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 Preemption would clearly prevent states from imposing net neutrality laws similar to the ones being repealed by the FCC, but it could also prevent state laws related to the privacy of Internet users or other consumer protections.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

B-b-b-b-but

[Anonymous Coward]

states rights!

Re: B-b-b-b-but

[Anonymous Coward]

I think all the intelligent things about net neutility have already been said. Now it's just fuck Ajit Pai, and fuck Donald Trump, and fuck rich corporations that just look for ways to screw people more instead of adding something of value to society.

Re:B-b-b-b-but

[Immerman]

Actually I believe you are still required by law to pay sales tax on internet purchases. It's simply that the merchant isn't required to collect those taxes and pay them for you when they are operating out of a different state.

Re:B-b-b-b-but

[gtall]

Bullshit. You recall the FDA, not in the Constitution. Yet they prevent Joe's Bait and Pill Emporium from poisoning your mother with fake headache pills, or you with fake erectile dysfunction "medicine". The NiH does research into diseases with your name on them, not in the Constitution. The FAA prevents airlines from using accounting methods to find the correct price point between crashes and loyal ridership. They also have vehicle emissions standards so we don't revert to LA circa 1960's air, much as the alleged Administration looks back in fondness at those times. Rules and laws against workplace discrimination, again the alleged Administration looks back fondly at the 1950s, which is strange because most minorities do not have such fond memories. Neither do women.

The list goes on.

Re:B-b-b-b-but

[Dog-Cow]

FCC does not make law. They make regulations.

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.

Re:B-b-b-b-but

[slinches]

So pass an amendment that gives the federal government those authorities. Undermining the constitution, even for good reasons, still weakens our rights and threatens the fundamental concept of consent to govern. How can we feel represented when the fundamental rules of our government are ignored whenever it's convenient for whoever is in power?

Keep on draining the consumer protection swamp

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks again, Trump voters! I really can not express strongly enough what an awesome decision you made.

Re:Keep on draining the consumer protection swamp

[fyrewulff]

By law, the FCC must have 2 members from one party and 3 from the other. Obama was literally required to appoint Pai to the board.

Re: Keep on draining the consumer protection swamp

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck that. I blame people that actually voted for Trump and those that didnâ(TM)t vote.

Re:Keep on draining the consumer protection swamp

[mukinrestak]

No, he was required to appoint a Republican. He didn't have to choose an ISP mouthpiece/lobbyist as the one he appointed.

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

[ClickOnThis]

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

Won't kill it. Just turn it into something more like cable TV.

The difference being?

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.

Bonus

[mrwireless]

"And if you can kill it at the state level too, we'll throw in a private jet"

Sigh.

It's a sad thing for the world.. but a great opportunity for Europe.

Re:Bonus

[Baron_Yam]

>It's a sad thing for the world.. but a great opportunity for Europe.

For the rest of the world, services can be hosted outside the USA and we won't have a problem. Any American content that can be locally cached in our countries will be fine, too. So maybe we'll have issues with American sporting events, possibly trouble if we want to join a multiplayer gaming server in the US. I don't think it'll hurt the rest of the world enough to care. If anything, it'll reduce American media influence around the globe.

For you Americans, though... if your American ISP decides to charge based on packet type AND either the origin or destination, you're done. It's not like you can use a VPN connection to access services from outside a 'no-net-neutrality zone', because they'll be charging the highest rates for that kind of traffic specifically to prevent such behaviour.

Americans will get less choice and higher prices as ISPs promote vertical integration by adding costs to services they don't own (or aren't owned by).

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".

"I am altering the deal...."

[Ichijo]

"Pray I don't alter it any further."

Dear Mr. Pai

[JohnFen]

Fuck you twice, then. Once for letting the foxes into the henhouse, and once more for locking the door behind them.

Obligatory Robot Chicken

[DontBeAMoran]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

10th Amendment baby!

[sphealey]

- - - - - 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. - - - - -

I suspect that tomorrow will not be a big day for my hard Radical Right coworkers to expound on the centrality of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, nor to opine on "states' rights". Just a guess.

Re:10th Amendment baby!

[Ogive17]

They can't count past the 2nd Amendment.

Re:10th Amendment baby!

[serviscope_minor]

You hyperpartisan nutcases are basically going to be the ruination of this world.

You appear to swear near undying allegiance ot the party in power and hate the scum in opposition.

Essentially the party in power has done something you don't like so you find a way to make that a criticism of the scum you despise rather than the ones you worship.

Drop they hyperpartisan bullshit, pull your head out of your arse and start evaluating the actions on their own merit rather than whether they come with a little red or blue flag attached.

Re:you either keep control or you lose it, no both

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that the ISPs actually don't want the internet in the first place.
So they just black list any site that doesn't pay them, their customers are locked in to the ISP since they have a monopoly where they live, so they just can't access those sites.

In the end every website is blocked and the only thing you can do is get to the ISP's content (News/Movies/TV Series) because of vertical integration. And this is exactly what the ISP would like the best.

It is win-win for the ISP, either sites pay them and they got money, or they become a content monopoly and they get more money by increasing prices.