Comments on: Is the FCC Becoming the Federal Cloud Commission?

By: My Opinion by Joe Eiben » Net Neutrality Regulation

My Opinion by Joe Eiben » Net Neutrality Regulation — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 03:48:22 +0000

[...] other layers of the Net and cover content and applications. (FCC is already hinting at interest in regulating in the cloud and other Net services and content). Google and Apple’s necks will be on the neutrality chopping [...]

By: The 5-Part Case against Net Neutrality Regulation « Internet Freedom Coalition

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 17:33:01 +0000

By: FCC’s Genachowski Promises He’s Not Out to Regulate Net, New Media « Internet Freedom Coalition

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 06:03:10 +0000

[...] of Inquiry, (paragraph 60, pg. 21) that suggests the FCC is angling to become the Federal Cloud Commission: As other approaches, such as cloud computing, evolve, will established standards or de facto [...]

By: The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog

The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:31:59 +0000

FCC's Genachowski Promises He's Not Out to Regulate Net, New Media...

By Berin Szoka & Adam Thierer We learned from The Wall Street Journal yesterday that "Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski gets a little peeved when people suggests that he wants to regulate the Internet." He told a group...

By: Ken Ferree on the FCC’s “Future of Media” Inquiry as an Affront to Free Speech

Sat, 06 Feb 2010 17:42:51 +0000

[...] from “merely asking questions”—as with asked open-ended questions about things like cloud computing, online privacy (a slightly different matter) and online content controls that don’t come [...]

By: Is the FCC Above the Law? — Technology Liberation Front

Is the FCC Above the Law? — Technology Liberation Front — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 05:11:18 +0000

[...] The agency also recently began looking at and cloud computing, forcing me to wonder, “Is the FCC Becoming the Federal Cloud Commission?” And then there was the Commission strong-arming of Apple about the iPhone app store [...]

By: The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog

The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:35:05 +0000

2010: The Year of "Everything Neutrality"...

As early as 1990, telecom industry observers speculated about the shift away from traditional circuit-switched telephony to "Voice Over IP" (VoIP). By the late 1990s, Internet industry observers began using the term "Everything Over IP" (VoIP) to d...

By: The 10 Most Important Info-Tech Policy Books of 2009 — Technology Liberation Front

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:37:23 +0000

[...] Dawn Nunziato is the perfect foil for Larry Downes. Her book is a manifesto for cyber-collectivism and “media access theory.” (For those unfamiliar with media access theory, see my old essay: “Your Soapbox is My Soapbox! Thoughts on the Media Access Movement in General and the Media & Democracy Coalition’s ‘Bill of Media Rights’ in Particular.”) She attempts to bring media access theory up to date by taking the ideas made famous by Jerome Barron, Owen Fiss, Cass Sunstein, and others, and applying them to the Internet and digital technologies. Like those earlier legal thinkers, she argues for “an affirmative conception” of the First Amendment that would allow government to use the First Amendment to “facilitate the conditions necessary for democratic self-government” (whatever that means). Net neutrality regulation becomes one of many ways she would put this theory into action. Importantly, she would not stop with ISPs. She makes the case for extending the entire regulatory regime to Google and search platforms. Welcome to the Brave New World of the the FCC as the Federal Search Commission or Federal Cloud Commission! [...]

By: Should an Independent Regulatory Agency Head Be Visiting the White House This Often? — Technology Liberation Front

Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:13:53 +0000

[...] Internet, recently inquiring about regulation of online television, video games, Google Voice, cloud computing, the Apple apps store, and resurrecting railroad-era concepts of common carriage [...]

By: mwendy

mwendy — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:40:53 +0000

Here's a classic example of what I was talking about above - the upsell of authority / "benefits" by attaching it to an compelling governmental interest (in this case, voting). This one interest could allow the FCC to mandate all sorts of things - communications applications, services, devices, broadband access, subsidies for home PC / broadband use - because to deny them would be to deny the fundamental right of voting.

Don't get me wrong - all American citizens eligible to vote should. As few barriers as possible, consistent with reasonable costs and a fraudless election process, should stand in the way of that process.

But, this apple pie example is how all the other nefarious stuff enters into the picture.

By: Adam Thierer

Adam Thierer — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:23:59 +0000

William… Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I really appreciate it. And you are right to ask where the FCC gets the authority.

By: William

William — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:15:24 +0000

There's no question this FCC is one of the most activist FCC's in history... Remarkably, according to this FCC Public Notice, it looks like they might be getting into the election regulation business as well:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmat...

As I read it, they are using a provision of the Stimulus package for funding broadband programs as cover for having the FCC act as a vehicle for increasing federal involvement and oversight of state and local voter registration and voting processes.

Don't know if this is the basis for starting a regulatory proceeding on the voter registration process, issues related to voter fraud and inquiries on how “we can learn from other nations” with respect to their voting processes, but what authority does the FCC have to be looking into this at all?

By: mwendy

mwendy — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:55:54 +0000

I'm with Adam on this. I think we have become numb to the administrative state and the restrictions held within the Constitution and guiding / organic statutes.

Sorry for being "old school" here - but the upsell creep of the administrative state has softened our critical thinking on these "mundane" regulatory matters, which carry prospective effect (i.e., the weight of law). Now, we just say - "Oh, well, there's a 'public interest' here on matter 'X' - so, it looks OK to me if they find 'new authority' to prosecute that interest."

New authority? From where?

Can you name a single reporter in the mainstream media who understands the importance of the Administratvie Procedure Act (not to mention the restrictions within the Constitution) on how US agencies, like the FCC, regulate our lives?

The more liberally we enable the Constitution's Article 1, Section 8's general welfare, commerce and necessary and proper clauses, the more we eviscerate our essential liberties and freedoms. As to the FCC - if they want "New Authority" over cloud computing (or whatever), then go to Congress and specifically get it. Don't "Kelo" us through administrative shell game.

Rant over.

By: mwendy

mwendy — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:40:53 +0000

By: Adam Thierer

Adam Thierer — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:23:59 +0000

William… Thanks for bringing that to my attention. I really appreciate it. And you are right to ask where the FCC gets the authority.

By: William

William — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:15:24 +0000

By: mwendy

mwendy — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:55:54 +0000

By: Adam Thierer

Adam Thierer — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:02:19 +0000

Perhaps, Mike. Like I said, I could be guilty of being overly paranoid here. Then again, I remember just a few years ago people saying that the FCC's “simple principles” for Net neutrality were just aspirational principles and would never be used to take regulatory action. And look how that story turned out.

By: Mike Sullivan

Mike Sullivan — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:56:03 +0000

It's possible the FCC is just trying to make sure it has the whole picture when it renders its report to
Congress. That doesn't necessarily result in extending its regulatory reach, although that is a possibility. For example, in the media ownership context, the FCC has considered the fact that the media subject to its regulation now compete with media delivered over the Internet and by other unregulated means; while that process is still underway, it has thus far resulted in lessened regulation rather than broadened regulation.