Regulatory classification

[Commentary]  Once again, the [open Internet] rules are being rewritten.  Once again, the pitchforks and torches are in hand.  And once again, the only real and effective solution is being ignored:  legislation from Congress, versions of which have been floating around Capitol Hill for almost a decade. 

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s proposal — which is expected to be formally approved next month in a party-line vote — would render the FCC powerless to stop internet service providers like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon from slowing down or creating paid “fast lanes” for certain sites. And that could produce some big winners and losers throughout the industry.

Winner: Big Internet Service Providers

Loser: Netflix and YouTube 

Winner: Yahoo — and other services owned by ISPs 

Loser: Upstart streaming companies

Loser: Innovators 

For years, Comcast has been promising that it won't violate the principles of network neutrality, regardless of whether the government imposes any net neutrality rules. That meant that Comcast wouldn't block or throttle lawful Internet traffic and that it wouldn't create fast lanes in order to collect tolls from Web companies that want priority access over the Comcast network.

[Commentary] Moving in for the kill, incumbent carriers have stretched their home team advantage.  With millions in lobbying, campaign contributions and sponsored research, along with a like-minded Federal Communications Commission majority, the unpleasantness of the prior 8 year Obama stretch largely will evaporate very quickly. Money well spent. Rather than frame regulatory debates in terms of midlevel issues of economic theory and political philosophy, think lower tier: cold hard cash money. Follow the money.

One after another, regulators are making moves that underscore just how fast the media industry is changing, putting pressure on Washington to make sure laws keep up.

Over just two days this week, the Trump administration has both sued AT&T to block its planned takeover of Time Warner and proposed allowing internet-service providers—like AT&T—to form closer alliances with content companies, like Time Warner. The two government moves seem to go in opposite directions, on the one hand restricting a major telecommunications merger and on the other giving internet providers broad new powers to shape their customers’ online experiences.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai said that network neutrality protestors have "crossed a line" with hateful signs that target his children. It was reported Nov 27 there were protests outside Chairman Pai's home. “It certainly crosses a line with me,” Pai said.

[Commentary] In the rush to eliminate network neutrality protections, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai failed to hold a single public hearing, and has ignored the chorus of entrepreneurs, investors, businesses and citizens asking him to stop. Citizens across the political spectrum are now looking to their elected representatives to speak out on their behalf and call on Chairman Pai to cancel the vote. Chairman Pai’s plan is a radical break from FCC history and a fundamental departure from how the Internet has operated for the past 30 years.

[Commentary] Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai’s assertion that consumers will be served by Internet service providers’ “transparently” offering them “the plan that’s best for them” is fatuous in the extreme. The more likely outcome is that consumer options will shrink. They’ll “transparently” know that they’re being offered fewer choices, none of which will genuinely encompass an open internet. The truth is that competition among ISPs is shrinking, and their power already is enormous.