• Home
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Domain Crunch | Domain Name Industry News

  • Home
  • Categories
    • News
      • Internet News
      • The Short Report
      • Flippa
      • NameJet
      • Namepros
    • Domain News
      • .NYC
      • ccTLDs
      • Celebrity Domains
      • Corporate Domains
      • Domain Auctions
      • Domain Business
      • Domain Deals
      • Domain Sales
      • Domain Trends
      • Expired Auctions
      • GEO Domains
      • New gTLD's
      • Numeric Domains
    • Domain Registrars
      • Go Daddy
      • Google
      • ICANN
    • Domain Basics
      • Domain Development
    • Marketing
      • advertising
      • Branding
      • Bitcoin
      • Search
      • Social Media
      • Video
    • Legal Issues
      • UDRP
You are here: Home / Legal Issues / Net Neutrality – “Fast Lane” Still on the Table

Net Neutrality – “Fast Lane” Still on the Table

May 15, 2014 By JasonS 2 Comments

May 15, 2014. Is it “the end of the Internet as we know it?” — Sen. Al Franken. Answer: Maybe yes, maybe no.

Today, the FCC voted 3-2 along party lines to accept a provisional set of rules meant to protect Net Neutrality.This proposal did not move to reclassify broadband under Title II, and it left many important issues up for debate.

The key issue of whether “paid prioritization,” or “fast lanes,” where Content Providers could pay ISPs for priority is now up for public comment. Here is the link for the full text of the proposal http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0515/FCC-14-61A1.pdf

Some key points for debate are whether the FCC should: 1) completely bar paid prioritization “fast lanes;” 2) apply the rules to cellular service in addition to fixed broadband; and 3) reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service under Title II (allowing strong “common carrier” type regulation).

As we’ve previously discussed, classifying broadband as a telecommunications service would provide the FCC authority to regulate broadband under Title II like a “common carrier.” Instead of moving for reclassification, which seems to be what is really needed in the wake of the Comcast and Verizon decisions, the current proposal may rest on Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act, which provides the FCC with limited authority to enforce net neutrality rules.

While moving to “Title II” would provide stronger regulatory powers, it is fraught with problems and sure to bring the “fury” of the Cable Giants. Opponents to stronger regulation argue that such a move would stifle innovation and investment in broadband. Some also argue all that is needed are strong “anti-discrimination” rules to keep “watch.”

With all that is being considered, some may find comfort in Chairman Wheeler’s statements: “I will not allow the national asset of an open Internet to be compromised…[t]here is one Internet, not a fast Internet or a slow Internet. I don’t like to see that the Internet could be defined by the haves and the have nots. Privileging some content to the disadvantage of others is unacceptable.”

If the past few weeks are any indication, keeping the pressure on the FCC is the best way to keep the Internet open, avoid a two class system, and prevent destruction of the powerful tool we’ve come to rely on.

So, in sum, we didn’t get reclassification under Title II, and “fast lanes” are still on the table. Time to get involved and follow the next few months of comments. These comments and the reply will define the scope of the new Net Neutrality Rules.

Filed Under: Legal Issues

« Google acquires restaurant website builder Appetas
Dear Piece of Sh*t, that is one way to start a reply »

Comments

  1. Michael Cyger says

    May 16, 2014 at 12:50 am

    Good summary, Jason.

    I’ve submitted my comments to the FCC. I suggest others do the same. Visit http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list, find docket number 14-28, and tell the FCC you want an equal Internet, not a two-class system.

    Reply
    • Jason Schaeffer says

      May 16, 2014 at 2:54 pm

      Thank you Michael! It’s great that you presented comments to the FCC. I’m hopeful that others in the domain community will get involved and share their thoughts. Without question we do not want a two-class system.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Twitter

Tweets by @DomainCrunchcom

RSS Domain News

  • Top 10 Domains Owned by Future Media Architects: Media.com, AI.com, Cool.com...
  • Chaos Reigns on This Week's Domain Sales Chart - Top Two Sales Total Nearly 500K
  • GoDaddy tops $3 billion bookings in 2018
  • Grand Ambitions For Cryptocurrency
  • Who is the best registrar in 2019 and why?
  • Mention How Domain Was Acquired in Offer Email
  • Wix hits 4 million paid subscribers
  • AUCTION RECAP OF FEBRUARY 19, 2019
  • Unique idea to help grow domain industry
  • NathanGao.xyz: International designer takes his work with McDonald’s and Michael Kors to a global...

Recent Posts

  • Zillow to launch RealEstate.com
  • Google has a problem
  • Frank Schilling is happy with his .xxx investment
  • NameJet January sales led by TRM.com
  • NameJet December sales led by eLuxury.com

Recent Comments

  • Joseph Peterson on Zillow to launch RealEstate.com
  • Dn Ebook on Zillow to launch RealEstate.com
  • Raymond Hackney on Zillow to launch RealEstate.com
  • Julio Maysonet on Zillow to launch RealEstate.com
  • Josh on Zillow to launch RealEstate.com

Categories

Copyright © 2019 · DomainCrunch.com | Built by TCK