Internet/Broadband

With the Federal Communication Commission’s recent vote to consider reversing net neutrality rules, many might be wondering how that could affect their lives. Net neutrality has a handful of functions, but its main function is to keep internet service providers from speeding up, slowing down or blocking content users may want to access, said Sherry Lichtenberg, principal for telecommunications research and policy at National Regulatory Research Institute. “There will no longer be protection for blocking access to websites you want to go to or having carriers favor their own sites or browsers over the one you want to go to,” she said. “It takes away the protection, essentially, that allows you to do whatever you want on the internet.” That’s one take on things, but the FCC, with Chairman Ajit Pai at the helm, believes the commission overstepped with the 2015 rules. The FCC’s notice of proposed rule-making, which was adopted May 18, said the decision to apply utility-style regulation to the internet represented a “massive and unprecedented shift in favor of government control of the internet.”

The order to classify the internet as Title II put online investment and innovation at risk, the FCC said in the notice. Its biggest concern is that over the past two years, investment in broadband networks declined and service providers have pulled back on plans to build new infrastructure.

The federal judges who upheld the Federal Communications Commission's TItle II classification of Internet service providers in 2016 have signaled that even under those rules, ISPs could block content or slow certain traffic, just so long as they created a "walled garden" that had clear signage signaling that was what they were doing. That is according to a new blog post from Hank Hultquist, VP of federal regulatory for AT&T, which strongly opposed Title II.

Hultquist cites the concurring opinion from judges Sri Srinivasan and David Tatel earlier in May in the en banc (full court) decision of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit not to review the three-judge panel ruling last year to uphold the FCC's Open Internet order. Srinivasan and Tatel wrote the majority opinion in that panel decision. "In the past," said Hultquist, "supporters of Title II often alleged that without reclassification, ISPs would be free to block unpopular opinions or viewpoints that they disagreed with. In the understanding of the DC Circuit panel majority, it seems that the Title II order does not touch such practices as long as an ISP clearly discloses its blocking plans to customers."

Matthew Berry, chief of staff to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, assured a National Public Radio audience May 31 that the chairman's proposal to roll back Title II was meant to continue to protect an open Internet while encouraging innovation and investment that will promote high-speed broadband access, particularly to rural America. Berry was grilled by host Joshua Johnson on the NPR show 1A, a production of WAMU FM Washington, in a segment about the proposal and the pushback it has drawn from Title II fans and its impact on rural broadband deployment. Other guests on the show included former FCC chair Tom Wheeler, US Telecom CEO Jonathan Spalter and Free Press CEO Craig Aaron.

A group of Democratic Sens, including some of the loudest critics of Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai's effort to roll back Title II, have asked the FBI to investigate the multiple distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks the FCC says it suffered that affected its online comment system. “This particular attack may have denied the American people the opportunity to contribute to what is supposed to be a fair and transparent process, which in turn may call into question the integrity of the FCC’s rulemaking proceedings,” the Sens wrote to acting FBI director Andrew McCabe. “We request that you update us on the status of the FBI’s investigation and brief us on this matter.”

Fight for the Future sees dead people. At least it says a few have somehow filed anti-Title II comments to the Federal Communications Commission according to reports from the deceased's friends.

The group has also found another dozen or so people—twice the original number—who say anti-Title II comments were filed in the FCC docket under their names that they did not submit. In addition, the group said it has been hearing from people saying that a comment was filed under the name and address of a deceased family member. The group claims that over 450,000 fake comments have been submitted and that the FCC "is still refusing to remove fake comments, even when victims call the FCC directly and demand that their name and personal information be removed from a public docket endorsing political messages they don’t agree with." Fight for the Future also said it had received three reports from friends of recently deceased individuals whose names were on comments, saying the comments would have had to be posted posthumously.

[Commentary] Although the BROWSER Act is a well-intentioned attempt to clean up the privacy mess left by Net Neutrality, there’s a better path. Rather than reviving a seriously flawed Federal Communications Commission rule, why not just unleash the Federal Trade Commission?

[James Cooper is a professor at George Mason University School of Law]

TeleQuality Communications filed comments urges changes to the Federal Communications Commission rural healthcare-broadband programs, arguing that the Universal Service Fund (USF) rural healthcare, telecom and e-rate schools and libraries programs would be more effective if they did not operate as isolated silos. TeleQuality, an organization that provides network connectivity for healthcare providers funded, in part, through the USF rural healthcare program. The filing includes some compelling data points, along with some creative ideas for potential reforms to FCC rural healthcare-broadband programs – although some readers may find some of the ideas unrealistic. The most compelling data points in the TeleQuality filing:

• The number of physicians serving rural areas is insufficient. The filing cites a Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) report that found that a majority of rural counties have 1 practitioner serving 3,500 patients when 1 practitioner per 2,000 patients is recommended for adequate care – a finding that confirms similar data that Telecompetitor has reported previously. There is also a shortage of skilled IT personnel in rural areas, TeleQuality argues – another data point that is consistent with previous research on that topic.
• The number of FCC rural healthcare funding requests from healthcare providers has not increased as dramatically as the amount of funding requested – a phenomenon the filing attributes to the significant bandwidth increases needed to run electronic health records systems. At the same time, the FCC program remains underutilized because some healthcare providers do not have the resources to handle program filing and administration.

Congressional Republicans knew their plan was potentially explosive. They wanted to kill landmark privacy regulations that would soon ban Internet providers, such as Comcast and AT&T, from storing and selling customers’ browsing histories without their express consent. So after weeks of closed-door debates on Capitol Hill over who would take up the issue first — the House or the Senate — Republican members settled on a secret strategy, according to Hill staff and lobbyists involved in the battle. While the nation was distracted by the House’s pending vote to repeal Obamacare, Senate Republicans would schedule a vote to wipe out the new privacy protections. On March 23, the measure passed on a straight party-line vote, 50 to 48. Five days later, a majority of House Republicans voted in favor of it, sending it to the White House, where President Trump signed the bill in early April without ceremony or public comment. “While everyone was focused on the latest headline crisis coming out of the White House, Congress was able to roll back privacy,” said former Federal Communications Commission chairman Tom Wheeler, who worked for nearly two years to pass the rules. The process to eliminate them took only a matter of weeks. The blowback was immediate.

[Commentary] The BROWSER Act would establish affirmative consent (“opt in”) requirements for the collection and use of certain data, such as location and web browsing histories. In addition, the bill would restrict companies from conditioning access to their services on whether users choose to share their data. If adopted, these policies would be a disaster for Internet users and companies. First, obtaining consent is expensive. Second, requiring companies to obtain affirmative consent would make digital services less user-friendly without increasing privacy. Third, the bill requires providers to allow users to remove their data whenever they wish. Finally, the bill prohibits service providers from refusing to provide service as a “direct or indirect consequence of the refusal of a user to waive any such privacy rights.” Congress should reject this legislation, or any similar proposal that attempts to impose opt-in requirements on the digital economy.

Louisville has launched a new public workspace — one that combines free loaner laptops and fiber Internet connection with modern design aesthetics, the sort more closely associated with trendy coffee shops than government facilities. And it’s done so in an economically challenged neighborhood where people often lack access to tech.

A central aim of this space is to help foster entrepreneurial partnerships and economic growth in a section of the city facing significant obstacles. The workspace, dubbed the PNC Gigabit Experience Center, is located in the Louisville Central Community Centers' (LCCC) Old Walnut Street development, which is in the Russell neighborhood on the city’s west side. The neighborhood didn’t even have a place where residents could grab a coffee and hop onto Wi-Fi, whether it be to discuss potential business collaborations, apply for jobs or simply browse the Web. The PNC Gigabyte Experience Center seeks to rectify this dearth by providing higher connection speeds and loaner tech, in a space that feels both vibrant and productive. The PNC Gigabit Experience Center is part of Louisville’s recently announced digital inclusion strategy, the city's plan to remove technological barriers so that all citizens have the digital access, skills and hardware to get jobs, degrees and other services.