW THEY WILL CENSOR TBP

Hat tip TMWNN

Throttling of websites and online services might help customers, FCC says

The FCC will now take your comments on whether to kill net neutrality.

 

You can now start filing public comments on the Federal Communications Commission plan to eliminate net neutrality rules.

The FCC today opened the docket, titled “Restoring Internet Freedom.” Clicking “New Filing” takes you to a form for uploading documents, while an “Express” filing lets you write a brief comment without uploading a document. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai also released the draft text of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that will be voted on at the May 18 FCC meeting. There will be another three months for public comments after that preliminary vote, and the FCC will make a final decision sometime after that.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

It’s already pretty clear where this is going, though: Pai intends to overturn the 2015 net neutrality order, and the only question is whether anything will replace it. While previous FCC leaders decided that home Internet providers and mobile carriers shouldn’t be allowed to throttle websites and online services, Pai’s proposal suggests that the current ban on throttling hurts customers.

The existing no-throttling rule “bans the impairment or degradation of lawful Internet traffic or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management practices,” the NPRM says. “We seek comment on whether this rule is still necessary, particularly for smaller providers. How does the rule benefit consumers, and what are its costs? When is ‘throttling’ harmful to consumers? Does the no-throttling rule prevent providers from offering broadband Internet access service with differentiated prioritization that benefits consumers? Does the no-throttling rule harm latency-sensitive applications and content?”

Pai’s NPRM presents no evidence that the no-throttling rule hurts customers, but claims that the current rules were passed without evidence. The document seeks comment about whether the FCC should have any rules on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization, but strongly suggests that such rules aren’t necessary.

“Despite virtually no quantifiable evidence of consumer harm, the commission nevertheless determined that it needed bright-line rules banning three specific practices by providers of both fixed and mobile broadband Internet access service: blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization,” Pai’s draft proposal says.

4 million comments last time around

The FCC received 4 million comments, most supporting strict net neutrality rules, prior to issuing the rules in February 2015. But the number of comments on each side isn’t that important, senior FCC officials said in a call with reporters today. It’s not a public opinion poll where the most votes wins–what matters are the quality of the arguments, the facts entered in the record, and legal arguments, they said.

While people can put submissions into the record regarding the draft version of the NPRM starting today, the official comment cycle on the questions and proposals in the NPRM won’t begun until after the May 18 vote. The deadline for initial comments will be July 17, and the deadline for reply comments will be August 16, the FCC told Ars.

The FCC’s comment website crashed multiple times during the last net neutrality debate, forcing the commission to extend the deadline, but the site and FCC’s back-end systems have undergone significant upgrades since then.

Arguments in favor of strict net neutrality rules aren’t likely to be given much weight by the FCC’s Republican leadership. Pai has already said he intends to reverse his Democratic predecessor’s classification of ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act, which in turn would wipe out the core net neutrality rules and other requirements. When the FCC tried to impose net neutrality rules without using Title II in 2010, the rules were struck down in court. The commission’s net neutrality rules were finally able to withstand a court challenge after the FCC invoked its Title II authority.

The FCC will seek comment on whether there are any possible “formulations of a no-blocking rule” that can be legally enacted without the Title II common carrier designation.

The NPRM also suggests that customers are being harmed by the ban on ISPs charging websites and other online services for faster access to consumers. “Is there a risk that banning paid prioritization suppresses pro-competitive activity?” the NPRM asks. “For example, could allowing paid prioritization give Internet service providers a supplemental revenue stream that would enable them to offer lower-priced broadband Internet access service to end-users?”

The NPRM asks whether paid prioritization could “enable certain critical information, such as consumers’ health care vital signs that are being monitored remotely, to be transmitted more efficiently or reliably.” But the document fails to mention that the existing rules have an exception that lets ISPs sell isolated network capacity for telemedicine services.

The FCC also asks whether it should keep rules that require ISPs to make greater disclosures about hidden fees and data caps. The FCC seems to think the broadband market is so competitive that this isn’t necessary. “We seek comment on whether the additional reporting obligations from that rule remains necessary in today’s competitive broadband marketplace,” the NPRM says. Pai has already exempted ISPs with 250,000 or fewer subscribers from these rules.

An FCC official acknowledged that it’s highly likely the commission will be sued after it makes changes to net neutrality rules, but noted that courts have generally deferred to the FCC on whether Internet providers should or should not be classified as common carriers.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
19 Comments
Rob
Rob
May 1, 2017 10:01 am

I am having trouble understanding the position of the author in this post. It appears as though he supports throttling and pay for bandwidth. If that is the case then he clearly does not understand how those limitations give some providers a license to print money at the expense of the customers. Perhaps he makes limited use of the internet and has never run up against throttling. Maybe slow connections are all he has ever seen and it never interfered with his ability to play a game or watch a movie that didn’t come from some monopoly. But many people have experienced these problems and that is why 4 million people commented the last time around.

How about adding a conclusion to this post that sums up what you think. It really isn’t all that clear from your writing.

Iska Waran
Iska Waran
May 1, 2017 10:12 am

I believe that Denninger thinks that “net neutrality” is a way for Netflix to scam bandwidth for free – like “drafting” in a car race. Maybe there are (at least) two ways for TBP to effectively be censored: 1) have traffic here purposely slowed 2) have overall web speeds disminished due to constant streaming of videos. I don’t know.

hardscrabble farmer
hardscrabble farmer
May 1, 2017 10:15 am

If opinions from the public had any effect I’d write them a novel, but I get the feeling that decisions have long been made regarding freedom for the hoi polloi.

Flashman
Flashman
  hardscrabble farmer
May 1, 2017 3:53 pm

Word.

General
General
May 1, 2017 10:21 am

They don’t care. They just pretend to care.

Now get back to work serfs.

overthecliff
overthecliff
May 1, 2017 10:47 am

The farmer has it right. It is what it is and they are going to do what they are gonna do.

suzanna
suzanna
May 1, 2017 12:32 pm

Ditto on that. The petition is likely worthless.
My internet is slow as molasses in any case.
Gov and corps use all the bandwidth, we are
last on the list.

Capn Mike
Capn Mike
May 1, 2017 12:50 pm

So, the path to freedom lies through the FCC??? I don’t fuckin’ think so!

Flashman
Flashman
May 1, 2017 12:57 pm

TINWOVYOOT….There Is No Way Of Voting Yourself Out Of This. Pass it on.

Iconoclast421
Iconoclast421
May 1, 2017 3:06 pm

I dont know how many times sites like this one have failed to load or taken a very long time to load. Yet amazon pages never experience this kind of inconsistency. To be fair, sometimes yourtube videos take a long time to load or dont load at all (which forces me to use the video downloadhelper addon for firefox). It seems like the internet has always been a story of instability and inconsistency. So I’m not really sure what the big deal is with potential throttling. It’s not like sites like this host video files.

AWB
AWB
May 1, 2017 5:31 pm

Not as fun when the shoe’s on the other foot is it?

Westcoaster
Westcoaster
May 1, 2017 11:21 pm

As a person who has filed more FCC Petitions (commercial leased access against all the major cable co’s) than anyone on TBP, I can tell you whatever they’re going to inflict on us has already been decided, done deal. Your and my comments will have zero effect (just like our votes).

catfish
catfish
May 2, 2017 3:38 am

who gives a shit – TBP censored me when I told everyone Trump was a false flip-flopper, on the day he was elected. And the tossers here, instead of having humility (except hardscrabble and one other whose name I forgot), get really angry when I point out their naivity. Ya’ll deserve to get screwed by Trumps govment thugs.

Ed
Ed
  catfish
May 2, 2017 4:55 am

You’re full of shit, catfish. If Jim censored you over Trump, why would he let you tell lies about it and leave your posts up?

catfish
catfish
  Ed
May 2, 2017 1:54 pm

Ed – you fucking wanker – ask Hardscrabble – just fucking ask him, or your co-cunt starfcker. You can see Starfckers comment to my deleted reply e.g. “its called grace asshole” . See it for yourself retard, just after your fucking Messiah was elected. You are a denying little retarded arsehole

You are a liar – I know that much

catfish
catfish
  Administrator
May 2, 2017 2:27 pm

Fuck you – it is a question of facts – you are not dealing with these – my post were deleted and you know it – whether I am a douchebag or not is irrelevant – is what I am saying the truth or not? so grow a pair asshole, man up and face the ugly facts and admit you were deceived by your fucking flip-flopping balding Messiah twat Trump

you too are a liar

steve
steve
May 2, 2017 10:14 am

See this video as to why we want net neutrality.