When a right-winger says "cancel" "cancel culture" or "censorship," in English that means "liberals exercising their rights to free speech in ways I don't like."
Likewise, "woke" "SJW" and "virtue signaling" mean "someone who, unlike me, has a functioning moral compass."
see: the forbearance language in the 2015 net neutrality order).
AKA this language:
B. Promoting Investment with a Modern Title II
Today, our forbearance approach results in over 700 codified rules being inapplicable, a
“light-touch” approach for the use of Title II. This includes no unbundling of last-mile facilities, no
tariffing, no rate regulation, and no cost accounting rules, which results in a carefully tailored application
of only those Title II provisions found to directly further the public interest in an open Internet and more,
better, and open broadband. Nor will our actions result in the imposition of any new federal taxes or fees;
the ability of states to impose fees on broadband is already limited by the congressional Internet tax
moratorium.
38. This is Title II tailored for the 21st Century. Unlike the application of Title II to
incumbent wireline companies in the 20th Century, a swath of utility-style provisions (including tariffing)
will not be applied. Indeed, there will be fewer sections of Title II applied than have been applied to
Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS), where Congress expressly required the application of
Sections 201, 202, and 208, and permitted the Commission to forbear from others. In fact, Title II has
never been applied in such a focused way.
D. Broad Forbearance
In finding that broadband Internet access service is subject to Title II, we simultaneously
exercise the Commission’s forbearance authority to forbear from 30 statutory provisions and render over
700 codified rules inapplicable, to establish a light-touch regulatory framework tailored to preserving
those provisions that advance our goals of more, better, and open broadband. We thus forbear from the
vast majority of rules adopted under Title II. We do not, however, forbear from sections 201, 202, and
208 (or from related enforcement provisions),
46 which are necessary to support adoption of our open
Internet rules. We also grant extensive forbearance, minimizing the burdens on broadband providers
while still adequately protecting the public.
Section 201:
PART I--COMMON CARRIER REGULATION
SEC. 201. [47 U.S.C. 201] SERVICE AND CHARGES.
(a) It shall be the duty of every common carrier engaged in interstate or
foreign communication by wire or radio to furnish such communication service upon reasonable request therefor; and, in accordance with the orders of the
Commission, in cases where the Commission, after opportunity for hearing, finds
such action necessary or desirable in the public interest, to establish physical
connections with other carriers, to establish through routes and charges applicable
thereto and the divisions of such charges, and to establish and provide facilities and
regulations for operating such through routes.
(b) All charges, practices, classifications, and regulations for and in
connection with such communication service, shall be just and reasonable, and any
such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust or unreasonable is
hereby declared to be unlawful: Provided, That communications by wire or radio
subject to this Act may be classified into day, night, repeated, unrepeated, letter,
commercial, press, Government and such other classes as the Commission may
decide to be just and reasonable, and different charges may be made for the
different classes of comunications: Provided further, That nothing in this Act or in
any other provision of law shall be construed to prevent a common carrier subject
to this Act from entering into or operating under any contract with any common
carrier not subject to this Act, for the exchange of their services, if the Commission
is of the opinion that such contract is not contrary to the public interest: Provided
further, That nothing in this Act or in any other provision of law shall prevent a
common carrier subject to this Act from furnishing reports of positions of ships at
sea to newspapers of general circulation, either at a nominal charge or without
charge, provided the name of such common carrier is displayed along with such
ship position reports. The Commissioner may prescribe such rules and regulations
as may be necessary in the public interest to carry out the provisions of this Act.
Section 202:
SEC. 202. [47 U.S.C. 202] DISCRIMINATION AND PREFERENCES.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or
unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations,
facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly
or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or
unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or
locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any
undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.
(b) Charges or services, whenever referred to in this Act, include charges
for, or services in connection with, the use of common carrier lines of
communication, whether derived from wire or radio facilities, in chain broadcasting
or incidental to radio communication of any kind.
(c) Any carrier who knowingly violates the provisions of this section shall
forfeit to the United States the sum of $6,000 for each such offense and $300 for
each and every day of the continuance of such offense.
(Section 208 outli es the process of filing a complaint with the FCC)
Other sections:
In addition, we do not forbear from a limited number of sections necessary to ensure
consumers are protected, promote competition, and advance universal access, all of which will foster
network investment, thereby helping to promote broadband deployment.
Section 222: Protecting Consumer Privacy. Ensuring the privacy of customer
information both directly protects consumers from harm and eliminates consumer concerns about using
the Internet that could deter broadband deployment. Among other things, section 222 imposes a duty on
every telecommunications carrier to take reasonable precautions to protect the confidentiality of its
customers’ proprietary information.47
We take this mandate seriously. For example, the Commission
recently took enforcement action under section 222 (and section 201(b)) against two telecommunications
companies that stored customers’ personal information, including social security numbers, on
unprotected, unencrypted Internet servers publicly accessible using a basic Internet search.48
This
unacceptably exposed these consumers to the risk of identity theft and other harms.
As the Commission has recognized, “[c]onsumers’ privacy needs are no less important
when consumers communicate over and use broadband Internet access than when they rely on [telephone]
services.”
49
Thus, this Order finds that consumers concerned about the privacy of their personal
information will be more reluctant to use the Internet, stifling Internet service competition and growth.50
Application of section 222’s protections will help spur consumer demand for those Internet access services, in turn “driving demand for broadband connections, and consequently encouraging more
broadband investment and deployment,” consistent with the goals of the 1996 Act.51
Sections 225/255/251(a)(2): Ensuring Disabilities Access. We do not forbear from those
provisions of Title II that ensure access to broadband Internet access service by individuals with
disabilities. All Americans, including those with disabilities, must be able to reap the benefits of an open
Internet, and ensuring access for these individuals will further the virtuous cycle of consumer demand,
innovation, and deployment. This Order thus concludes that application of sections 225, 255, and
251(a)(2) is necessary to protect consumers and furthers the public interest, as explained in greater detail
below.
52
Section 224: Ensuring Infrastructure Access. For broadband Internet access service, we
do not forbear from section 224 and the Commission’s associated procedural rules (to the extent they
apply to telecommunications carriers and services and are, thus, within the Commission’s forbearance
authority).53
Section 224 of the Act governs the Commission’s regulation of pole attachments. In
particular, section 224(f)(1) requires utilities to provide cable system operators and telecommunications
carriers the right of “nondiscriminatory access to any pole, duct, conduit, or right-of-way owned or
controlled” by a utility.54
Access to poles and other infrastructure is crucial to the efficient deployment of
communications networks including, and perhaps especially, new entrants.
Section 254: Promoting Universal Broadband. Section 254 promotes the deployment
and availability of communications networks to all Americans, including rural and low-income
Americans—furthering our goals of more and better broadband. With the exception of 254(d), (g), and
(k) as discussed below, we therefore do not find the statutory test for forbearance from section 254 (and
the related provision in section 214(e)) is met. We recognize that supporting broadband-capable networks
is already a key component of Commission’s current universal service policies. The Order concludes,
however, that directly applying section 254 provides both more legal certainty for the Commission’s prior
decisions to offer universal service subsidies for deployment of broadband networks and adoption of
broadband services and more flexibility going forward.
We partially forbear from section 254(d) and associated rules insofar as they would
immediately require mandatory universal service contributions associated with broadband Internet access
service.
On the post: Techdirt Is Fighting A New Lawsuit
And thus Klayman only underscores his complete lack of integrity or legal acumen.
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Spotify Comes Under Fire For Hosting Joe Rogan's Podcast (2020)
Re: Joe nailed it
Translator note:
When a right-winger says "cancel" "cancel culture" or "censorship," in English that means "liberals exercising their rights to free speech in ways I don't like."
Likewise, "woke" "SJW" and "virtue signaling" mean "someone who, unlike me, has a functioning moral compass."
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re:
That you'tr trying to claim hallucinations are the same as china proves the only confused moron here is the one you see in your mirror.
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
Re: Re: Re:
[Projects facts not in the evidence]
On the post: Florida Tells Court: Actually, It's Section 230 That's Unconstitutional (Not Our Social Media Law)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nice of you to admit you're illiterate, but we knew that already.
On the post: Sixth Circuit Says School Board Can't Boot People From Meetings Just Because It Doesn't Like What They're Saying
Re: Re: Re: Why is it…
[Projects hallucinations not in evidence]
On the post: Florida
ManGovernor Wastes More Florida Taxpayer Money Appealing Ruling About His Unconstitutional Social Media LawRe: Re: Re: I Invented the Keyboard Necktie!!!!
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Axios Parrots A Lot Of Dumb, Debunked Nonsense About Net Neutrality
AKA this language:
Section 201:
Section 202:
(Section 208 outli es the process of filing a complaint with the FCC)
Other sections:
On the post: Senator Steve Daines Decides To Spit On The 1st Amendment Again: Wants To Ban Moderation Of Politicians
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, you know...
The complete opposite of reality in Charlottesville.
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: naw, its not censorship whe WE do it
So this is the first time I've ever been wrong here. I got my acronyms mixed up, and had VOA confused for OAN this whole time.
On the post: Judge Ignores First Amendment, Misreads Town Law, While Ordering Resident To Remove 'Fuck Biden' Signs
Re:
Remember that that's the "Veterans Today" liar from a couple days ago.
On the post: MAGA 'Freedom Phone' Targets Rubes With Dubious Promises Of Privacy
Re: Re: Good for them…
You can lead a MAGAt to facts, but you can't make them think.
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: naw, its not censorship whe WE do it
...Which VOA is the polar opposite...
On the post: Senator Steve Daines Decides To Spit On The 1st Amendment Again: Wants To Ban Moderation Of Politicians
Re: Re: Help Me
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Senator Steve Daines Decides To Spit On The 1st Amendment Again: Wants To Ban Moderation Of Politicians
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Oh, you know...
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re: Re: Re: naw, its not censorship whe WE do it
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re: naw, its not censorship whe WE do it
Flagged for malicious link
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re:
And hasn't been trying.
On the post: No, The White House Isn't Colluding With Facebook To Silence Dissent; But It Sure Could Have Handled Things Better
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The only problem here is whatever substances you're taking to see such hallucinations.
On the post: French Competition Authority Fines Google Nearly $600 Million For Failing To Negotiate A Nonsensical Deal With Publishers 'In Good Faith'
Can you hold a government accountable for sending invoice fraud like that?
Next >>