addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscontroller-playcrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1light-bulblinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonprintShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

Tech Tuesdays at the SeaPort: Net Neutrality in a Non-Neutral Net

Presented with LaunchLM.

In light of recent court rulings, the FCC is scrambling to find the authority to solve the net neutrality problem, an issue they have targeted for years now.  Where are we in the development of this problem?  And are there mechanisms that could address it without FCC authority?


Bruce Kushnick 

David Pashman

Jonathan Askin 

Althea Erickson

Moderated by:

Nilay Patel

Sponsored by Clio and the Internet Society, New York chapter.

Join or login to comment.

  • Joly M.

    August 6, 2014

  • Joly M.

    Good story from Nancy Scola in today;s WaPo. AT&T backs Free Press/CDT "Let users do the discriminating:"proposal - quote "That AT&T is making CDT and Free Press's thinking the centerpiece of its arguments is a sure sign that we've reached the jiu-jitsu phase of the net neutrality debate, where the best move you can make is one that uses your opponents's assets against it."

    July 22, 2014

  • Taier P.

    NY bar exam is July 29 + 30. Would this be a relaxing and low-key evening activity between the two days? :-)

    July 8, 2014

    • Phil W.

      Yes! Outdoors and talking about something definitely not on the bar exam.

      3 · July 9, 2014

    • KK

      Good luck!

      1 · July 20, 2014

  • Bruce K.

    So here's a conundrum. In every state we checked, Verizon FiOS rides on a title II, common carriage, telecommunications, FTTP, fiber to the premises, network. --NY, NJ, DC, FL, PA, MD, MA... Verizon's entire Net Neutrality legal argument is that title II is evil-- and yet there is no place Verizon told the FCC or the courts that their premier, entire fiber networks are title II. Couldn't the FCC just acknowledge it's already title II and end this charade?

    July 19, 2014

  • Bruce K.

    "Title Shopping" is the term when a telco tells regulators different things about the same services, and hopes they don't cross-reference. I've tracked a bunch of them for the Net Neutrality proceeding.

    1 · July 15, 2014

  • Bruce K.

    For those of you who don't know, the comments period closes at the FCC July 15th, 2014. As lawyers I pose this -- Verizon's cable franchise agreements in almost every state outlines that Verizon's FTTP, fiber-to-the-premises wires are Title II, common carriage, telecommunications service. Verizon sued the FCC claiming that the internet order was an attempt to add "title II", common carriage requirements and the FCC lost-- because the previous administration (circa 2004) had stated that fiber optic broadband and internet are an information service. -- Thus the question to 'reclassify' However, Verizon's own document show that the FTTP is Title II already, and Verizon never told the FCC or the court this material fact. We've been doing a series with new data about Verizon

    Can the FCC, simply acknowledge the FTTP is title II, and open these network to direct competition for other ISPs to use?

    July 13, 2014

Our Sponsors

  • TestMax

    Comprehensive test prep courses on mobile & web.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy