CyberWarfare / ExoWarfare

USA: The FCC’s gutting of net neutrality ignores 22 million comments filed

(Quote Techcrunch:) “This FCC is basically a crowd of criminals dismantling net neutrality regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I suppose it’s not surprising that they ignored all the comments in support of existing regulations in creating their new rules. Not surprising, but still immensely depressing.”

 

The FCC’s craven net neutrality vote announcement makes no mention of the 22 million comments filed

For someone who claims to be working for the American people, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai sure doesn’t seem to care what they have to say. In his announcement today that the Commission would vote whether to roll back net neutrality rules on December 14, he made no mention of the inconvenient and embarrassing fact that his proposal had attracted historic attention, garnering over 22 million comments — the majority of which opposed it.

The statement mentions benefiting or protecting consumers five times, so clearly the idea here is to help the users of internet services. Yet those very same consumers wrote the Chairman by the millions to say that they felt the existing rules protect them very well and that to remove them would be detrimental to their safety and privacy.

Just like when their safety and privacy were put at risk by the elimination of the Broadband Privacy Rule earlier this year. Strangely enough, the Chairman didn’t listen to the outcry then, either.

The response has been so strong, in fact, that the FCC was obliged to upgrade its filing system and then extend the comment period in order to accommodate the volume of comments.

Technically the FCC is not obliged to include public commentary in its considerations when proposing rules, something Pai and other officials have repeated constantly. In fact, just this morning, during a media call, a representative of the Commission said that comments which “did not introduce new facts to the record but just stated an opinion… do not have much bearing on decisions,” which is as much as saying the positions expressed by millions do not matter.

But this would have been an excellent opportunity to address the millions of fake comments, the allegations from Congress that the Commission has mismanaged its cybersecurity, the accusations of industry favoritism, and other concerns. And of course it would have been rewarding simply to hear the Chairman acknowledge the unprecedented level of public involvement on display.

Instead, the Chairman’s statement repeats the well-worn justifications for his proposal, which range from questionable to misleading to outright wrong. (I collected the arguments and counter-arguments here.)

Pai writes that the 2015 rules have “depressed investment in building and expanding broadband networks and deterred innovation.”

In fact the numbers are far from decisive on this and many industry experts and ISPs themselves have said that the net neutrality rules had nothing to do with changes in investment — instead, they follow years-long cycles of updating infrastructure, accommodating technology changes like 5G and so on.

And even if the numbers did show a slight change, that wouldn’t constitute proof that the rules aren’t working. As several representatives who actually worked on the 1996 Telecommunications Act (under the authority of which all this is playing out) wrote:

The proposal single-mindedly concentrates on one issue to the exclusion of all others: the raw dollars spent on network deployment. This narrow focus is clearly contrary to the public interest—if we had intended network investment to be the sole measure by which the FCC determines policy, we would have specifically written that into the law.

Pai also calls the rules “failed” but cites no metric by which they could be considered to be so. Perhaps he has picked up this habit from the president.

He calls the previous lack of Title II-based net neutrality rules a “longstanding consensus.” But it was neither. In fact, net neutrality rules have been in and out of the courts since 2002, with the FCC and various industries disagreeing fundamentally on what constitutes an “information service” versus a “telecommunications service,” the dichotomy at the heart of this conflict.

The “consensus” he speaks of is the telecommunications industry putting net neutrality in a legal holding pattern for more than a decade. Notably he does not mention the current and overwhelming consensus of the American people in support of the 2015 rules.

 

 

The statement says the new rules will “simply require Internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that’s best for them.” Other Commissioners aren’t so keen on the idea of having ISPs operate on the honor system. When I interviewed Commissioner Clyburn earlier this year she assured the audience this was a bad and rather naive idea. Not to mention that ISPs already have to report this information, and that the FCC earlier this year declined to require further disclosures regarding how subscriber information is used.

It’s not surprising that Pai and his colleagues are making so little effort to sell the proposal. The vote on December 14 is a fait accompli, all but guaranteed by the current partisan makeup of the Commission: three Republicans in favor, two Democrats deeply opposed. Ironically, Pai has repeatedly criticized the 2015 order for having been established by a “party-line vote,” but fails to mention that his proposal will be enacted in exactly the same way. This little hypocrisy barely registers compared with the magnitude of its peers, but it’s worth mentioning.

Lastly, Chairman Pai crows about releasing the draft version of “Restoring Internet Freedom” to “the American people” three weeks before the vote, a change in process he has never tired of touting.

But it’s unclear what he expects “the American people” to do with it. Comment on it? Millions already did, and he has ignored them.

 

from: https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/21/the-fccs-craven-net-neutrality-vote-announcement-makes-no-mention-of-the-22-million-comments-filed/

 

 

Netzneutralität vor dem Aus:
USA ebnen Weg zur Spaltung des Internets

Von Roland Peters

Wer im Internet surft, wird gleich behandelt – egal, wie viel er bezahlt. Dies soll sich in den USA nun ändern. Bürgerrechtler kritisieren das Vorhaben der US-Telekommunikationsbehörde FCC scharf. Konzerne können auf einen Geldsegen hoffen.

Das Internet sollte die Welt gleicher machen: Zugang zu Informationen für alle, ohne Rücksicht auf Herkunft; so weit wie möglich anonym, um Diskriminierung zu vermeiden. Die US-Telekommunikationsbehörde FCC hat angekündigt, dass damit nun Schluss sein soll. FCC-Chef Ajit Pai veröffentlichte einen entsprechenden Entwurf, der die Netzneutralität abschaffen würde.

Unternehmen könnten dann den Zugang zu Informationen im World Wide Web legal erschweren oder gar blockieren.

Die unter der Regierung von Ex-Präsident Barack Obama vor zweieinhalb Jahren eingeführten Regeln verbieten es Internet Service Providern (ISP) wie T-Mobile oder AT&T, die Auslieferung von Websites zu stoppen oder zu verlangsamen. Sie verhindern damit außerdem, dass die Unternehmen zusätzliche Gebühren für hochauflösende Streams oder andere Dienste erheben – etwa für Netflix oder Amazon Prime. Damit würden ISPs zu Torwächtern, die kontrollieren und manipulieren, wer welche Informationen wie schnell verbreiten kann und über Gebühren, wer Zugang zu ihnen erhält.

Die neue Regelung dagegen würde Anbieter nur dazu verpflichten, dass sie ihre Priorisierungen offenlegen. Für große US-Provider könnten die Änderungen einen wahren Geldsegen bedeuten, Menschen mit geringerem Einkommen durch die Zusatzkosten diskriminiert werden. Das fünfköpfige FCC-Gremium stimmt am 14. Dezember über die Abschaffung ab. Drei von fünf Mitgliedern sind Republikaner, die Bestätigung von Pais Vorschlag gilt deshalb als sicher. US-Präsident Donald Trump hatte Pai im Januar als Behördenchef eingesetzt.

Zustimmung gilt als sicher

Sprecher der American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sagten, das Vorhaben werde einen desaströsen Effekt auf die Informationsverbreitung im Netz haben. Kleine Unternehmen würden zudem unter einem Wettbewerbsnachteil zu leiden haben. Bei der FCC ging zu dem Vorhaben die Rekordzahl von mehr als 22 Millionen Kommentaren ein. Die meisten sprachen sich für den Erhalt der Netzneutralität aus.

Die ACLU forderte den US-Kongress auf, die Pläne zu stoppen. “Die FCC droht damit, das Internet wie wir es kennen abzuschaffen”, kritisierte der demokratische Senator Michael Schatz: “Falls der Plan angenommen wird, wird es die Art und Weise jedes Amerikaners verändern, wie er an Informationen gelangt, Filme guckt, Musik hört, Geschäfte macht und mit seinen Familien spricht.”

Im Laufe des Jahres hatte die FCC bereits weitreichende Datenschutzregeln abgeschafft. Internetanbieter dürfen seither Daten über Nutzerverhalten ohne Einverständnis der Person weiterverkaufen. Die Kommission schaffte auch das seit mehr als 40 Jahren geltende Verbot des Zusammenschlusses von TV-Medien und Zeitungen ab.

In der EU ist Netzneutralität seit August 2016 weitgehend vorgeschrieben. In Deutschland wird das über eine Informationspflicht der Netzbetreiber geregelt, die verbietet, bestimmte Daten zu bevorzugen. Trotzdem gibt es Verstöße: Vodafone etwa sah die Drosselung bei der Nutzung von Filesharing-Diensten vor. Gegen die Telekom wurde ein Verfahren wegen ihres “StreamOn”-Angebots eingeleitet, das bestimmte Inhalte gegen Bezahlung bevorzugt. Die Bundesnetzagentur hatte im Juli ihren Jahresbericht zur Netzneutralität veröffentlicht.

 

from: https://www.n-tv.de/politik/USA-ebnen-Weg-zur-Spaltung-des-Internets-article20145180.html

 

 

 

By continuing to use this site, you agree to the use of cookies. Please be aware this site uses Google Analytics to measure traffic. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close