Less rules, less cost, more freedom. All good things in my eyes. Here an bit of a story from The Washington Post:
Federal regulators unveiled a plan Tuesday that would give Internet providers broad powers to determine what websites and online services their customers can see and use, and at what cost.
The move sets the stage for a crucial vote next month at the Federal Communications Commission that could reshape the entire digital ecosystem. The agency’s Republican chairman, Ajit Pai, has made undoing the government’s net neutrality rules one of his top priorities, and Tuesday’s move hands a win to broadband companies such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast.
Also here is excerpt of a interview from CNet entitled “Meet the man John Oliver just called ‘doofy’” that talks about Ajit Pai view on deregulating the internet:
Let’s talk about your proposal to rewrite the net neutrality rules. I know you’re unhappy with the Title II classification, which applies utility style regulation to broadband. But I was surprised that the proposal also asks whether the “Bright Line” rules that prohibit broadband providers from slowing or blocking traffic are needed. Do you think we need rules?
Pai: Well, I haven’t made any predetermined judgment, that’s the entire purpose of this proceeding, to start this conversation with the American public. I’ve been pretty consistent about my view that I favor a free and open internet. I’ve said that the Clinton era approach worked really well. At the dawn of the internet age, President Clinton and a Republican Congress had a pretty fundamental choice to make. Are we going to treat this new technology as we do the water company or the electric company or Ma Bell from the 1930s? And they made a very conscious decision not to do that, because they thought consumers would be better off if they had a marketplace that could evolve without these heavy-handed regulations.
True, but DSL was regulated as a Title II telecommunications service until 2005.
Pai: But cable modem, for example, had never been classified as anything other than a Title I [information] service. The Supreme Court explicitly upheld that classification in 2005 in the Brand X case.