Slashdot Mirror
Ajit Pai Helped Charter Kill Consumer-Protection Rules In Minnesota (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A court ruling that limits state regulation of cable company offerings was praised by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, who says the ruling supports his contention that the FCC can preempt state-level net neutrality rules. The new court ruling found that Minnesota's state government cannot regulate VoIP phone services offered by Charter and other cable companies because VoIP is an "information service" under federal law. Pai argues that the case is consistent with the FCC's attempt to preempt state-level net neutrality rules, in which the commission reclassified broadband as a Title I information service instead of a Title II telecommunications service.
The ruling was issued Friday by the US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, following a lawsuit filed by Charter Communications against the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). A three-judge panel ruled against Minnesota in a 2-1 vote -- the FCC had filed a brief supporting Charter's position in the case. "[F]ederal law for decades has recognized that states may not regulate information services," Pai said in response to the ruling. "The 8th Circuit's decision is important for reaffirming that well-established principle: '[A]ny state regulation of an information service conflicts with the federal policy of non-regulation' and is therefore preempted." Pai said the ruling "is wholly consistent with the approach the FCC has taken under Democratic and Republican Administrations over the last two decades, including in last year's Restoring Internet Freedom order." The commission says the reclassification should preempt any such attempts at regulating broadband at the state level.
The ruling was issued Friday by the US Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, following a lawsuit filed by Charter Communications against the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). A three-judge panel ruled against Minnesota in a 2-1 vote -- the FCC had filed a brief supporting Charter's position in the case. "[F]ederal law for decades has recognized that states may not regulate information services," Pai said in response to the ruling. "The 8th Circuit's decision is important for reaffirming that well-established principle: '[A]ny state regulation of an information service conflicts with the federal policy of non-regulation' and is therefore preempted." Pai said the ruling "is wholly consistent with the approach the FCC has taken under Democratic and Republican Administrations over the last two decades, including in last year's Restoring Internet Freedom order." The commission says the reclassification should preempt any such attempts at regulating broadband at the state level.
Does this scumbag ever leave out an opportunity to screw customers?
Goofy desirap attempts didn't get him the job, sucking corporate cock and screwing the consumer got him the job. NOBODY SHOULD BE SURPRISED, the fuck did you think Trump hired him to do? He's a WHORE, duh.
but that sort of implies the slightest attempt to hide what they're doing. Hell, this is what the voters wanted. Less regulation. Well, consumer protection rules are regulation folks. And we just got less of them.
I'm sure the savings will trickle down eventually...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
... VoIP is an "information service" under federal law.
Then federal law is wrong.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
We all already know Ajit Pai is a scum bag big ISP shill. We really don't need to hear it again.
The states definitely have control over right-of-way on all land within the state. States can always remove pole/digging access from anyone that doesn't comply with Net Neutrality. If VoIP is an "information service" then a Title I company does not have a legal right to pole access if they are not providing a real dial tone on the copper.
I wish that techies would QUIT trying to force net neutrality. It will solve NOTHING. The far right wants to make it so that the companies that lobby them (i.e. bribes them) wins out.
As such, the ONLY way to win at this, is to push local govs to add fiber utilities. For most states, it means passing laws that allow this. Some states like Colorado have the law and just need to have local govs vote on it. What is interesting is that nearly all attempts have passed. So, if techs REALLY want to make difference, just target the cities in which net neutrality has been violated. Once businesses realize that they can lose all their customers and profits in an area, they will stop. In the mean time, by pushing local gov fiber, we gain with G speed and much lower costs.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
One needs to look for the root cause, which is the whole current Republican regime. It's corrupt from top to bottom.
They'll say – and more importantly, they'll do anything – to hold on to power. They'll gerrymander. They'll lie. They'll cheat. They'll steal. They'll stop at nothing.
Everyone who thinks voting is pointless. That their vote doesn't count. That nothing will change. Get the fuck out and vote in November. Kick these assholes out.
We can stop them. The power to do it is in the ballot box. Crawl over broken glass if you have to, but just go vote.
Tyranny of the majority (or tyranny of the masses) refers to an inherent weakness of majority rule in which the majority of an electorate can and does place its own interests above, and at the expense of, those in the minority. This results in oppression of minority groups comparable to that of a tyrant or despot, argued John Stuart Mill in his famous 1859 book On Liberty.
Potentially, through tyranny of the majority, a disliked or unfavored ethnic, religious, political, social, or racial group may be deliberately targeted for oppression by the majority element acting through the democratic process
Tyranny of the majority is used commonly by conservatives to pass laws that infringe on sub-groups rights, whether directly or indirectly. Often when the courts throw out social conservative laws, the GOP screams "judicial overreach" when it's actually just the courts telling them they can't infringe on peoples rights.... that the tyranny of the majority will not stand. We've seen it with civil rights, interracial marriages, sodomy laws, same-sex marriage...they pass laws that infringe on peoples constitutional rights, and they do so more often than not through states because of the smaller voter bases. Conservatives want all their rights, but they don't want anyone else to have any.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Different circuit court, so perhaps not. Different details on the law, so perhaps not.
OTOH, it would be reasonable to prohibit use of public right of way (i.e. poles) to any company that did not adhere to net neutrality. Or a tax to subsidize other carriers that did provide it. Or lots of other possibilities. All there needs to be is the political will to do so, and the possibilities are nearly endless. This has been said before, long since: "The power to tax is the power to destroy.". The implication that this is always bad is unfounded...but it surely often is.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.