FCC Will Also Order States To Scrap Plans For Their Own Net Neutrality Laws (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In addition to ditching its own net neutrality rules, the Federal Communications Commission also plans to tell state and local governments that they cannot impose local laws regulating broadband service. This detail was revealed by senior FCC officials in a phone briefing with reporters today, and it is a victory for broadband providers that asked for widespread preemption of state laws. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposed order finds that state and local laws must be preempted if they conflict with the U.S. government's policy of deregulating broadband Internet service, FCC officials said. The FCC will vote on the order at its December 14 meeting. It isn't clear yet exactly how extensive the preemption will be. Preemption would clearly prevent states from imposing net neutrality laws similar to the ones being repealed by the FCC, but it could also prevent state laws related to the privacy of Internet users or other consumer protections. Pai's staff said that states and other localities do not have jurisdiction over broadband because it is an interstate service and that it would subvert federal policy for states and localities to impose their own rules.

Comments

Folks, we are in big trouble

[Anonymous Coward]

I cannot think of a better way to kill the tech sector.

Re:Folks, we are in big trouble

[gtall]

The Orange Fuhrer has no opinions in the sense of most of the rest of us, he doesn't do policy. He only repeats what Fox News tells him is "twooo".

One thing to remember about that Knob, he's got no strategy for anything. It is simply gut reactions to everything. He's easily manipulated and only repeats whatever he heard last. He's completely incapable of fitting the pieces of his alleged Administration into any cohesive plan for governance. You can see this when he uses to the Press to communicate with the heads of the executive branch agencies.

You can also see his incompetence in the people he puts in charge of those agencies and in other positions. He'll take someone with no expertise in an area and make them head of the executive fiefdom for that area. The only reason the U.S. hasn't folded up on itself is inertia. And it will continue that way until that Knob leaves office. The problems he's set in motion will come back to bite us, especially the tax giveaway currently giving the R's wet dreams. When the budget gets sucked up by interest payments, then people will realize what damage he really did, but it will be too late. And Grandma will be coming to live with you because the government can no longer afford her. Better start saving.

Re: B-b-b-b-but

[Anonymous Coward]

Civil war or a revolution is not far off if the Washington royalty keeps this crap up

Interstate service but not a utility?

[Tinsoldier314]

Somehow the rationalization that the internet is simultaneously a vital interstate service that precludes state regulation and a purely market driven business seems like a big business wet dream.

States can regulate and tax most businesses but not *this* business because it's special for "reasons".

Re:Bonus

[Anonymous Coward]

Europe is morphing into a neoliberal dystopia, run by bankers, and riven with social unrest. And that's without the UK. Your bits won't be free there either.

Re:10th Amendment baby!

[Anonymous Coward]

The South has only been in favor of State's Rights since the Civil War.

When individual Northern states passed personal liberty laws that gave protection to run-away slaves and freed men, the South wanted Federal Fugitive Slave Acts to take precedence over the state laws.

The South was never a deeply principled bastion for State's Rights. The only thing that they were consistent about was their determination to preserve the institution of slavery.

Re:10th Amendment baby!

[Orgasmatron]

Holy shit! President Trump has magical abilities. For something like 100 years, the left has consistently pretended that the 10th Amendment applies to nothing, ever. Less than a year into his first term and the Communists have not only discovered Federalism, they've decided that they were always in favor of it!

you either keep control or you lose it, no both

[eyenot]

a few things before i start in:

* I actually remember when the EFF was about preventing unecessary regulations and legislation for the sake of avoiding creating bubbles of fantasy land bullshit. The old thinking was that computers don't obey legislation. Now I'm dosheartened to see the EFF actively calling for regulations and laws to force things to be convenient for them. Who the fuck is writing this shit?

* I'm all for net neutrality, because I like the internet as a vital and growing platform for business and creativity, networking and socializing.

So, let me start in.

This shit is a fucking non. Issue.

Look, nobody is paying for the internet just to make a modem connect across miles of line to a distant server just for the wow factor. Nobody is paying for internet service just to ssh to the ISP and >message everyone else who's logged in.

And nobody is paying for internet service just to connect to the WWW pages of their favorite sites just for wow factor, either. The front pages of most web sites and services are really fucking boring and typically just offer shit like legal things to read, contact pages, "about us", etc. Most sites these days don't even offer a site map, so we're talking immensely boring.

EVERYBODY who connects to the internet is connecting to see other users' content.

Nearly every major web site or service exists to host user content: forums; photo hosting; facebook; twitter; youtube, vimeo, vidme; reddit; amazon, ebay, craigslist; they all host user content. The exceptions like netflix, hulu, other entertainment services, let's leave them out of the discussion. Even fucking redbox has a website; so does your local library. But let's acknowledge that even though those sites don't host user generated content, they wouldn't exist without the users who show up to drink from the media tap.

No sites exist just to be on a hard drive somewhere. Well there's weird shit like Zombo.com but I think you get my point: the biggest sites online are all about connecting people to people, and the rest are about connecting people to companies.

Nowhere in ANY of this is the user left out of the equation. The user is part of the flowchart every step of the way. If you think otherwise, sorry, you're fucking retarded.

Which means that the user is in a position to place demands. You want congress to do that for you, that's great, have fun going round and round the cycle of bubble-bust bubble-bust while you strive to maintain the illusion of fantasy land and work on suspending your disbelief.

Some people, notably Stephen King (check his twitter) think net neutrality is about censorship.

Guess what, jerky? It's got shit to do with censorship. We have net neutrality right now, and facebook, twitter, youtube, and google have been censoring what you are allowed to see for over a year, and it's all been politically motivated. If you aren't aware of any of that, either you just got out of prison or, sorry, you're retarded.

Net neutrality is about whether your service providers, the content-less middle men just passing data between you and the sites that exist only to serve you, will get to start charging you to reach those sites. Of course you should feel a little discouraged at that prospect, considering by and large those sites work by not charging you anything (at least not up front. And in the case of twitter, I hear that for $99/mo. you can buy a sponsored content account and boila, no more bans). Without those sites being able to offer that service, those sites don't work out to be as big as they are today. Without those sites being that big, ISPs have nothing much to sell the vast majority of users. Now you can see how and why the user has control, complete and utter fucking control, of the situation.

So here's the fucking deal. Here's how and why net neutrality is a non issue: the user can flip the table by getting the websites on their side.

Here's the proposal:

1. Users get the major sites to agree that ISPs mon

Re: Bonus

[Anonymous Coward]

The social unrest part is Fox News bullshit. We're fine. Fix your own shit, USA.

Re:B-b-b-b-but

[Talderas]

Interstate commerce has frequently been abused since the 1942 ruling in Wickard v. Filburn which pretty much held all economic activity as interstate. Electing not to purchase something is interstate commerce that can be regulated because you are participating in the interstate market by lowering the demand in the market. If you want to talk about twisting the Constitution around, this is probably one of the most egregious rulings from the Supreme Court permitting twisting.