[125198] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: FCC dealt major blow in net neutrality ruling favoring Comcast
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Fri Apr 9 18:51:41 2010
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <C2CBB492-DDC0-4B6F-818F-855C0BD51804@via.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 18:51:25 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 9, 2010, at 5:22 PM, joe mcguckin wrote:
> Let me see if I understand this correctly.
>=20
> People are defending the FCC?
>=20
> The same FCC that ruled that any data service over 200Kbits was =
broadband, not "Information Service" and thus came under the purview of=20=
> the FBI and CALEA - directly contravening the language and intent of =
the CALEA act?
Very specifically NOT the same FCC. The FCC may retain the name, but =
the management, political bent, philosophies, and attitude are very =
different from the one that made that ruling.
That said, it is entirely possible this FCC would make the same ruling. =
Doesn't change what I said above.
> Sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just your enemy.
Sometimes. And sometimes he is neither, so it might be advantageous to =
work with him on the occasional project where your interest and his =
correlate well.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
> On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:59 AM, Rod Beck wrote:
>=20
>> In Europe you rarely encounter courts circumscribing regulatory =
power.=20
>>=20
>> And it is well known that the District Court is dominated by =
anti-regulatory judges. =20
>>=20
>>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Holstein [mailto:michael.holstein@csuohio.edu]
>> Sent: Tue 4/6/2010 7:40 PM
>> To: Patrick W. Gilmore
>> Cc: NANOG list
>> Subject: Re: FCC dealt major blow in net neutrality ruling favoring =
Comcast
>>=20
>>=20
>>> =
<http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/90747-fcc-dealt-major=
-blow-in-net-neutrality-ruling-favoring-comcast>
>>>=20
>>> Seems on-topic, even though policy related.
>>>=20
>=20
