The damage has been done and consumers are already facing the consequences of net neutrality repeal.
The internet has never been the same after the Federal Communications Commission decided to put an end to the Obama-era net neutrality regulations. Those measures served as the consumers’ protection against the unscrupulous business practices of the biggest telecom and broadband provider companies. Attorneys general from different states unite to stand for net neutrality and help it restore.
Several different groups, companies, institutions, and lawmakers advocate for a free open internet which is strongly opposed mainly by telecoms and ISPs, some lawmakers and especially Ajit Pai who happens to be the current FCC chairman. He said that gutting the “2015 Open Internet Order” and replacing it with his “Restoring Internet Freedom Act” will “close the digital divide.” However, a majority of the population prove him wrong.
The repeal took place in June and since then many incidents of data and video throttling have been reported. Giant telecom companies and ISPs are brave enough to do so due to the authority given by the commission itself. Besides, the agency director himself was a Verizon lawyer and was only appointed by the Trump administration.
States cannot be blamed if they forged and enacted their own net neutrality rules. They know that the government will not help them, so they take the matters into their own hands to protect their people. But the opposition and the government are not wasting any time and sue California just hours after Gov. Jerry Brown signed Sen. Scott’ Wiener’s SB 822 into a law two months ago. Now, State Attorney General Xavier Becerra made an agreement with the Justice Department until the filed case by the latter has been cleared up.
An alliance of state attorneys general together with the city officials dispute in new court papers that the rollback of net neutrality will compromise the safety of the public. According to the papers presented in the court, the rollback “imperils residents’ approach to protected and credible electricity; inhibits residents from getting on-time evacuation; shelter-in-place, and disease plague warning; and intervenes with critical medical services, including other things. The complaint was filed on Friday with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
This statutory debate is a part of the argument to the federal agency’s decision to abolish the net neutrality rules of the previous Obama administration. It prohibited ISPs from blocking or slowing down online contents. Likewise, it forbids them imposing higher fees for speedy delivery.
Ajit Pai responded that those rules were “oppressive” and afflict investment. However, net neutrality advocates push that the rules are necessary to stop ISPs from restricting consumer’s capability to access search engines, streaming videos, content, and other online services.
A group of tech companies, state attorneys, city officials general, and consumer advocacy groups have appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to quash the current FCC’s decision to repeal net neutrality and restore it. They stressed on Verizon’s data throttling of the Santa Clara’s Fire Department in time of emergency as one example that the repeal is putting the public’s safety at risk.
In August, search engine company Mozilla along with other companies filed a lawsuit against the FCC to fight for net neutrality rules. It argued that repealing the rules was completely an unprofessional move by the commission.
“The FCC’s removal of net neutrality rules is not only bad for consumers, but it is also unlawful. The protections in place were the product of years of deliberation and careful fact-finding that proved the need to protect consumers, who often have little or no choice of internet provider. The FCC is simply not permitted to arbitrarily change its mind about those protections based on little or no evidence,” the lawsuit stated.
The net neutrality regulation has served consumers for many years against the ISPs’ pro-profit business procedures. Without it, they are prone to blocking and throttling of contents. Consumers can take refuge in Decenternet platform. It is an alternative peer-to-peer neutral decentralized internet infrastructure unchained by politics and dictatorship.
Unlike ISPs, Decenternet does not discriminate contents. Instead, it provides users boundless access to the centralized and decentralized web to freely communicate online without the worries of being censored. Its core assets like the Dnet web hosting, Liberty Search Engine, blockchain native Spyce, and the Osiris Net-Neutral Web Browser establish an absolutely free web environment which bring profits directly to the partaking peers without the corruption of an intermediary.
Are attorneys general correct about the harm that net neutrality repeal will inflict on consumers?