FCC tells Obama to stuff it
Posted by: Timothy Weaver on 11/11/2014 11:20 AM
[
Comments
]
The FCC responded to President Obama's call for net neutrality by telling him to stuff it.
The White House said it wanted to put the internet under the rules passed in the 1930s to deal with the Bell telephony monopoly. This is called the "Title II re-classification" of the market as circuit-switched network. However, in 1990, Congress decided against regulating packet networks as a circuit-switched utility to encourage investment.
FCC chairman Tom Wheeler writes, in response to the White House: "As an independent regulatory agency we will incorporate the President's submission into the record of the Open Internet proceeding."
The FCC said it is taking its time be because any change proposed by the FCC would need to be legally watertight. The FCC's net neutrality rules were found to be unconstitutional in 2010 when Verizon successfully argued that in creating the 2010 rules, "the FCC [had] acted without statutory authority to insert itself into this crucial segment of the American economy, while failing to show any factual need to do so.")
The White House said it wanted to put the internet under the rules passed in the 1930s to deal with the Bell telephony monopoly. This is called the "Title II re-classification" of the market as circuit-switched network. However, in 1990, Congress decided against regulating packet networks as a circuit-switched utility to encourage investment.
FCC chairman Tom Wheeler writes, in response to the White House: "As an independent regulatory agency we will incorporate the President's submission into the record of the Open Internet proceeding."
The FCC said it is taking its time be because any change proposed by the FCC would need to be legally watertight. The FCC's net neutrality rules were found to be unconstitutional in 2010 when Verizon successfully argued that in creating the 2010 rules, "the FCC [had] acted without statutory authority to insert itself into this crucial segment of the American economy, while failing to show any factual need to do so.")
Comments
