(FCC Chairman) Ajit Pai not concerned about number of pro-net neutrality comments

[workinclasszero]

Ajit Pai not concerned about number of pro-net neutrality comments
Two million new pro-net neutrality comments claimed by "Day of Action" organizers.
JON BRODKIN - 7/14/2017, 12:25 PM


One day after a large protest of his plan to gut net neutrality rules, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai was asked if the number of pro-net neutrality comments submitted to the FCC might cause a change in course.

In response, Pai maintained his stance that the number of comments is not as important as the content of those comments.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/07/ajit-pai-not-concerned-about-number-of-pro-net-neutrality-comments/

[TheBlackAdder]

1. Of course he isn't. He's a muppet of the corporations.

[workinclasszero]

2. Those mega corp dollars

speak much louder than millions of Americans apparently.

Your government on republicanism.....

[onenote]

3. From a purely legal standpoint, he's right

The key question raised in the FCC's current network neutrality proceeding is whether to reverse the agency's determination that, as a legal matter, Internet Access is a telecommunications service governed by Title II of the Communications Act (the title that applies to telephone service) or is an "information service" and as such, not subject to certain types of regulations. The FCC initially treated Internet Access as an information service, but when the courts limited what the agency could do under that approach, it revisited it and decided that Internet Access service was more properly defined as a Title II service under the Communications Act . As an initial matter, it is that ruling that the current FCC is now proposing to reverse, returning to the earlier information service interpretation.

As a legal matter, comments that say keep network neutrality but offer no legal analysis on the statutory interpretation issue before the FCC aren't particularly useful. The FCC certainly couldn't survive a court challenge to a decision that says "we interpreted the statute this particular way because more people said we should do so than said we shouldn't."

That being said, even if the FCC concludes (and I think its safe to say they will) that Internet Access service is properly classified as an information service, there still are questions as to what regulations the Commission can and should apply to Internet Access service under that interpretation. Boatloads of comments that say keep regulation are of some value in suggesting that there is a strong public interest in maintaining some regulation, but it doesn't do much to inform the legal issues surrounding the question of what rules the FCC can and should adopt.

[snot]

4. Fwiw, I'd just add that

the telephone system was and I think still is classified as a communications service, and I would argue that the net is NOT primarily an information service, although it certainly can be used as one, but is first and foremost a communications service. It has in fact all but replaced the telephone system as that originally functioned, and also serves as our current village square. Sure, we go there for information; but we also do nearly all of our public and private communication through it, including a lot of stuff besides information.

The net is humanity's nervous system; and like the nervous system of an individual, sure, it communicates information, but the key word is COMMUNICATES, and like an individual nervous system, communicates all kinds of stuff besides information, e.g. effectuating agreements, registering operational requests (such as, please don't disable this nervous system, you motherfockers!), or just being creative!

The arguments for the classification desired by Big Cable are actually pretty weak, in my view.