Under Fire Over NET NEUTRALITY Plans, FCC SEEKS EARLY FEEDBACK

[Segami]

In a blog post on Thursday, Wheeler denied reports that his plans would abandon the FCC’s commitment to an open Internet. But numerous advocacy groups don’t buy it. Campaigns are already calling for consumers to protest the plans to the White House and lawmakers.

Email box where the public can send comments: [e-mail]

The Public should SWAMP the FCC with protest emails for their upcoming Net Neutrality Plans......




The FCC’s upcoming net neutrality plan has already touched off such a blaze of reaction that the agency has set up an email box where the public can send comments about it. The coming proposal has generated so much commentary, before even being released, that on Friday the U.S. Federal Communications Commission started accepting comments at [e-mail]. Normally, anyone who wanted to weigh in on an FCC proposal would have to wait for the agency to issue a “notice of proposed rulemaking” and start soliciting comments to its Electronic Comment Filing System. That will happen for the net neutrality issue on May 15, assuming the full Commission votes at its meeting that day to move the proposal forward.


But the email address means it will start accepting comments now. It’s not the first time the agency has sought comments early, but it suggests it’s keen to be seen as open to feedback on this issue. Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated the proposal among his fellow commissioners on Thursday. The actual text of the plan is not yet public, but the agency has said it would let Internet service providers give preferential treatment to some content providers on “commercially reasonable” terms. Watchdog groups say that could force consumers to pay more and squeeze out startups that can’t afford anything but the slow lane.


The FCC’s former rules on the issue were struck down by a federal appeals court in January. Now Wheeler is pushing to get the new regulations on the books by the end of this year. Wheeler has circulated the proposals among his fellow commissioners, who are set to address them at a regular agency meeting on May 15.





http://www.pcworld.com/article/2148700/under-fire-over-net-neutrality-plans-fcc-seeks-early-feedback.html

[Demo_Chris]

1. kick. There is simply no more important issue. nt

[pangaia]

2. Just emailed..

[GoneFishin]

3. Anyone know if there are any additional relevant email addresses besides the

"special" address they have designated?

[Segami]

4. More info here.

http://www.savetheinternet.com/what-can-i-do

[GoneFishin]

6. Thanks.

[Scuba]

5. Anone have a short and sweet boilerplate message?

[icymist]

7. How about this one...

Dear Sirs, I am outraged to find that the internet will soon be only for those who have the most money. In this economy it is hard for the common person to pay for an ISP let alone which tier of service they can afford! I sure do hope I have enough money to continue this mes



On second thought, that's probably the desired effect; to shut people up who don't have the right view.

[Segami]

9. A previous letter to former Chairman Genachowski.....

This March 2010 letter to former Chairman Genachowski might help serve as a guide to recompose a brief, short version letter.

March 1, 2010
Chairman Julius Genachowski
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

Re: Preserving the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 09-191; Broadband Industry Practices, WC
Docket No. 07-52

Dear Chairman Genachowski,

The undersigned institutions and organizations represent a broad and diverse coalition of
schools, colleges, libraries and research institutions who believe strongly in preserving the open
Internet. Research, collaboration, distance education, job training and placement, catalog
sharing, access to government data and services, and much more all depend upon open and
unfettered access to the Internet. We believe it is vitally important that policymakers act now to
preserve the open Internet for our institutions, our users, and the public at large.
The open Internet faces four major threats today. First, deregulation in recent years removed
previous guarantees of neutrality. Second, many of the largest broadband network operators also
sell video and telephone services and have a strong incentive to degrade service from Internetbased
competitors. Third, the advent of new network management technologies makes it easier
for network operators to control traffic without the knowledge of the end user. Finally, the
market for Internet access is increasingly consolidated and prone to failure. We believe that
policymakers can and should act decisively to protect the Internet against these threats.
Because the open Internet is indispensable to us and to our users, and because it is threatened
now more than ever, the undersigned institutions urge the adoption of net neutrality policies
based on the following principles:

❖ Non-discrimination: Every person in the United States should be able to access content
and to use applications and services over the Internet in an open and unfettered manner,
without interference from or discrimination by the owners and operators of public
broadband networks and Internet Service Providers (ISPs).

❖ All Public Network Operators: Neutrality is an essential characteristic of the Internet,
so the non-discrimination principle must apply to all public broadband network
operators and ISPs, regardless of underlying transmission technology (e.g., wireline or
wireless) and regardless of local market conditions.

❖ Reasonable Network Management: Public broadband network operators and ISPs
should be able to engage in reasonable network management (e.g., to address
congestion, viruses, and spam) as long as such actions are reasonably consistent with
the non-discrimination principle above.

❖ Transparency: Public broadband network operators and ISPs should disclose network
management practices publicly and in a manner that 1) allows users to make informed
choices, and 2) allows policymakers to determine whether the practices are consistent
with neutrality principles.

❖ Private Network Operators and End Users: Owners and operators of private networks
that are not open and available to the general public should continue to operate free
from neutrality obligations. Similarly, end users (such as households, companies,
coffee shops, schools or libraries) should be free to decide how they use the broadband
services they obtain from network operators and ISPs.

❖ Meaningful, Enforceable Policies: Policymakers should adopt meaningful and
enforceable policies to reflect these principles.

❖ Consistent with Law Enforcement: The above policies should recognize and be
consistent with the needs of law enforcement, public safety, homeland security, and
national security. Net neutrality policies should not interfere with government efforts
to stop illegal activities or content, and existing laws to prevent illegal activity will
continue in effect.


Sincerely,

Jeri Semer
Association for Information Communications Technology Professionals in Higher
Education
George Boggs
American Association of Community Colleges
Ada Meloy
American Council on Education
Emily Sheketoff
American Library Association
John Vaughn
Association of American Universities
Robert J. Samors
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities
Prue Adler
Association of Research Libraries
Susan McVey


Chief Officers of State Library Agencies
Gregory Jackson
EDUCAUSE
Gary Bachula
Internet2
John Walda
National Association of College and University Business Officers



http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Letter-net-neutrality-030110.pdf

[abelenkpe]

8. K&R

[MohRokTah]

10. The FCC plan will be the Citizens United of internet regulation.

That's a point that needs to be hit long and hard with this administration.

[Faryn Balyncd]

11. KICK . . . . Wheeler should be FIRED immediately.

[justhanginon]

12. The sellouts of our regulators

are becoming more and more blatant. I was under the impression that they were there to regulate industry for the good of the american people not the corporations, (even though some misguided jurists consider them people). I hope someone follows the careers of these folks after they leave office and see which corporations where they end up employed, Could be interesting.

[Eyerish]

13. K&R

[L0oniX]

14. Sorry ...can't get there. Seems that the connection is being slowed down for some reason.

[L0oniX]

15. DUzy