What a joke in the first 30 min. Democrat Member Clyburn (daddy is in Congress) is a complete moron. She is talking about prisoners and the cost of phone calls and the burden on their families. What the heck about the Net Neut issue. Just another waste of time.
FCC Stops Informal Review Clocks for Comcast, AT&T Mergers
Bloomberg By Todd Shields
18 minutes ago
(Bloomberg) -- The Federal Communications Commission paused its reviews of Comcast Corp.’s bid for Time Warner Cable Inc. and AT&T Inc.’s proposed purchase of DirecTV.
Coalition slams Comcast, Time Warner Cable merger, even after net neutrality ruling American City Business Journals
Early Glance: Media companies Associated Press
FCC Approves Net Neutrality Internet Rules Bloomberg
Comcast says Time Warner Cable merger is on track Los Angeles Times
Stock market shrugs off net neutrality vote Associated Press
The FCC is awaiting a court ruling on whether CBS Corp. and other media companies need to divulge programming contracts for the reviews, the agency said in a notice posted on its website. It said it was pausing the 180-day clocks that set informal deadlines for its rulings.
A U.S. appeals court heard arguments on the media companies’ petition to protect their documents on Feb. 20, and hasn’t issued its opinion. The FCC in the order Friday said it “would be advantaged by knowing the resolution” before the informal clocks reach the 180-day mark, which they were slated to do by the end of this month.
tpb: thanks for your technical insights. Keep 'em coming.
What a great speech and interaction yesterday by AGIO CEO. Encourage all to go to the website and view/listen. Folks, I think we have a powerhouse in the making. Congratulations shareholders!
Check out the LA Times article on this yahoo T Summary page:
Nearly all discussion of the federal rules for high-speed Internet service approved Thursday has focused on net neutrality — the idea that all online content be treated the same.
Largely overlooked has been another part of the regulatory change: Privacy.
This could be a game changer, requiring Internet service providers to seek customers' permission before monitoring or sharing personal information.
"Potentially, this could apply to every Web request you make," said Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
"If the same safeguards that now apply to phone services are applied to broadband, this could have major implications for Internet service providers," he said.
At issue is Section 222 of the Communications Act. It requires that telecom companies protect customers' "proprietary information," such as how you use their services.
It defines such information as relating to "the quantity, technical configuration, type, destination, location and amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer."
It also applies to information "that is made available to the carrier by the customer solely by virtue of the carrier-customer relationship."
In the context of telephones, for which the provision was created, Section 222 is relatively benign. It empowers a telecom company to market different services to you based on, say, how many long-distance calls you make.
In the context of the Internet, however, Section 222 takes on more sweeping significance, covering almost everything you might do online, from the sites you visit and searches you perform to the things you buy.
"Clearly, where you go and what you do on the Internet qualifies as proprietary information under the law," said Ryan Calo, an assistant law professor at the University of Washington who specializes in Internet privacy. "This potentially covers a lot of ground."
smalls: good stuff.
I do think you need to revisit the 4 million "letters" sent in. I understand it was millennial viewers worked up by Oliver on late night TV. Perhaps they were unaware and became worked up in a short skit on TV and asked to contact the FCC with emails. I thought I saw a news report where 41% of those TV driven emails actually were against the net neutrality provisions. Regardless, Wheeler was significantly impacted by the volume of "letters" and the BO executive pressure was just too much for the old fart.
so what are we to make of the FCC decision tomorrow? reading and viewing stories on the FCC antics during the time leading up to their vote, it seems the democrats on the FCC are being influenced by small online companies that are loud, but ignorant. And what is with one of the FCC directors being the daughter of a US Congressman? Impartial? Even Google and Facebook are NOW against the strong title 2 rules. Looks to me like we are set to jump off the cliff of free markets and fall down to the regulatory bureaucratic abyss of the 1933 monopoly rules. What a joke. There is no problem, but our socialist president BO is going to impose more controls so he and his cronies can influence decisions and grant favors for whatever (cash, donations, etc.) Makes me sad to see the USA slip non-stop to European socialism. The lack of informed decision making on this title 2 movement pushed onto the FCC by BO is just pathetic.
God save us from this mindless acquiescence to giving up capitalism and free will. Wake up America.
The full text of the rules will not be revealed to the public until after the FCC’s vote on Thursday morning.
Clyburn declined to discuss specific changes she was supporting on Tuesday.
“This is a process that is an interaction with all five members of the commission and their offices,” she said after remarks at a policy forum hosted by Comptel, a trade group.
“I will just say that I am attempting to strike a balance and whatever you hear, whether it’s accurate or not, is a reflection of my enthusiastic willingness to do so.”
In a speech at the Federal Communications Bar Association last week, the commissioner said that she was “pleased” with the initial draft but also hinted that she might need some fixes to strike that balance between “strong” protections for consumers and “clarity” for investors.
“Some have expressed concerns about allowing private rights of action in court, failing to consider the impact on smaller [Internet service providers], that including interconnection goes too far or that the case-by-case approach does not go far enough, and that the new conduct rule may not be as strong as the previous unreasonable discrimination rule,” she said.
The Hill (posted on Drudge Report 2/25/15
Those deals, known as “interconnection” arrangements, became a point of contention last year, when Netflix accused Comcast and other companies of erecting “Internet tolls” before easily passing Web traffic from one network to another.
The initial plan sought by Wheeler would allow the FCC to investigate and take action against deals that are “not just and reasonable,” according to a fact sheet released by the commission earlier this month.
Eliminating the new legal category could make it trickier for the FCC to police those arrangements, said officials with the agency, who were granted anonymity in order to speak freely about the ongoing negotiations.
Other FCC officials have previously said that the broader act of reclassifying broadband Internet service would, in and of itself, give the commission enough power to oversee interconnection deals. That opinion has been backed up by lawyers at Google, among others, who made the argument to FCC officials last week.
Matt Wood, the policy director at the pro-net neutrality organization Free Press, disagreed with officials who thought the change could weaken the rule. Clyburn’s edit might actually make the rules stronger by getting rid of “unnecessary baggage” in Wheeler’s early draft, he said.
Clyburn’s changes also would replace a new standard for Internet service providers’ conduct, which was meant to act as a catchall rule for any future behavior that might abuse consumers. That standard would be swapped out with potentially narrower language from 2010 rules that prevented “unreasonable discrimination.” A federal court tossed out those 2010 rules early last year, setting the stage for the FCC to write new rules.
Eleventh-hour drama for net neutrality
By Julian Hattem - 02/24/15 12:00 PM EST
A Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission wants to see changes that could narrow the scope of new net neutrality rules set for a vote on Thursday.
Mignon Clyburn, one of three Democrats on the FCC, has asked Chairman Tom Wheeler to roll back some of his provisions before the full commission votes on them, FCC officials said.
The request — which Wheeler has yet to respond to — puts the chairman in the awkward position of having to either roll back his proposals, or defend the tough rules and convince Clyburn to back down.
It’s an ironic spot for Wheeler, who for months was considered to be favoring weaker rules than those pushed for by his fellow Democrats, before he reversed himself and backed tougher restrictions on Internet service providers.
Clyburn’s objections complicate the highly anticipated vote and add an extra bit of drama to the already high tensions on the five-member commission.
Wheeler will need the votes of both Clyburn and Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel to pass the rules, since the two Republicans on the commission are expected to vote against anything he proposes.
Clyburn’s changes would leave in place the central and most controversial component of Wheeler’s rules — the notion that broadband Internet service should be reclassified so that it can be treated as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, similar to utilities like phone lines.
Proponents of net neutrality have said such a move is the surest way to prevent Internet service providers from interfering with people’s access to the Web.
However, she wants to eliminate a new legal category of “broadband subscriber access services,” created as an additional point of legal authority for the FCC to monitor the ways companies hand off traffic on the back end of the Internet.
Those deals, known as “interconnection” arrangements, became a point of
Ah, yes...forbearance is the key here. Even though title 2 gets passed, it depends on how strongly everyone believes that the fcc will actually practice forbearance from the more intrusive parts of the ruling as time goes on. Should be good for T...and VZ as well.
small: thanks for your extensive post. questions: 1) if the DirectTV deal is blocked then T would have tons of non-invested deal cash to continue dividend and build out 4gl even further...so shouldn't the stock rise, at least in the near term? 2) didn't VZ just dump a lot of their traditional business and some 4gl to Frontier? maybe the game has moved past consumer and in the USA will be b2b enterprise. appreciate your response, I am just trying to figure this complex prob out.
thanks smalls. so, are you long T and/or would you buy in front of the expected title 2 announcement on thurs? wonder if fcc will then not allow direct tv deal. do you think that, strangely, would actually help T deliver stronger eps since their usa investments would be vastly curtailed?
thanks for your thoughts. i think the CEO indicated in the last cc that T was going to focus on b2b enterprise for future sales and profit growth in usa. if so, then what happens in consumer is of less relevance to T, even if title 2 is forced on industry. just my thoughts.