The big story as we close out this week is Verizon appealing the FCC’s Net Neutrality order . Verizon is choosing to go back to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, the site of the last Net Neutrality legal fight. That was the Comcast v FCC case, lost by the FCC because the FCC simply doesn’t have the legal authority to do it. Some say it could set up the FCC for another loss for Net Neutrality II to be fought out there. In fact, Verizon is doing all it can to get this decided the right way. Verizon is arguing the DC Circuit is the only place this should be resolved, on the grounds that the FCC is essentially modifying Verizon’s wireless spectrum licenses. Clever. Also interesting is the request that the Comcast v. FCC panel be assigned to this appeal, on the grounds that the judges involved won’t have to waste time getting up to speed on the issues. A friend told me Verizon had some clever lawyering going on with this. Not being especially familiar with regulatory litigation, or even a lawyer at all, my ability to judge that is limited, but what I’m reading suggests it’s true. Of course, even the allies of Net Neutrality think the FCC isn’t in a very good spot here. Leading House Democrat in the Congressional Internet Caucus Anna Eshoo think the FCC made mistakes leaving itself vulnerable to the Net Neutrality order being tossed out. Meanwhile, Fred Upton and House Republicans are praising Verizon for this move , while Henry Waxman and the Democrats are not . Yes, elections matter. To close the night, a few points on Google. Over at Pundit League I went in depth on the issues of Google Chrome and HTML 5 explaining why Google’s actions are a problem for us all. But that’s not what everyone’s talking about right now. Everyone’s talking about Google CEO Eric Schmidt stepping down . He will stay on as Chairman, and co-founder Larry Page will take charge again as the new CEO. I’m not sure what it means, but it coming shortly after Steve Jobs has announced another health leave makes me wonder if the intent is to make Google look better at Apple’s expense. We know the care about that, in the above HTML 5 issue. Given Schmidt’s long history of strange and erratic statements with respect to privacy (calling upon people to change their names upon turning 18, saying the only alternative to Google maintaining massive databases on people is for government to run them, etc.), some wonder whether under Page Google will respect privacy more. One way to tell will be to watch details like Google’s privacy principles , which are interesting because point 1 is directly opposed to privacy. “Use information to provide our users with valuable products and services” implies information gathering and storage, just the opposite of keeping your data with you. Of course, Google has a monetary reason not to keep your data with you: selling advertising! I believe I previously mentioned in Tech at Night that Google was very carefully free riding off of the Java platform without actually having to play by the Oracle- and formerly Sun-dictated Java rules and licensing. Not calling their Android VM Java was part of that, despite Java being used on the developer side to create Android apps. However it appears that Google may in fact have crossed the line between clever dodging and outright violation of copyright law by lifting whole sections of Java 2 source code and putting them into Android under a different, legally incompatible license. Oops.
Go here to see the original:
Tech at Night: Verizon, FCC, Net Neutrality, Google
Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, has put out a two pronged announcement of what America needs conservatives to achieve when it comes to the the Internet, new technologies, and the regulation of them all. It’s fun to watch just how strong she’s come out on these critical issues. First she had a very well-written piece in the Washington Times explaining how the Internet and related tech issues have gone from a “niche in public policy” to being essential “to keep America free and prosperous.” She gives a great overview of the problems with the FCC and Net Neutrality, then goes on to explain how she, Fred Upton, and other Republicans can do something about it. It’s worth a read, or a link, if you ever need a summary of where we stand today. The big story though came the next day, when she gave the keynote address to the State of the Net conference held by the Congressional Internet Caucus advisory committee . That’s where she drew the line, bright and clear. The Congressional Internet Caucus is a bipartisan caucus, and the advisory committee is just as diverse. So when Blackburn stood up in front of them and made an uncompromising case for freedom and against the radical regulatory agenda, it was not necessarily a friendly venue. She did it anyway. She spoke not only of the bipartisan consensus in Congress against the radicals like (Advisory Committee member) Free Press… The FCC thought they were pushing into a regulatory vacuum last month when they unveiled their net neutrality rules. They may find soon that they stumbled into a Congressional hurricane. No one, Republican or Democrat, Congressman or Commissioner, believes that these new regulations are also the final word. They are the first draft many regulations to come. And as the rules are revised and revised and revised, they create instability, unpredictability- the greatest of all disincentives to investment. …but Blackburn also emphasized what conservatives ought to remember in this and the next fight, and the one after that: Beginning with the coming repeal of the FCC overreach, Conservatives should apply our philosophy to the broader arena of tech policy. We must do so in the spirit of our classic defense of free markets and property rights while guarding against needless regulation and federal intervention. Blackburn leaves no room for doubt. She wants to repeal the FCC’s Net Neutrality power grab. She wants to stand for freedom and property against expanding government. For that, she deserves our support and encouragement.
Read this article:
Marsha Blackburn declares war
I know it’s a big day for Net Neutrality when I wake up and my Email Inbox is jammed full with links, so many basically saying the same thing: The FCC is on the move. I’m told it all goes back to a November 15 speech by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski , in which he expresses an urgency for the FCC to pass a bunch of new rules quickly. It’s a crisis, he says. He then called out Google and Verizon , saying that their temerity to contribute to the debate “slowed down some other processes.” You see: the whole process of talking to industry is apparently a sham, and the only speech that counts is speech that leads the FCC closer to the Obama administration’s predetermined outcome. And it’s that Net Neturality outcome we may be nearing after all. That’s the Red Alert. Tech at Night’s good buddy Seton Motley at Big Govenrment brings us the key story : He’s now claiming that we must pass industry-crippling Net Neutrality restrictions in order to expand broadband access in America, and using that as the leverage to justify Title II reclassification. “That’ll happen,” he says. And further he’s going to gun hard for wireless services, something that Henry Waxman’s bill didn’t dare do, proving once again that the FCC is far outside the mainstream of even Congressional Democrats. Here’s Politico on the story , as well. And worst of all: The plan is to launch it while Republicans are home for Thanksgiving, and then pass it two weeks before Christmas, three weeks before Republicans take control of the House. These dates and times are designed to minimize public debate on the matter as well as to minimize the impact of the 2010 elections on the process. Everything is chosen to silence and thwart popular will. Hold on and get loud. This is crunch time. Some more Net Neutrality? You betcha. Precursor Blog chimes in , arguing against the recent speeches by Julius Genachowski and for the need for freedom online, not government-dictated “neutrality.” House Republicans of the Energy and Commerce Committee, led by Ranking Member Joe Barton, have also written a letter to Genachowski , warning him that his plans to circumvent Republican victory are “a mistake.” They know when their rightful Constitutional powers are being subverted. Quick hits to round out the night: I’m told that the currently-in-progress SB 3804 is a dangerous bill to watch, giving the government expansive new powers online in the name of copyright protection. Copyright used to be a matter of civil law, before the MPAA convinced the feds to start doing their dirty work for them. That’s why FBI notices appear on home releases of movies. Now it’s increasingly criminalized, even as copyright is also increasingly extended. Copyright today would be unrecognizable to the founding fathers, who put the concept into the Constitution with the express warning that copyright be limited in duration. Having gotten tired of serving up waffles to the FCC, Free Press radicals are now writing bad poetry for Net Neutrality. It’s theater. It’s not debate. Oh, and I hate to end on a downer, but the White House CTO says the administration will step up tech efforts next year . Whoever we have head the House committee, whether Barton or someone else, had best be ready to fight back.
Read the original post:
Tech at Night: Red Alert
Good evening. I’ll level with you: I’m exhausted. All summer I got virtually no exercise because, as it turned out, I’ve developed asthma triggered by the air pollution that gets worse during the summer here in inland southern California. So I’m ramping back up my weight lifting, and as I adapt, it’s wearing me out. So tonight I’ll be brief. The push continues for Republicans to listen to us and and join to pass legislation preventing the FCC from implementing devastating, systemic regulation of the Internet through the Title II reclassification power grab. Roll Call describes the troubles on this front with Congressional Republicans hesistant to touch Net Neutrality at all. Honestly I’m glad we’ve pushed the debate to the point where Net Neutrality is so radioactive that no Republican wants to get anywhere near it, but we all must remember that the FCC remains under Barack Obama’s control, not ours, even if we win the election. Action must come sooner, not later, to ensure the FCC respects our need for an open Internet with free and active investment from private business. And again, the right must remain mobilized on this issue not just against a hypothetical bad bill by Congressional Democrats, but also against the FCC. Seton Motley has a video on that urgent point . I promise I don’t link everything he writes. I’m being selective, but he really is just hammering this issue often and well. I’ll close tonight with a laugh. When it came out that Google was minimizing its tax burden , reducing the money the firm “invests” in the Obama administration, there were gasps all around. If a firm led by Republicans did this, they’d be called crooks. But because they’re Democrats continuing to raise money with Barack Obama , they get a pass. Dodging as much tax burden as possible, pumping corporate money into politics, and offshoring what they can. It’s amazing how one little party difference makes all that less offensive in the press. Hey, I love free trade, free markets, and lower taxes. I just wish Google would look out for the little guy who can’t afford creative accountants, and support conservatives who would give all of us lower taxes. Have a good weekend.
See more here:
Tech at Night: Net Neutrality, Google, free weights
Alright I admit it. I’m kicking off tonight’s Tech at Night with this article from NationalJournal.com because it mentions me. I like feedback. But seriously it’s an important overview of Net Neutrality with respect to the conservative grassroots and the TEA party. Our side has been resistant to any action ( Because as Digital Society points out , we don’t support action for its own sake), but the Obama FCC just might not give us any choice on that. In fact, the FCC’s express words for months have been telling us that we won’t have a choice on that. The runaway FCC must be slapped down before they claim broad powers with Title II reclassification, and Congressional leaders have to take the lead on that. One thing though, the closing quote in the National Journal piece isn’t quite right: “If legislation is needed to stop the FCC from carrying out its ‘third way’ proposal, it will be up to industry to sell the idea to the tea party,” said Paul Raak, head of legislative affairs at the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance. “Otherwise, the tea party will always be negative on net neutrality.” It’s not just industry. I’m also here to make the case. The FCC can do so much damage, including price and content controls, if we don’t stop them. Think of how tightly regulated and taxed phones are. Can our economy afford that kind of choking effect on the Internet? I don’t think so. I’ll close tonight with something very technical. One way that, even under more radical Net Neutrality proposals, customers and ISPs could get around regulation would be to forego traditional Internet services and go with more specialized “managed services.” So of course the FCC is talking about regulating those as well. Nothing is too private for the FCC to get involved. There’s no pretense of something being public that demands regulation. Once again, we need [legislation] to stop this ever-expanding scope that the FCC is claiming for itself. We have to save the real open Internet by stopping regulation, and say no to the Orwellian rhetoric of radicals like Free Press, who are claiming that only through tight government controls can we be free. But we know better.
Read the original post:
Tech at Night: Lots more Net Neutrality
