Dear FCC: Rethink The Vague "General Conduct" Rule

Electronic Frontier Foundation ^ | 2/24/15 | corynne mcsherry

[Enlightened1]

we are deeply concerned that the FCC’s new rules will include a provision that sounds like a recipe for overreach and confusion: the so-called “general conduct rule.”

According to the FCC's own "Fact Sheet," the proposed rule will allow the FCC to review (and presumably punish) non-neutral practices that may “harm” consumers or edge providers.

[Enlightened1]

This is where the FCC will censor and shut down your web site because they do not like your free speech.

[Enlightened1]

This is a giant power grab. The fact they keep most of it secret, just like Obama care, you know it's a screw job.

[Hurricane Andrew]

The EFF is a great, non-partisan organization, and they have nailed this issue spot-on. Glad to see them calling out the FCC on this.

[dforest]

This really doesn’t have to happen. But it will because the People are too stupid and cowardly to stop them.

[DJ MacWoW]

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

[W.]

From battleforthenet.com, the commie pro-net neutrality website sponsor section:

Looks like they were for it before they were against it!

[HiTech RedNeck]

They got burned

[Steve_Seattle]

"Accordingly, if the Commission intends to adopt a “general conduct rule” it should spell out, in advance, the contours and limits of that rule, and clarify that the rule shall be applied only in specific circumstances."

Which is exactly what this "transparent" administration does NOT want to do. It wants to ram something through with vague language, and then use the law to do whatever they are currently unwilling to openly declare.

[Beagle8U]

Owebamacare for the internet, what could possibly go wrong?

[Steve_Seattle]

The FCC wants the regulation to be vague so that it can eventually be used to do things that most people would oppose. Then, when the FCC acts on a “broad” interpretation of the regulation, courts will ratify it and something that Congress never actually approved will become “settled law.”

[NewHampshireDuo]

I had an email chat last week with a person from EFF and, some points like this notwithstanding, they seem to still be very much for it. Just a bup in the road so to speak.

I really like EFF in spite of some of their associations (Greenpeace, CAIR, etc.) but they are generally spot on with regard to electronic freedom.

[W.]

Yes, they did, and in turn, they helped burn us.

[NewHampshireDuo]

bup = bump

[W.]

Well, we’ll see. Wish we’d have got going on this 8 months back.

[GraceG]

These Vague Terms are something that only a selective enforcement NAZI would LOVE! Ie. Progressively Socialist Control Freak.

[Bob434]

[[we are deeply concerned that the FCC’s new rules will include a provision that sounds like a recipe for overreach and confusion]]

But you’re NOT concerned that the FCC has NO AUTHORITY to take over the internet?

[HiTech RedNeck]

Somehow a gaggle of libertarians does not sound like it would willingly instigate “secret” rules. They got played. Now maybe they will realize not everybody is as ethical as they were trying to be, and be careful.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Maybe if they are really pushed, they can accept that as a cherry on top.

[ViLaLuz]

Better yet... instead of protesting one rule, can the whole thing.

[Political Junkie Too]

I think one reason Obama is keeping his net neutrality regulation a secret is that he's going to eliminate anonymity on the internet.

No more anonymity means they can find you if you post something they don't like.

Also, anything political will be treated as a campaign contribution and must be reported to the FEC.

Next, if it's a utility then we can't have anonymous people using it, just like how phone, water, and electricity users are not anonymous. Ignore the fact that you are not really an anonymous user of the utility because your ISP knows you and bills you each month. It's just the traffic content that is anonymous, but the usage is paid for.

And finally, if anonymity is to be banned, then this will also ban all personal encryption and VPN services that spoof internet traffic, with the possible exception of business telecommuting and online banking and stock trading traffic, but only if decryption keys are registered with the government.

That's my prediction, anyway.

-PJ