Why Mike Masnick changed his mind on net neutrality / responses to Ben Thompson

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Barbara van Schewick <schewick () stanford edu>
> Date: December 10, 2017 at 12:25:04 PM EST
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Cc: Barbara van Schewick <schewick () stanford edu>
> Subject: Why Mike Masnick changed his mind on net neutrality / responses to Ben Thompson
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> For IP, if you wish. You recently shared an article by tech industry analyst and blogger Ben Thompson, in which he 
> argued that you can be in favor of net neutrality, but still support Chairman Pai’s plan to eliminate all net 
> neutrality protections at the FCC. 
>
> Here are two thoughtful articles responding to his claims:
> 1) Why I changed my mind on net neutrality by Mike Masnick on Techdirt: 
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20171206/22535138758/why-i-changed-my-mind-net-neutrality.shtml
>
> “The larger point here, though is that while there certainly were a number of reasons to be hesitant about supporting 
> Title II or even explicit rules from the FCC a decade ago, enough things have happened that if you support net 
> neutrality, supporting Title II is the only current way to get it. Ajit Pai's plan gets rid of net neutrality. The 
> courts have made it clear. The (non) competitive market has made it clear. The statements of the large broadband 
> providers have made it clear. The concerns of the small broadband providers have made it clear. If Ben does support 
> net neutrality, as he claims, then he should not support Pai's plan. It does not and will not lead to the results he 
> claims he wants. It is deliberately designed to do the opposite.
>
> So, yes. For a long time -- like Ben does now -- I worried about an FCC presenting rules. But the courts made it 
> clear that this was the only way to actually keep neutrality -- short of an enlightened Congress. And the 
> deteriorating market, combined with continued efforts and statements from the big broadband companies, made it clear 
> that it was necessary. You can argue that the whole concept of net neutrality is bad -- but, if you support the 
> concept of net neutrality, and actually understand the history,  then it's difficult to see how you can support Pai's 
> plan. I hope that Ben will reconsider his position -- especially since Pai himself has been retweeting Ben's posts 
> and tweets on this subject.”
>
> 2) Also recommended: What an Internet analyst got wrong about net neutrality on Wired by Klint Flintley on Wired: 
> https://www.wired.com/story/what-an-internet-analyst-got-wrong-about-net-neutrality/. 
>
> Best,
> Barbara
> ---
> Barbara van Schewick
> Professor of Law and (by Courtesy) Electrical Engineering
> Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar
> Director, Center for Internet and Society
> Stanford Law School
>  
> Author of "Internet Architecture and Innovation," MIT Press 2010
> URL: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/people/barbara-van-schewick 
> Twitter: @vanschewick
> E-Mail: schewick () stanford edu
> Phone:  650-723 8340 
>  
> Crown Quadrangle
> 559 Nathan Abbott Way
> Stanford, CA94305-8610
>
>  



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20171210175454:210C68B4-DDFD-11E7-B403-B345DC1F4A50
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com