Numerous States Pledge to Sue Over Net Neutrality Repeal In the wake of the FCC's attack on net neutrality, numerous states have stepped forward saying they'll be stepping up to defend net neutrality in the wake of the Trump FCC's massive handout to giant broadband duopolies. In Washington State, Governor Jay Inslee stated that his state would be taking numerous actions to punish ISPs that don't live up to their promises on privacy, transparency and net neutrality, including refusing to award contracts to telecom providers that violate consumer trust.

Granted the FCC's net neutrality repeal includes provisions, lobbied for by Comcast and Verizon , that tries to ban states from protecting consumers on the net neutrality and privacy fronts. But Inslee stated the state will explore every avenue possible to hold ISPs, and the apathetic FCC, accountable. "We will make net neutrality rules to protect Washington consumers and businesses," Inslee said. "I look forward to working with legislators and the attorney general on the parameters of our actions, but make no mistake, we are moving forward on net neutrality in this state." Massachusetts also stated it would be filing suit. In California, state senator Scott Wiener said he'll be pursuing state legislation attempting to protect consumers from net neutrality violations. "California can regulate business practices to require net neutrality, condition state contracts on adhering to net neutrality, and require net neutrality as part of cable franchise agreements, as a condition to using the public right-of-way for internet infrastructure, and in broadband packages," he said. Again, this should prove to be an interesting battle, since the FCC (again, at directly fealty to Comcast and Verizon lobbying request) has stated it will try to stop any states that step in to try and protect consumers. "The order makes plain that broadband will be subject to a uniform, national framework that promotes investment and innovation," Republican Commissioner Michael O'Rielly said in his statement before voting to approve the repeal yesterday. "Broadband service is not confined to state boundaries and should not be constrained by a patchwork of state and local regulations." Amusingly, folks like O'Rielly have been ok in letting incumbent ISPs write horrible, protectionist law that prevents states and cities from having a say over their own infrastructure. Or from building broadband networks when incumbent ISPs refuse to. Any attempt to stop this has been assailed as an assault on "states rights." Yet here, you'll notice that stomping all over "states rights" is perfectly acceptable if the state is trying to protect the end user. All told, not only will the FCC be facing numerous lawsuits from numerous AGs and consumer groups for ignoring the public interest and FCC comment fraud, they'll likely be facing a large number of lawsuits from states looking to protect consumers. If you thought 2017 was a busy one for competition and net neutrality, we likely haven't seen anything yet. »twitter.com/GovInslee/st ··· 4865536

»twitter.com/MassAGO/stat ··· 23467522









News Jump Starlink's Network Faces Huge Limitations; AT&T Whines T-Mobile Merger Put Too Much Spectrum In One Place; + more news WISPs Get CBRS Range As Great As Six Miles At 100 Mbps Speeds; Windstream Officially Exits Bankruptcy; + more news Charter Relaunches Free 60-day Internet And Wi-Fi Offer; NCTA: FCC Should Stick With 25/3 Speed Threshold; + more news Comcast Shuts Off Internet for Subs Who Were Sold Service Illegally; AT&T, Verizon Team To Stop T-Mobile 5G; + more news California Defends Its Net Neutrality Law; AT&T's Traffic Up 20% Despite Data Traffic Actually Being Down; + more news Are The Comcast-Charter X1 Talks Dead In The Water?; AT&T May Offer Phone Plans With Ads For Discounts; + more news Europe's Top Court: Net Neutrality Rules Bar Zero Rating; ViacomCBS To Rebrand CBS All Access As Paramount+; + more news Verizon To Buy Reseller TracFone For $7B; 5G Not The Competitive Threat To Cable Many Thought It Would Be; + more news MS.Wants Records From AT&T On $300M Project; Google Fiber Outages In Austin, Houston, Other Texan Cities; + more news States With The Biggest Decreases In Speed; AT&T Hopes You'll Forget Its Fight Against Accurate Maps; + more news ---------------------- this week last week most discussed

Most recommended from 48 comments



NOCMan

MadMacHatter

Premium Member

join:2004-09-30

Colorado Springs, CO 6 recommendations NOCMan Premium Member Except Colorado Apparently the Republican AG is ignoring the wishes of the people. Ostracus

join:2011-09-05

Henderson, KY 5 recommendations Ostracus Member Broadband commune. Municipal broadband. By the people, for the people.

Packeteers

Premium Member

join:2005-06-18

Forest Hills, NY ·Verizon FiOS

·Charter

Asus RT-AC3100

(Software) Asuswrt-Merlin

4 recommendations Packeteers Premium Member lawyers against nn+t2



so lawyers would have less reason to rack up billable hours



it's also why the term "tax reform" is a sham because is will not



actually put any future tax attorneys or accountants out of work. this is the main reason why we needed nn+t2 in the first place,so lawyers would have less reason to rack up billable hoursit's also why the term "tax reform" is a sham because is will notactually put any future tax attorneys or accountants out of work.

TIGERON

join:2008-03-11

Boston, MA Motorola MG7550

2 recommendations TIGERON Member Let?s be objective I was watching Netflix. So far no throttling from Comcast.



I want to say this honestly: everyone including myself has been really concerned about this whole net neutrality debate and here’s my view on it...



First off: let’s be clear about internet service providers. All ISPs use various network management protocols such as quality of service (QOS) to deal with various forms of traffic moving through the digital pipes. It’s called traffic shaping. A data stream from any steaming entertainment television service such as Netflix, Amazon or HULU uses far more bandwidth then shopping on Amazon or iTunes. I can understand the internet service provider’s point of view that while it is in their best interest to keep the web open, not all traffic going through their pipes is equal and requires management to keep everything running smoothly and every customer happy.



I get it.



I also understand why people are up in arms that while ISPs have promised NOT try and monetize the web creating fast and slow lanes, they have the means to do it.



Also people seem to forget that you as a customer depending on your provider and their hardware capabilities, you already pay for the service package they offer in terms of speed, for example in my case my provider is Comcast and I pay $74.99 a month for 170megs which in average goes up to 210megs that the company increased at no charge.



Not everyone has a fixed wireline internet connection. Some people connect to the web via cellular or fixed wireless. For me it’s the laws of physics: wireless whether fixed or mobile simply CANNOT deliver as good, nor reliably, nor as fast as wireline. There’s also the problem of wireless spectrum as it is finite meaning limited. I don’t give a shit of all the promises of 5G hype by the big telecoms. Also, there’s the problem of all massive fiber optic cables that are needed to connect those wireless towers to effectively deliver the speeds that Verizon and AT&T are promising. Right now much of our internet infrastructure relies very heavily on old deteriorating copper wire that old MA BELL once controlled that is connecting the web. All of that needs to be replaced with fiber.



I get it why people are concerned about websites being considered as packages to be delivered as cable access. I’ve scoured many sources and the one thing that I have found is this issue has united both conservatives and liberals equally. Both views strongly agree that the web should be open.



Truthfully though, this is an issue that should be taken out of the FCC’s hands and let Congress craft a law forcing internet service providers to keep the web open. And it appears to me that it is going to happen.



I know many of you following net neutrality hate Ajit Pai. I don’t like him either. I don’t agree with anything he says regarding NN saying it has hurt investment. Internet service providers have publicly told investors that net neutrality has not hurt investment at all. Keep in mind that these ISPs cannot lie to Wall Street.



So let’s go back to the net neutrality question and the 2015 order to classify ISPs as common carriers. It is a good idea and should be done. However the order was deeply flawed as it relies on a 1934 analog telephone law. That is what Pai was against and the order was rescinded. In this case, Pai is right.



So, he is leaving this to Congress to solve.



My take is, as pissed off many of you are, and your anger at this government and the baboon and his cronies running it, just remember that there are still plenty of sensible people opposed to this administration and his supporters, and we have already sent a strong message that we are not going to put up with anymore shit.



When it comes to this issue, and your fears and worries are well-founded, this will be resolved. The web will remain open.