The funniest thing about Verizon complaining about Title II, is that they used Title II to roll out their FIOS FTTP.
I really am unsure of what they expected the outcome to be, and further proves the point of how big of a mess ISP¹s in this country are. Stephen Carter | IT Systems Administrator | Gun Lake Tribal Gaming Commission 1123 129th Avenue, Wayland, MI 49348 Phone 269.792.1773 On 2/27/15, 11:04 AM, "Miles Fidelman" <mfidel...@meetinghouse.net> wrote: >I'd think they'd be better off with some jujitsu, along the lines of: > >"We've always practiced network neutrality, not like some of our >competitors, this won't effect us at all and may enforce some good >business practices on others" > >(As far as I can tell, Verizon has not played games with favoring their >own content - for all intents and purposes, they operate FIOS as a >common carrier - no funny throttling, no usage caps, etc.) > >I'm surprised they weren't a bit more vocal on the OTHER FCC decision of >the day - preempting some state restrictions on municipal broadband >builds - Verizon has been very active in pushing state laws to kill muni >networks (even in places where they have no intention of building out). > >Miles Fidelman > >Scott Fisher wrote: >> I am not arguing that they have a valid complaint. I just think their >> method of doing so is a bit childish. It does get the point across, >> just not in the method I respect. Just my opinion though. >> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Rob McEwen <r...@invaluement.com> wrote: >>> Scott Fisher, >>> >>> I think Verizon's statement was brilliant, and entirely appropriate. >>>Some >>> people are going to have a hard time discovering that being in favor of >>> Obama's version of "net neutrality"... will soon be just about as cool >>>as >>> having supported SOPA. >>> >>> btw - does anyone know if that thick book of regulations, you know... >>>those >>> hundreds of pages we weren't allowed to see before the vote... anyone >>>know >>> if that is available to the public now? If so, where? >>> >>> Rob McEwen >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Scott Fisher <littlefish...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Funny, but in my honest opinion, unprofessional. Poor PR. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Larry Sheldon <larryshel...@cox.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-mov >>>>>e-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet >>> >> >> > > >-- >In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. >In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra > <br><hr><font face='Arial' color='Gray' size='1'>The information contained in this electronic transmission (email) is confidential information and may be subject to attorney/client privilege. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS PROHIBITED, except by the intended recipient. Attempts to intercept this message are in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2511(1) of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which subjects the interceptor to fines, imprisonment and/or civil damages.</font>
