[8287] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: FCC regulation of Internet service providers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tony Rutkowski)
Fri Nov 12 20:21:28 1993
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1993 20:10:35 +0500
To: Gordon Cook <cook@path.net>
From: Tony Rutkowski <amr@cnri.reston.va.us>
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Gordon,
At 07:56 PM 12/11/93 GMT, Gordon Cook wrote:
....
>OTHER ESP data services such as compuserve and prodigy available that
>would presumably remain affordable. I thought that putting the Internet
>on the same level as compuserve and prodigy was a bit ludicrous. Pepper
>said it would take legislation from congress to change the FCC's view on
>these matters.
It's perhaps a bit unfair to quote Bob Pepper in this fashion without
him being able to correct your non-linearities (a state of non-
connectivity that is about to be remedied). He was just providing you
with an example to try to explain the law and policy.
The Commission's policy is eminently sensible. It has allowed the
Internet and related information and networking services
to thrive in the US (and other enlightened geo-political environs)
by keeping the government out of the business of regulating these
services. This policy has been crafted and refined with broad support
over more than three decades in a trilogy of proceedings, the last
one of which is known as Computer III. The decision simply says
that the FCC will refrain from exercising jurisdiction over anything
other than basic telecommunication (read telephony and pipe) services.
There were many of us involved in crafting that policy who are rather
proud of it, and in retrospect, it was perhaps the primary enabler of
what is now unfolding as the Internet revolution. This FCC national
policy is now a global paradigm.
Would you have it differently?
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Tony Rutkowski
THE INTERNET IS ITS OWN REVOLUTION
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
