
FCC rescinds claim that AT&amp;T and Verizon violated net neutrality - aao
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/fcc-rescinds-claim-that-att-and-verizon-violated-net-neutrality/
======
giarc
>AT&T and Verizon allow their own video services (DirecTV and Go90,
respectively) to stream on their mobile networks without counting against
customers' data caps, while charging other video providers for the same data
cap exemptions.

Isn't that the anti definition of net neutrality?

~~~
chimeracoder
> Isn't that the anti definition of net neutrality?

Yes, zero-rating is a direct affront to net neutrality:
[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-
is...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/02/zero-rating-what-it-is-why-you-
should-care)

But I don't think that we're going to see many successes in net neutrality at
the federal level anytime soon - the fight really has to be carried out at the
state level.

~~~
gcb0
...and still absolutely nobody think about moving companies. We already have
number portability.

~~~
criley2
...Moving companies?

Tmobile, Verizon, AT&T and Sprint uses 0 rating.

That's the entirety of the American wireless infrastructure.

It is literally impossible to use 4g wireless communication in America without
patronizing directly or indirectly a 0 rating neutrality violator.

------
megiddo
Pai is a very strange character.

He was general counsel for Verizon, which is typical for regulatory capture
stooges as far as career choices go, but worked for Jenner & Block, who's
primary public record is heavily left-leaning. He's an Obama appointee, but on
the recommendation of McConnell.

My guess is that Jenner & Block probably fronts a lot of left-leaning legal
cases outside of their bread & butter, which is telco, giving them a good face
across the board with Congress. Meanwhile, his prior appointment to the FCC
was almost certainly a horse trade between McConnell and Obama.

Pai has been more or less a telco puppet for the last 15 years in one role or
another.

The interesting thing about this is that regulatory capture is generally in
support of further regulation rather than against. This implies that net
neutrality is actually either a grass-roots regulation (highly unlikely), or
there is an inversion of concern over the general case. My guess is that the
monopoly positions that telcos hold has inverted the normal regulatory capture
process at the FCC, and that the primary consumers of the content (Amazon,
Netflix, etc) are very shrewd operators who can see through regulatory
rhetoric.

~~~
tzs
> He's an Obama appointee, but on the recommendation of McConnell.

By law the FCC can have no more than three of the five Commissioners from the
same political party, so it is quite normal for a President to appoint two
Commissioners from the major party that the President is not a member of. It
is not required, but I believe most or all Presidents (so far...) have picked
their "not my party" appointees by asking the other party's Senate leadership
who to nominate.

------
shatteredvisage
I fear we can't stop what's happening. I miss days when I could afford
political ignorance.

~~~
e40
Yeah, I wonder how all those people feel that didn't vote because _it doesn 't
matter, they're both the same_?

~~~
equalarrow
This only matters - voting in the presidential elections - in the red states.
If you're a liberal, progressive, futurist, etc, and you're living in states
like CA or NY or OR, then statistically speaking, those states are pretty much
gonna go democrat regardless. So your vote counts 'less' there.

What is needed is a bunch of these people to move to swing states where the
vote really matters. Places like OH, FL, etc.

But, the blue states people have built their own little comfortable enclaves
in their respective states and there's little chance they'll be moving to
places like AK, TN, or MS.

Now, why does this matter? Well, because it's clear the republicans are pro
big business and in the case of net neutrality, pro locking up the internet
for the few (the few being, big media/telecom companies). There will never be
a pro-citizen net neutrality policy as long as the republicans/big-business
types are running the show.

So, living in CA, for instance, doesn't matter much in this case. Having a
progressive, pro-net mentality will make much more difference in swing states.

~~~
balabaster
Perhaps someone needs to organize a movement of large populations of
progressive future thinking utopian philosophers moving to different states to
more effectively rig elections in the way of a more enlightened future.

Alas, I don't think there are enough of these types to actually effectively
hack elections like that.

~~~
massysett
Or you could try to influence the people already in those swing states?

~~~
balabaster
Sure, whatever works... I'd say that so far this approach has had questionable
results.

------
JustSomeNobody
Is there any way, as a citizen and consumer, to stop Pai? Or get him fired
from FCC? Will writing Congress help?

~~~
virmundi
Nope. Not unless you can show that he did something a)unethical, b) immoral or
c) illegal. Since he gets to define legality through what the FCC dictates,
within reason, he can't really violate c on a policy level. If you got a
and/or b, please let us know. You can even leak that information.

In general Congress has to pass a law declaring the ISPs utilities. Then net
neutrality is a good thing. The problem is that none of the congress
(obviously a generalization) really care about the topic. It appears to be too
much for them to understand that AT&T made the claim that bandwidth over the
wireless is limited. They went so far as to say that caps were needed. Now
AT&T has changed it argument, "Our bandwidth is too limited for our users to
use services from providers that we haven't made a peering deal with."
Congress can't understand that peering or not, wireless spectrum is limited.
Too complex.

If you write your representatives, you might need to use really basic
language. Think Alan Shore explaining the pharmaceutical case to Denny.

edit: grammar.

~~~
tracker1
Alternatively, congress can pass laws that would define net neutrality and
enforcement... but good luck with that.

------
DenisM
There's an interesting workaround for the Net Neutrality problem that Netflix,
Amazon, Hulu, et al can implement.

They could create a industry standard for testing mobile internet speed
against CDNs of all major video providers, and then use their respective video
services to ingrain it into customers minds that they have to use this when
shopping for a mobile internet provider.

This might just create enough pressure on the cell providers for one of them
to break the ranks and start treating all such traffic with respect.

~~~
kej
That's pretty much what Netflix does with fast.com, only just for themselves.
Opening that up so that other providers could use the fast.com name with their
own backends is an interesting idea.

------
kem
The next step, assuming that the ISPs start moving away from net neutrality in
an egregious way, is for the EFF to sue them for criminal negligence in cases
of child pornography. ISPs can't have their cake and eat it too.

------
p4lindromica
Meanwhile, AT&T launched a traffic shaping program in December called Smart
Stream that mobile customers are automatically opted in to. The program
downgrades videos watched on their network to 480p quality.

~~~
awj
So long as they do that with all videos regardless of source, what's the
problem? It's annoying, possibly, but it doesn't really restrict the open flow
of information that made the Internet great.

~~~
mrgoldenbrown
If they do it without informing me as a customer, it's more than just
annoying, it's also unethical.

------
coldcode
The FCC no longer handles communications. The part we thought of the FCC as
being in charge of will be given to the FTC which lacks any enforcement
authority and is inundated with millions of things to watch.

------
deelowe
To everyone panicking in this sub, please remember that the communication from
washington is that they want this to be fought at the state and local level.
So, please engage your representatives about this.

~~~
ska

       communication from washington is that they want this to be fought at the state and local level
    
    

... isn't a good result, at all (if you care about net neutrality)

~~~
deelowe
I didn't say it was. My point is that you need to talk to your local
representatives, because Washington is putting it on them right now. This
includes your congressman and senators.

~~~
ska
fair point, I just thought it deserved calling out as a blow to NN.

------
BBCC
It is good for customers to enhance the competitive of small companies.

------
mr_spothawk
so, I'm still in favor of NOT Net Neutrality. Specifically, I think the system
is rigged through the telecommunications act, but that the FCCs process for
"fixing" it with NetNute was an attempted end run around bad legislation from
decades ago.

Hopefully this will promote self-organizing mesh providers. There is (or will
be) money to be made in cheap, fast, unfiltered internet.

~~~
virmundi
How are you laying the infrastructure, microwave transmitters or otherwise?

~~~
mr_spothawk
sure, towers I guess. maybe some clever company will float it on
kites/balloons/wings/copters/microsats.

