[Chapter-delegates] Should ISOC support Net Neutrality in the U.S.?

[vinton cerf]

I am in agreement with John and Evan. The sequence of events leading up to
the use of Title II to give FCC authority to enforce NN was the only path
forward. If I remember correctly, under the Powell FCC, Internet service
was moved to Title I (information service, unregulated) and when the
Wheeler FCC tried to enforce NN rules, the Supreme Court said "you don't
have regulatory authority under Title I" - so Wheeler's FCC switched back
to Title II with substantial limiting of applicable rules (ie refrained
from enforcing) to as to give FCC authority to regulate the NN rules. The
better solution would be an Internet Title expressing NN rules in an
amended Telecom act but the present Congress seems an unlikely place in
which to achieve passage of such legislation.

vint

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 11:46 PM, John Levine <isocmember at johnlevine.com>
wrote:

> In article <CAMguqh2zqGrY0o7dT+XF70fxLivO2+ADXfKwDkoN5r+
> 5DGvWhw at mail.gmail.com> you write:
> >​I agree. But the current US push for telephony ​classification seems to
> be
> >a desperation fallback position from the preferred solution --
> implementing
> >NN through legislation --
>
> The preferred solution is to go back to the 1996 rules, regulate the
> wires as common carriage with competitive ISPs using those wires, like
> they do in Europe.  But with the FCC in the telcos' pocket, I'm not
> holding my breath.
>
> R's,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
> Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20170708/5cc5b937/attachment.htm>