Attorney Jim Hood issued the following statement.
JACKSON—Attorney General Jim Hood joined 22 attorneys general in filing a petition Thursday
to formally commence their lawsuit against the Federal Communications
Commission’s
illegal rollback of net neutrality. The coalition filed a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit after the FCC
published the final rule rolling back net neutrality in today’s Federal
Register.
“The
repeal of net neutrality would have dire consequences for consumers and
businesses in Mississippi and across the country who rely on and have a
right to a free and open
internet,” said General Hood. “A repeal would allow internet service
providers to control and slow down consumers’ lawful internet activity,
which is unfair and un-American.”
As
the Attorneys General will argue in their suit, under the
Administrative Procedure Act the FCC cannot make “arbitrary and
capricious” changes to existing policies, such
as net neutrality. The FCC’s rule fails to justify the Commission’s
departure from its long-standing policy and practice of defending net
neutrality, while misinterpreting and disregarding critical record
evidence on industry practices and harm to consumers
and businesses. Moreover, the rule wrongly reclassifies broadband
internet as a Title I information service, rather than a Title II
telecommunications service, based on an erroneous and unreasonable
interpretation of the Telecommunications Act. Finally, the
rule improperly and unlawfully includes sweeping preemption of state
and local laws.
Click here to read the petition.
The lawsuit is led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and
joined
by the attorneys general of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii,
Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
Mississippi, New Mexico, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington,
and the District of Columbia.
###
31 comments:
I have never in 59 years voted Democrat. Can't wait to this go around. Jim Hood....Governor! Tate Reeves...(finally)....get a job.
One of these things (states) is not like the others.....
Blue (democratic) states, and their AG's all suing to keep the Obama era rules in place, and of course, our AG joining in with all his allies.
For, or against, net neutrality - the fact is that the FCC has the authority to establish rules and regulations, and to overturn previous rules/regulations established in the same manner. Wonder who the law firm will be that gets hired to be a "special assistant" in this case.
Complete BS. It makes me sick that my tax dollars are helping pay for this nonsense. Complete misuse of the office for a political point. The left is wrong on this one.
@8:07
"The left is wrong on this one."
Please, let me know how so.
Thank you Hood.
How do people support policy that isn't good for their self interest and vote for people that don't support their interest.
There's nothing neutral about net neutrality. It's not about charging a company more than another for carrying their traffic. It's about government control. The internet was fine in 2015 without net neutrality, the internet hasn't died in the past 2 months since net neutrality ended.
If Jim Hood wins the net neutrality argument, does that mean he will let us buy wine online?
90% of the millennials crying over this could not explain net neutrality in the first place.
So, Jim Hood wants to force me to keep subsidizing people who watch Netflix and other bandwidth hogs?
Hard to believe, but he makes Tater seem like a good choice.
The neat thing is the public got to experience an unthrottled internet.
Now when att charges more for “higher” speeds (that it creates by slowing others) then the public knows the difference.
Hood is on right side of this.
Rs can’t stand it that it’s now apparent that Rs do not actually stand for the person.
Net Neutrality has not ended. When it does if you use Nextflix, Hulu, YouTube or any other streaming media you will be screaming to the high heavens.
I find it sad that so many useful idiots in the gullible masses fall easy prey to the manipulations of certain big tech interests. "Net Neutrality" and "equal access for all" sounds so sweet and fair. Funny how it only seems to apply to if it's a hard wired connection provider. Big Bad Comcast and AT&T shouldn't charge for extra speed or bandwidth usage, but Cspire, Verizon, et al can and do all the time. And yes they will throttle you back if you're using too much bandwidth.
At the end of the day, this is pushed by the bandwidth freeloaders, the Youtube's, Netflix's etc that want their 18 wheeler Cement Trucks to have a free ride on the "free and open" information superhighway, without having to pay for the extra infrastructure and equipment the equipment needed to provide it. Google already attempted to start their own internet provider with "Google Fiber". They've more or less shelved it because it was so expensive. https://www.wired.com/2017/03/google-fiber-was-doomed-from-the-start/ Cspire got into fiber to the home years ago and the project ground to a crawl because of the expense. It's slowly picking back up.
There's also the claim that a Comcast might "restrict" access to certain sites, while Youtube already does that with respect to certain content.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/4372177/youtube-accused-of-censorship-over-controversial-new-bid-to-limit-access-to-videos/
There's big corporate interests behind both sides. Just remember that.
I believe that there's a balance to work these issues out in the free market without the government over regulating it.
@8:34 hits on it. "Net neutrality" is nothing more than de facto price controls. Nothing will stop investment and innovation faster than price controls.
Anyone reading here have any early experience with CSpire's fixed broadband service?
Most people don't realize how much it benefits them. When it's over a whole bunch are going to be crying. Their tax cut will disappear in fees and service charges.
The only role the government has in my Internet is to encourage open markets and competition and avoid monopolies. If they do that, the market will take care of the rest.
10:18 AM Do you have multiple natural gas, electric, cable, water utilities serving your neighborhood? The "market" has made most of those monopolies with the highest possible rates. When net neutrality is gone we will be paying much more for every part of the internet and will have few to no choices of providers.
How did we ever survive before net neutrality? Back when only the very rich could afford the internet? Way back in 2015.
Yea, he’s not running.
Just looking to start some suits and parachute into Mikey Moore’s firm to reap the pay day.
8:34, I find it sad how you have absolutely zero understanding of this issue and pretend to be an expert. Did you just watch a 20 second spot of Tucker Carlson telling you how to think and go with it? At least google net neutrality before displaying your ignorance on a public website. You are spreading lies to others and making your fellow Mississippians look stupid. Net neutrality has nothing to do with bandwidth or overages, it has to do with equal access to all content. A private website like Youtube will always be allowed to choose what content is displayed on their own website as long as it's legal. The issue is that your ISP will be able to decide which websites you can visit. I guess you will be ok with Comcast charging you an extra $50 a month for the conservative news website package and another $20 a month for the social media package and $20,000 a month for Netflix since they are a direct competitor. Why should Comcast be able to decide which websites we are allowed to view? Are you ok with Comcast being the sole gatekeeper?
Now I'm not a millennial but I sure would like a brief explanation of 'net neutrality' if somebody can provide one without using legal jargon or any of the following words:
Dashboard
Virtualization
Connection Sharing
Access Protocol
Encryption
Network Topology
Vertical Market
Inbound Competition Paradigm
Much thanks in advance....
8:34 understands it perfectly.
2:38 is spreading scare stories. Those who want services that are expensive to deliver (e.g., Netflix) should be willing to pay their fair share for the bandwidth. I don't want to subsidize them.
NN gave the government the power to declare an unlimited data plan for your phone anticompetitive.
8:00 because you don' use Netflix or the like, you expect your cost to go down from what you pay now? Since you won't be "subsidizing" those that do? That is adorable. There is nothing funnier than you Adam Smith types and your fairy tales. The free market has left Mississippians fewer choices in just about every single area, but you still think its magic.
Anyone that believes turning things over to the benevolence of Comcast or AT&T shouldn't be allowed near a computer.
This may be off subject, but would either side of this argument affect, say, a provider deciding they would not carry certain 'packages' (if that's the right word) in their regular lineup of online services and charging me extra if I wanted them?
Like some deciding not to carry ESPN3 or making me pay to get a sports package over the internet or even a local station over the net? Or some form of 'government' deciding I need to pay an additional tax to view a catalog online?
If I'm off base, please be gentle....
The free market has left Mississippians fewer choices in just about every single area, but you still think its magic.
But not when it comes to internet services. Most of NE Jackson, for example, can choose from three different service providers and soon to be a fourth.
But you go ahead and keep spreading your manure, er, FUD.
5:48....those are monopolies for exactly the reason we don't want NN. Those are REGULATED monopolies, allowed to become so by the govt. if Comcast limits what you can see, people will rapidly leave Comcast. It's called competition.
Or... We can put the Kemper regulators in charge of regulating your internet.
@10:34 AM, once Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, CSpire roll out their 5G services you'll have your fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth!
Kingfish, care to explain your comment at 8:52 or cite a source? I think you completely misunderstand what net neutrality is.
"I think you completely misunderstand what net neutrality is."
I think I smell a guy who is about to tell us Al Gore invented Net Neutrality....Unless it was Andy Rooney.
I'm confused by KF's comments too. Maybe he was referring to something like TMobile's binge on where Netflix and some other companies pay tmobile to not count their customer's data against their data plan? Still don't think that is pro consumer though, just pro ISP's being able to extort companies.
Sounds like we've suddenly turned into a seminar at The Hilton, with soft drinks and cookies on the back table. Everybody is outfitted properly in his pointy hat, high-water britches and pocket-protector. Tapping a pencil on the table and ready to challenge the knowledge of others. 3:23 and 5:31 waving their hands and competing for the consultant's attention.
Post a Comment