# data[].attributes.headline
what i learned from someone else's padlit 

# data[].attributes.subject
what i learned from someone else's padlit 

# data[].attributes.body
from dondee's padlit is that   Until last year's Supreme Court Brand X decision, telephone and cable based Internet operators were required to make Internet service "available on nondiscriminatory terms and conditions to all comers." Net Neutrality simply restores long-standing prior law.

# data[].attributes.body
I learned from

# data[].attributes.body
When i was reading meah's article I saw that the F.C.C. Vote Paves the Way for New Open Internet Rules.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now

# data[].attributes.body
omething I learned from

# data[].attributes.body
something I learned from Leila is that Montana was the first State to sign for net neutrality

# data[].attributes.body
From

# data[].attributes.body
From Dontes padlet I leaned that in 2004 and 2005 the internet got massive innovations.

# data[].attributes.headline
Southern Poverty Law Center tweet about net nertrality 

# data[].attributes.subject
Southern Poverty Law Center tweet about net nertrality 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Today, the United States Federal Communications Commission voted to eliminate regulations set in place in 2015 that established net neutrality, the premise that internet service providers are legally prohibited from giving different levels of priority to different kinds of data streamed over the internet. These regulations were paramount to the freedom of information over the internet.

What does the repeal mean for internet users?

Without the regulations, the internet may fall into chaos. Fears that ISPs will throttle popular services such as Netflix and YouTube in order to blackmail them are only the most mundane of concerns around the repeal. Users may also find that they have to pay for each individual service: the horrible nightmare of having to sign up for a Twitter subscription from your internet service provider means you would have to spend even more time communicating with them.

The worst concerns, however, are those of censorship; when someone is in control of what media can and cannot be downloaded, there is no stopping them from censoring any negative information about themselves or, even worse, taking bribes to only allow certain kinds of information to be released. In fact, it is because of this that net neutrality should be considered protected by the Constitution, and votes like this shouldn't be possible in the first place: no one, not even the government, can decide what is "fake news" or deserves to be seen, especially not when that entity is in a position to take bribes to influence said decision.

The #FCC just voted to repeal #NetNeutrality. Low income communities & communities of color could be disproportionately affected. "[An] end to net neutrality could cause an increase of media centralisation, censorship and a rise in costs." https://t.co/l3i2jUZcS5
- Southern Poverty Law Center (@splcenter) December 14, 2017

This tweet from the Southern Poverty Law Center demonstrates concerns that the internet is going to become vastly more expensive, and that it will disproportionately affect poor communities.

Millions of Americans wrote e-mails to the FCC or made calls to their senators with services like Fight For the Future and many others. But the voice of democracy was not heard today -- despite an overwhelming outcry for the FCC to reconsider their position on the issue, they forced the vote through anyway. Reddit users have taken to posting information about Congressmen that had accepted "gifts" from internet service providers, essentially accusing them of accepting bribes to allow the FCC to take away the freedom of the internet.

The most frustrating part of this resolution for many Americans is the fact that the FCC has already tried to pass similar resolutions in the recent past, but public disapproval forced them to hold off on the vote. This time, however, the chairman of the FCC, Ajit Pai, decided to hold the vote despite opposition. He claims that repealing net neutrality laws will actually benefit the internet by allowing internet service providers to compete for usage by different services. His claims are dubious at best, and the fact that he is being reviewed for suspicious activity regarding favoritism already doesn't help his case.

There is still hope left for net neutrality

There is one silver lining in the news today: it is possible that the United States Congress can prevent the FCC from enforcing their repeal, and many Americans, elected officials included, are not going to give up without a fight.

Ok, all. The FCC has voted to start rolling back #NetNeutrality. Here's what we do next.

First, recognize this is not unexpected. As I've been saying for weeks, the breakdown of the board suggested this would happen. https://t.co/xWj15rBnqr
- Celeste P. (@Celeste_pewter) December 14, 2017

Minutes after the FCC votes to repeal its net neutrality rules, New York @AGSchneiderman says he will sue to try and stop the rollback https://t.co/vrBKzk7VO1 pic.twitter.com/TSwuPa4J6b
- Mark Berman (@markberman) December 14, 2017

If Congress uses the Congressional Review Act to issue a statement of disapproval of the FCC's decision, it will overturn the vote and set a hard legal precedent that will hopefully prevent them from trying to pass votes like this one and for all. So if you are an American concerned with your ability to enjoy all kinds of media, Join the Battle for the Net, and send Congress a letter telling them to stop this nonsense.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net Neutrality Just Got Eliminated, but There is Still Hope

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Today, the United States Federal Communications Commission voted to eliminate regulations set in place in 2015 that established net neutrality, the premise that internet service providers are legally prohibited from giving different levels of priority to different kinds of data streamed over the internet. These regulations were paramount to the freedom of information over the internet.

# data[].attributes.headline
Net neutrality explained, what it means for UWF

# data[].attributes.subject
Net neutrality explained, what it means for UWF

# data[].attributes.body
Since Net Neutrality was repealed it has been affecting University of West Florida. Net Neutrality has affected some of them in a positive way and negative way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With the recent repeal of net neutrality, there could be positive and negative outcomes that would affect University of West Florida students greatly.

On Dec. 14, 2017, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to implement Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to end net neutrality.

There are a lot of people who are still confused on what exactly is net neutrality is and what it does. Network neutrality means applying well-established "common carrier" rules to the internet in order to protect its freedom and openness.

Common carriage prohibits the owner of a network that holds itself out to all-comers from discriminating against halting, slowing, or otherwise tampering with the transfer of any data.

If the FCC has its way, powerful profit-seeking telecommunication giants will be able to disapprove the content from smaller websites, and favor content providers who have the money to pay for better access.

In case there is any confusion on what the problem is, most people obtain high-speed internet access from only a few telecom giants, such as AT&T, Comcast, Cox, CenturyLink, Charter, and Verizon. When sending or receiving data through the internet, it is expected that these companies transfer the data from one end of the network to the other, we don't expect them to analyze or manipulate it.

With the new technology, telecommunication companies are able to examine every piece of information we send or receive online, such as websites, email, videos, internet phone calls, data generated by games, and social networks. They will be able to interfere with the data flow by slowing down or blocking traffic, with communicators that aren't compensating them, and speeding up traffic with companies that are paying them extra for the benefits and advantages.

In 2015, the FCC put protections in place to prevent broadband providers from doing just that, but now, the Trump FCC is moving to do away with those protections.

Since the FCC has voted to implement the plan to end net neutrality, the fight now shifts to the U.S. Congress, where pro-network neutrality members will press to use something called the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to undo this hurried and imprudent action.

The CRA is a relatively new tool that allows Congress to reverse regulatory actions within 60 legislative days of their enactment.

Even with the decision still in the air with Congress, the state of Montana has become the first state to implement net neutrality after the FCC.

The internet has become such an important part of our lives, it is impossible to get through life without using the internet, especially for college students.

What does the end of net neutrality mean for us? Access to the internet is extremely important for college students' ability to excel as the web is used for studying, academic research and general use.

"The section of UWF students that must deal with a lot of data transfer through the Internet on a regular basis would be the ones to be affected the most, but there might not be too many such students," Computer Science professor Amitabh Mishra said. "I don't see UWF students' academic use of internet impacted considerably due to recent changes in the net neutrality policy."

Uninhibited internet access is also of high importance to college students who primarily take online classes or do much of their coursework from home, using their own internet access.

"I would expect the Internet to be a bit slower due to these changes, but not slow to a trickle or a complete lack of access," Mishra said.

If net neutrality is repealed and ISPs begin to slow internet speeds unless a fee is paid, institutions may decide to pay for faster internet for the benefit of their students, and that would mean an increase in tuition.

Colleges may determine to pay more to make sure online content will continue being accessible at a reasonable speed for students, who use such resources for studying or class assignments.

With the possible changes that could come with tuition at any university, understanding that being able to have a faster internet is a definite necessity that colleges will need.

Could this impact our university's tuition greatly?

"UWF is a very large institutional user of internet resources and as such we have a certain amount of negotiating power, any changes would be small and incremental rather than large and dislocating," Computer Science professor John Coffey said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality explained, what it means for UWF

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
With the recent repeal of net neutrality, there could be positive and negative outcomes that would affect University of West Florida students greatly. On Dec. 14, 2017, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to implement Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to end net neutrality.

# data[].attributes.headline
Legislator introduces net neutrality bill

# data[].attributes.subject
Legislator introduces net neutrality bill

# data[].attributes.body
Scott Kawasaki introduced a bill, House Bill 277, that would protect net neutrality rules for Alaskan internet users. “If we can’t pass the bill maybe we can at least pass a strongly worded message from our state to Congress that says that we should bring back net neutrality,” Kawasaki said  on Thursday. “The message that we want to deliver to Congress is that we’d like Congress to overturn the FCC’s ruling that ended net neutrality.”

# data[].attributes.headline
Montana Gov. signed a bill making Net Neutrality illegal in that state.

# data[].attributes.subject
Montana Gov. signed a bill making Net Neutrality illegal in that state.

# data[].attributes.body
Any internet carrier (AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, etc.) with a state government licence cannot charge more for internet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
But Mr. Bullock and some public interest advocates who have advised him argue that the state has wide latitude to set conditions to any contracts with the government - one of the biggest customers in most cities and states - to get around the F.C.C.'s restrictions.

"If you want to do business with Montana, there are standards on net neutrality you will have to follow," Mr. Bullock said.

The idea is similar to bills in New York and Rhode Island that are also trying to use government contracts to regulate the practices of internet service providers. Those efforts are proceeding slowly, along with multiple lawsuits filed last week by more than 20 state attorneys general and public interest groups.

Broadband providers say they will have difficulty following different state laws related to net neutrality. Various trade groups said they were watching Montana's action and other state bills and were considering lawsuits.

"Following patchwork of legislation or regulation is costly and makes it even harder to invest in networks," said Matt Polka, president of the American Cable Association, a lobbying group for small- and midsize broadband providers.

Mr. Bullock, a Democrat, said the executive order was the fastest and surest way to bring back net neutrality rules and to head off any decisions by internet service providers to begin throttling or charging websites more to reach consumers.

"There is a long history of government using its procurement power to get companies to adopt requirements, and this is no different," said Travis LeBlanc, an enforcement chief for the F.C.C. during the Obama administration. "This action by Governor Bullock will provide immediate relief."

Though the order applies only to Montana, it could have a spillover effect, as seen with auto emissions rules and cybersecurity notification laws that began in a few states but eventually became national standards.

"This is simple plug and play for other states to do as well," Mr. Bullock said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Montana Governor Signs Order to Force Net Neutrality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
But Mr. Bullock and some public interest advocates who have advised him argue that the state has wide latitude to set conditions to any contracts with the government - one of the biggest customers in most cities and states - to get around the F.C.C.'s restrictions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Net neutrality will be enforced in New York under orders from governor

# data[].attributes.subject
Net neutrality will be enforced in New York under orders from governor

# data[].attributes.body
1. New York has been the second state to enforce net neutrality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same. The states are challenging the Federal Communications Commission, which repealed its own net neutrality rules and preempted states from imposing similar ones.

The executive orders attempt an end run around the FCC's preemption of local laws. Instead of directly requiring all ISPs to follow net neutrality principles, the executive orders require state agencies to only do business with ISPs that offer neutral networks.

"The FCC's dangerous ruling goes against the core values of our democracy, and New York will do everything in our power to protect net neutrality and the free exchange of ideas," Cuomo said in an announcement yesterday.

No charging extra for specific content

The order says state agencies and departments may not "enter into any contracts for Internet service unless the ISPs agree to adhere to net neutrality principles." ISPs would disqualify themselves from obtaining state contracts if they "block, throttle, or prioritize Internet content or applications or require that end users pay different or higher rates to access specific types of content or applications."

The New York order goes beyond Montana's by including the specific provision against charging users higher rates to access specific types of Internet content and applications.

States are using a few strategies to rebel against the FCC's elimination of net neutrality rules. There is net neutrality legislation pending in several states, and 22 attorneys general are suing the FCC in an attempt to reverse the net neutrality repeal.

In general, Democratic state officials are the ones challenging the FCC. Every US state with a Democratic attorney general is part of the lawsuit against the commission, but no Republican state attorneys general joined the effort.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality will be enforced in New York under orders from governor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same.

# data[].attributes.headline
1- should a speedy internet be required for everybody or only some people? that's the debate behind net neutrality.

# data[].attributes.subject
1- should a speedy internet be required for everybody or only some people? that's the debate behind net neutrality.

# data[].attributes.body
2- the vote for net neutrality was reported upside down and backward.

3-  Suzanne Spector was asked about the net neutrality complaints and she said that,   "the later version was not an effort to fix a flawed story, but rather an example of something The Times does on a daily basis."

https://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/22/readers-say-a-net-neutrality-vote-was-reported-upside-down-and-backward/?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FNet%20Neutrality&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=search&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=collection

# data[].attributes.headline
THE FCC JUST KILLED NET NEUTRALITY. NOW WHAT?

# data[].attributes.subject
THE FCC JUST KILLED NET NEUTRALITY. NOW WHAT?

# data[].attributes.body
1. What the FCC is doing isn't technically  wrong or illegal

2. The main argument the FCC uses is that net neutrality causes Internet providers to cut back on infrastructure upgrades but many companies said this wasn't true

I learned that the FCC voted 3-2 in favor of getting rid of it from Justin Reid's padlet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to dismantle its net neutrality regulations. But that won't end the fight over rules that prohibit internet service providers from creating fast lanes for some content, while blocking or throttling others.

Most immediately, the activity will move to the courts, where the advocacy group Free Press, and probably others, will challenge the FCC's decision. The most likely argument: that the commission's decision violates federal laws barring agencies from crafting "arbitrary and capricious" regulations. After all, the FCC's net neutrality rules were just passed in 2015. Activists and many members of Congress, including at least six Republicans, pushed for a delay in the vote, but apart from a brief delay due to a security issue, the vote occurred as planned.

But as capricious as the current FCC's about-face may seem, legal experts say the challenges won't be a slam-dunk case. Federal agencies are allowed to change their minds about previous regulations, so long as they adequately explain their reasoning. "It's not carte blanche," says Marc Martin, chair of law firm Perkins Coie's communications practice. "You can't make it obvious that it's just based on politics." Martin says the burden of proof will be on net neutrality advocates challenging the agency.

The FCC's main argument for revoking the 2015 rules is that the regulations hurt investment in broadband infrastructure. But, as WIRED recently detailed, many broadband providers actually increased their investments, while those that cut back on spending told shareholders that the net neutrality rules didn't affect their plans.

University of Pennsylvania Law School professor Christopher Yoo says courts generally defer to an agency's expertise in interpreting evidence submitted into the record. "Courts generally side with agencies on those types of issues," Yoo says.

Martin says net neutrality advocates could also argue that the agency's decision-making process was corrupted by the flood of fake comments left by bots. But FCC Chair AJit Pai will argue that the agency discarded low-quality and repeated comments and focused only on matters of substance, which Martin says may well be enough to sway a court.

Broadband providers say the public has nothing to worry about. AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon, among others, have promised not to block or throttle content. But those promises leave internet providers with quite a bit of room to prioritize their own content, or content from their partners.

AT&T, for example, already allows its DirecTV Now video-streaming service to bypass mobile subscribers' data limits. Verizon does much the same with its Go90 video service. Sling TV and Netflix, on the other hand, still count towards customers' data caps. The end of the FCC's current rules will allow companies to expand the ways they prioritize certain services over others.

Harold Feld of the advocacy group Public Knowledge recommends that people concerned with net neutrality keep a watchful eye on internet providers and file complaints about prioritizing or throttling with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice, though those agencies won't have the broad authority that the FCC has under the 2015 rules. He also thinks it's worth fighting for state-level laws to protect net neutrality, even though the FCC's order blocks states from making their own net neutrality rules. Martin and Feld both think courts might throw out that provision of the FCC's order even if they uphold the rest.

Just about everyone agrees that the real future of net neutrality will be decided in Congress. Free Press, Demand Progress, and other groups are pushing Congress to overturn the FCC's decision to revoke the net neutrality rules; the group suggests Congress do this by a joint resolution, the same legal framework it employed earlier this year to undo internet-privacy rules the FCC adopted last year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The FCC Just Killed Net Neutrality. Now What?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Federal Communications Commission voted Thursday to dismantle its net neutrality regulations. But that won't end the fight over rules that prohibit internet service providers from creating fast lanes for some content, while blocking or throttling others. Most immediately, the activity will move to the courts, where the advocacy group Free Press, and probably others, will challenge the FCC's decision.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The FCC ended the internet as we know it
2. The vote was won by the FCC 3-2
3. More money owed for faster service which isn't right

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The repeal of "net neutrality" rules that allowed consumers to have equal access to the internet has upset Florida's U.S. Democratic Senator.

On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission, or the FCC, voted 3-2 to end "net neutrality." Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) says that means they voted to allow internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon to charge more for faster speeds, and slow or block access to certain websites.

"The Republican-led FCC just turned its back on consumers," said Nelson, in a YouTube video. "By voting to give internet providers the ability to decide what websites their customers will see, how fast they'll see them and how much they're going to have to pay, the FCC just ended the internet as we know it."

Meanwhile, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has never liked the Obama-era rules, calling "net neutrality" an unnecessary regulation of the internet.

Copyright 2017 WFSU. To see more, visit WFSU.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
FCC Repeal Of 'Net Neutrality' Rules Upsets Florida's U.S. Senator Bill Nelson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The repeal of "net neutrality" rules that allowed consumers to have equal access to the internet has upset Florida's U.S. Democratic Senator. On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission, or the FCC, voted 3-2 to end "net neutrality." Sen.

# data[].attributes.headline
In protests of Net Neutrality Repeal, Teenagers voices stood out. 

# data[].attributes.subject
In protests of Net Neutrality Repeal, Teenagers voices stood out. 

# data[].attributes.body
1.) young people who have grown who have grown up knowing an open internet organized rallies, streamed the F.C.C vote in class and plan to keep fighting.  https://www.nytimes.com/topic/subject/net-neutrality

# data[].attributes.body
1.) 21 U.S states are trying to sue Net Neutrality.
2.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Reuters) - A group of 21 U.S. state attorneys general filed suit to challenge the Federal Communications Commission's decision to do away with net neutrality on Tuesday while Democrats said they needed just one more vote in the Senate to repeal the FCC ruling.

The state attorneys, including those of California, New York and Virginia as well as the District of Columbia, filed a petition to challenge the action, calling it "arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion" and saying that it violated federal laws and regulations.

The petition was filed with a federal appeals court in Washington as Senate Democrats said on Tuesday they had the backing of 50 members of the 100-person chamber for repeal, leaving them just one vote short of a majority.

Even if Democrats could win a majority in the Senate, a repeal would also require winning a vote in the House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a greater majority, and would still be subject to a likely veto by President Donald Trump.

Senator Ed Markey said in a statement that all 49 Democrats in the upper chamber backed the repeal. Earlier this month, Republican Senator Susan Collins said she would back the effort to overturn the FCC's move. Democrats need 51 votes to win any proposal in the Republican-controlled Senate because Vice President Mike Pence can break any tie.

Trump backed the FCC action, the White House said last month, and overturning a presidential veto requires a two-thirds vote of both chambers.

States said the lawsuit was filed in an abundance of caution because, typically, a petition to challenge would not be filed until the rules legally take effect, which is expected later this year.

Internet advocacy group Free Press, the Open Technology Institute and Mozilla Corp filed similar protective petitions on Tuesday.

The FCC voted in December along party lines to reverse rules introduced in 2015 that barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization. The new rules will not take effect for at least three months, the FCC has said.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said the issue would be a major motivating factor for the young voters the party is courting.

A trade group representing major tech companies including Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc and Amazon.com Inc said it would support legal challenges to the reversal.

The FCC vote in December marked a victory for AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc and handed them power over what content consumers can access on the internet. It was the biggest win for FCC Chairman Ajit Pai in his sweeping effort to undo many telecommunications regulations.

While the FCC order grants internet providers sweeping new powers it does require public disclosure of any blocking practices. Internet providers have vowed not to change how consumers obtain online content.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden, a Republican, said in an interview on Tuesday he planned to hold a hearing on paid prioritization. He has urged Democrats to work constructively on a legislative solution to net neutrality "to bring certainty and clarity going forward and ban behaviors like blocking and throttling."

He said he does not believe a vote to overturn the FCC decision would get a majority in the U.S. House. Representative Mike Doyle, a Democrat, said Tuesday that his bill to reverse the FCC decision had 80 co-sponsors.

Paid prioritization is part of American life, Walden said. "Where do you want to sit on the airplane? Where do you want to sit on Amtrak?" he said.

Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Cynthia Osterman and Leslie Adler

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
21 states sue to keep net neutrality as Senate Democrats reach 50 vote

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A group of 21 U.S. state attorneys general filed suit to challenge the Federal Communications Commission's decision to do away with net neutrality on Tuesday while Democrats said they needed just one more vote in the Senate to repeal the FCC ruling.

# data[].attributes.body
If you go and read on the link it talks about the beginning of all of this. The article talks about how Montana was the first state  to take action in this with other states like  California, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington. They all wanted more and more information about all of this, they also were saying they wanted to keep the internet open for all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
States are starting to make good on their promises to fight for net neutrality in the wake of the Federal Communications Commission's decision to jettison rules that banned broadband providers from blocking or discriminating against internet content.

On Monday, Montana Governor Steve Bullock signed an executive order effectively barring state agencies from doing business with internet service providers that violate net neutrality. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a similar order on Wednesday. The moves follow a lawsuit filed last week by 21 states and the District of Columbia challenging the FCC's decision to overturn its own protections.

Montana is the first state to take action to encourage broadband providers to follow the principles of net neutrality, but others, including California, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington are considering legislative action. Meanwhile, New York City officials published a request for information about how the city can best monitor the connection speeds and network performance of broadband providers. Mayor Bill de Blasio promised the city would do "everything within our power to keep the internet open and accessible for all" after the FCC voted to repeal its rules.

Activists and lawmakers are still trying to restore net neutrality protections at the federal level, but former FCC enforcement chief Travis LeBlanc says state and local action probably has the best chance of making an impact in the short term.

Activists say 50 senators are supporting a measure that would reverse the FCC's decision and restore the agency's Obama-era net neutrality rules. But LeBlanc, now a partner at the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner, says the legislation faces stiffer opposition in the House, and would need to be signed by President Donald Trump.

The state lawsuit, led by New York state attorney general Eric Schneiderman, argues that the FCC's decision to reverse its net neutrality rules less than three years after adopting them is a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which bans federal agencies from making "arbitrary and capricious" rules. All 21 states with Democratic attorneys general joined the suit, Ars Technica noted. No state with a Republican attorney general joined the suit.

Several advocacy groups have filed similar suits. But LeBlanc says the suits could take years to resolve. States and cities can have a more immediate impact, but there are questions about just how far they can go to protect net neutrality.

When the FCC voted last month to overturn its rules, the agency also banned states from passing their own rules mandating net neutrality. States will likely challenge those rules, but many are also trying to work around them. The executive order in Montana, for example, doesn't mandate net neutrality directly, but uses the state's role as a major broadband customer as leverage over the industry.

"This is a simple step states can take to preserve and protect net neutrality," Bullock said in a statement. "We can't wait for folks in Washington DC to come to their senses and reinstate these rules."

Legislators in Rhode Island and New York have proposed bills that would take a similar approach. Washington Governor Jay Inslee initially proposed a similar strategy last year, but the state House of Representatives is now considering a bill that would ban blocking and throttling of content, and limit the creation of "fast lanes" to cases in which a broadband provider can demonstrate that it would be in the public interest. California, likewise, is considering two separate bills that would mandate net neutrality.

If Washington or California pass one of these bills, the FCC will likely challenge the states. But LeBlanc thinks the states have a strong case that the FCC lacks authority to preempt state laws over net neutrality. "It's hard to say there's a conflict with federal rules when the FCC is removing rules, and it's hard to say the government has occupied the field, when they're not doing anything on the field," he says.

There's no guarantee the states will act. After Congress overturned a set of broadband privacy protections last year, lawmakers in 22 states proposed their own privacy rules, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But only Colorado has adopted one of these proposals so far.

Another challenge for states trying to police net neutrality will be determining whether internet providers are favoring certain content. That's the challenge that New York City is tackling with its request for proposals. Software such as the new iPhone app WeHe tries to spot net neutrality violations by comparing the connection speeds of various video sites to see if some are significantly faster or slower than others. But it can be tough to prove that such disparities are caused by deliberate action on the part of broadband providers, as opposed to temporary network congestion or other technical issues.

LeBlanc says that's one advantage of having net neutrality protection shift to states and cities for the time being: Each one can experiment with different policies and enforcement techniques.

Updated 1/24/2018, 1:00pm EST: This story has been updated to include New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's executive order.

Staying Neutral

After remaining muted for most of last year, big tech companies recently pledged to join lawsuits to preserve net neutrality.

Net neutrality is likely to be a campaign issue in congressional and other elections this year.

Without net neutrality, the internet may begin to resemble mobile-data plans, where preferred services are exempt from data caps.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
States and Cities Keep the Battle for Net Neutrality Alive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
States are starting to make good on their promises to fight for net neutrality in the wake of the Federal Communications Commission's decision to jettison rules that banned broadband providers from blocking or discriminating against internet content. On Monday, Montana Governor Steve Bullock signed an executive order effectively barring state agencies from doing business with internet service providers that violate net neutrality.

# data[].attributes.body
New York was the second state to sign for net neutrality the New York governor signed on Wednesday January 25, 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same. The states are challenging the Federal Communications Commission, which repealed its own net neutrality rules and preempted states from imposing similar ones.

The executive orders attempt an end run around the FCC's preemption of local laws. Instead of directly requiring all ISPs to follow net neutrality principles, the executive orders require state agencies to only do business with ISPs that offer neutral networks.

"The FCC's dangerous ruling goes against the core values of our democracy, and New York will do everything in our power to protect net neutrality and the free exchange of ideas," Cuomo said in an announcement yesterday.

No charging extra for specific content

The order says state agencies and departments may not "enter into any contracts for Internet service unless the ISPs agree to adhere to net neutrality principles." ISPs would disqualify themselves from obtaining state contracts if they "block, throttle, or prioritize Internet content or applications or require that end users pay different or higher rates to access specific types of content or applications."

The New York order goes beyond Montana's by including the specific provision against charging users higher rates to access specific types of Internet content and applications.

States are using a few strategies to rebel against the FCC's elimination of net neutrality rules. There is net neutrality legislation pending in several states, and 22 attorneys general are suing the FCC in an attempt to reverse the net neutrality repeal.

In general, Democratic state officials are the ones challenging the FCC. Every US state with a Democratic attorney general is part of the lawsuit against the commission, but no Republican state attorneys general joined the effort.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality will be enforced in New York under orders from governor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same.

# data[].attributes.body
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality. New York governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order days after Montana governor signed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same. The states are challenging the Federal Communications Commission, which repealed its own net neutrality rules and preempted states from imposing similar ones.

The executive orders attempt an end run around the FCC's preemption of local laws. Instead of directly requiring all ISPs to follow net neutrality principles, the executive orders require state agencies to only do business with ISPs that offer neutral networks.

"The FCC's dangerous ruling goes against the core values of our democracy, and New York will do everything in our power to protect net neutrality and the free exchange of ideas," Cuomo said in an announcement yesterday.

No charging extra for specific content

The order says state agencies and departments may not "enter into any contracts for Internet service unless the ISPs agree to adhere to net neutrality principles." ISPs would disqualify themselves from obtaining state contracts if they "block, throttle, or prioritize Internet content or applications or require that end users pay different or higher rates to access specific types of content or applications."

The New York order goes beyond Montana's by including the specific provision against charging users higher rates to access specific types of Internet content and applications.

States are using a few strategies to rebel against the FCC's elimination of net neutrality rules. There is net neutrality legislation pending in several states, and 22 attorneys general are suing the FCC in an attempt to reverse the net neutrality repeal.

In general, Democratic state officials are the ones challenging the FCC. Every US state with a Democratic attorney general is part of the lawsuit against the commission, but no Republican state attorneys general joined the effort.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality will be enforced in New York under orders from governor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New York has become the second state to enforce net neutrality with an executive order that prevents ISPs from obtaining state contracts unless they follow net neutrality principles. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the executive order yesterday, days after Montana Governor Steve Bullock did the same.

# data[].attributes.body
California is trying to bring back Net Neutrality. There is a debate between

# data[].attributes.headline
what I learned from Gavin Flati's  article is that the open internet allows people of color to tell their own stories and organize for racial justice.

# data[].attributes.subject
what I learned from Gavin Flati's  article is that the open internet allows people of color to tell their own stories and organize for racial justice.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Massive innovation on the internet took place in 2004 and 2005.
2. Network operators want to maximize their profits and minimize competition at the consumer's expense.
3.  Net Neutrality promotes broadband development by increasing the cost of most things in the internet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jump to navigation Skip navigation

Myth: Net Neutrality would, for the first time, regulate the Internet.
FACT: Massive innovation on the Internet since its creation occurred under pre-2005 Net Neutrality protection. Until last year's Supreme Court Brand X decision, telephone and cable based Internet operators were required to make Internet service "available on nondiscriminatory terms and conditions to all comers." Net Neutrality simply restores long-standing prior law.

MYTH: Net Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.
FACT: There are numerous examples of network providers engaging in content or user discrimination that will only grow without Net Neutrality. This year, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com, an advocacy campaign opposing AOL's pay-to-send e-mail scheme. Similarly, BellSouth has blocked its customers' access to MySpace.com in Tennessee and Florida. Net discrimination is real and happening every day.

MYTH: Net Neutrality will stifle innovation on the Internet.
FACT: Today's vibrant Internet economy resulted from Net Neutrality protection during the Internet's infancy. Net Neutrality spurred innovation and commerce by preventing large companies from leveraging market power to stifle competition from smaller, dynamic web innovators.

MYTH: Network operators are protecting consumers.
FACT: Like any monopoly or oligopoly, network operators want to maximize their profits and minimize competition at the consumer's expense. Network providers opposed to Net Neutrality such as AT&T, BellSouth, Comcast, Sprint, Time Warner, and Verizon have already shown they cannot be trusted to self-regulate in the interest of consumers in either content or cost.

MYTH: Net Neutrality will cause broadband networks to be abandoned.
FACT: Net Neutrality promotes broadband development by increasing Internet services and applications that generate new consumer demand. The increased demand for broadband resulting from Net Neutrality will lead to more investment in the next generation broadband networks, including the continued growth of fiber-optic cable.

MYTH: Yahoo and Google get a "free ride" from network operators.
FACT: These Internet companies pay much more than the average web operator because their sites use greater bandwidth from host sites than other operators. There is nothing wrong with bandwidth purchasing plans based upon usage. Net Neutrality simply ensures that network operators cannot play favorites with their own services.

MYTH: Net Neutrality interferes with network management.
FACT: There is no evidence that this occurred prior to last year, when Net Neutrality was protected. Telephone companies have been able to regulate and manage their networks for years under "common carrier" regulations much more stringent than those proposed by Net Neutrality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Myth: Net Neutrality would, for the first time, regulate the Internet. FACT: Massive innovation on the Internet since its creation occurred under pre-2005 Net Neutrality protection. Until last year's Supreme Court Brand X decision, telephone and cable based Internet operators were required to make Internet service "available on nondiscriminatory terms and conditions to all comers."

# data[].attributes.headline
AT&T urges Congress to rewrite net neutrality rules

# data[].attributes.subject
AT&T urges Congress to rewrite net neutrality rules

# data[].attributes.body
1.   The repeal lifted restrictions that kept telephone  companies like AT&T, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc from slowing down  or blocking access

2.  The Republican-majority U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted in December to reverse the Obama administration’s landmark rules except for internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization.

3.  A public backlash to the repeal,  among younger people, has raised concerns among some politicians about how the issue might play out in the 2018 congressional elections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - AT&T Inc urged U.S. Congress on Wednesday to write new laws to govern the internet, seeing that as preferable to future regulatory involvement after the Trump administration voted to rescind so-called net neutrality rules late last year.

The repeal lifted restrictions that kept telecom companies like AT&T, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc from slowing or blocking access to certain content.

But a future FCC could reimpose such rules, and AT&T and others want Congress to step in and write a permanent solution for a more than decade-long dispute that would likely provide fewer consumer protections.

Congress should "end the debate once and for all, by writing new laws that govern the internet and protect consumers," AT&T Chief Executive Randall Stephenson said in full-page newspaper advertisements, reiterating a position the company has held since 2010.

While Congress doing so would limit internet providers' freedom, it would also limit a future FCC's ability to regulate the internet, a prospect service providers fear in part because they believe it could lead to rate regulations.

The Republican-majority U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted in December along party lines to reverse the Obama administration's landmark 2015 rules barring internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization.

Stephenson said AT&T plans "to work with Congress, other internet companies and consumer groups in the coming months to push for an 'Internet Bill of Rights' that permanently protects the open internet for all users."

AT&T wants the rules to apply to all internet-related companies, including social media and content providers like Facebook Inc, Alphabet Inc and Amazon.com Inc, which do not support Congress writing rules governing their conduct.

The Internet Association, which represents companies like Facebook and Google, said in a statement it "is impossible to believe that AT&T is serious when they have such a long track record opposing consumer protections like net neutrality."

A public backlash to the repeal, especially among younger people, has raised concerns among some politicians about how the issue might play out in the 2018 congressional elections.

Republican Senator John Thune, who chairs the Commerce Committee, said he has offered to codify some of the consumer protections net neutrality advocates want, "as long as the regulation is sensible," but said it will be hard to get a compromise with Democrats reluctant to come to the table.

A planned Senate vote on whether to let the FCC repeal stand "gets you nowhere," Thune said, calling it a "shiny object." Even if it passes the Senate, it will not pass the House, "and the president is not going to sign it."

Editing by Chris Sanders and Meredith Mazzilli

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AT&T urges Congress to rewrite net neutrality rules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - AT&T Inc urged U.S. Congress on Wednesday to write new laws to govern the internet, seeing that as preferable to future regulatory involvement after the Trump administration voted to rescind so-called net neutrality rules late last year.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-rosenworcel-fcc-net-neutrality-repeal-20171122-story.html

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/01/26/burger-king-slams-net-neutrality-repeal-in-whopper-commercial.html

# data[].attributes.body
1.  Montana Governor Steve Bullock created and signed a contract that made taking away net neutrality illegal.
2.  New York is one of the biggest states that run on the internet to advertise products and would effect the states in a huge way. The only company that would benefit from taking away net neutrality would be internet companies.
3. Protesters are saying that 50 senators want the Obama-era net neutrality backs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
States are starting to make good on their promises to fight for net neutrality in the wake of the Federal Communications Commission's decision to jettison rules that banned broadband providers from blocking or discriminating against internet content.

On Monday, Montana Governor Steve Bullock signed an executive order effectively barring state agencies from doing business with internet service providers that violate net neutrality. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a similar order on Wednesday. The moves follow a lawsuit filed last week by 21 states and the District of Columbia challenging the FCC's decision to overturn its own protections.

Montana is the first state to take action to encourage broadband providers to follow the principles of net neutrality, but others, including California, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington are considering legislative action. Meanwhile, New York City officials published a request for information about how the city can best monitor the connection speeds and network performance of broadband providers. Mayor Bill de Blasio promised the city would do "everything within our power to keep the internet open and accessible for all" after the FCC voted to repeal its rules.

Activists and lawmakers are still trying to restore net neutrality protections at the federal level, but former FCC enforcement chief Travis LeBlanc says state and local action probably has the best chance of making an impact in the short term.

Activists say 50 senators are supporting a measure that would reverse the FCC's decision and restore the agency's Obama-era net neutrality rules. But LeBlanc, now a partner at the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner, says the legislation faces stiffer opposition in the House, and would need to be signed by President Donald Trump.

The state lawsuit, led by New York state attorney general Eric Schneiderman, argues that the FCC's decision to reverse its net neutrality rules less than three years after adopting them is a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which bans federal agencies from making "arbitrary and capricious" rules. All 21 states with Democratic attorneys general joined the suit, Ars Technica noted. No state with a Republican attorney general joined the suit.

Several advocacy groups have filed similar suits. But LeBlanc says the suits could take years to resolve. States and cities can have a more immediate impact, but there are questions about just how far they can go to protect net neutrality.

When the FCC voted last month to overturn its rules, the agency also banned states from passing their own rules mandating net neutrality. States will likely challenge those rules, but many are also trying to work around them. The executive order in Montana, for example, doesn't mandate net neutrality directly, but uses the state's role as a major broadband customer as leverage over the industry.

"This is a simple step states can take to preserve and protect net neutrality," Bullock said in a statement. "We can't wait for folks in Washington DC to come to their senses and reinstate these rules."

Legislators in Rhode Island and New York have proposed bills that would take a similar approach. Washington Governor Jay Inslee initially proposed a similar strategy last year, but the state House of Representatives is now considering a bill that would ban blocking and throttling of content, and limit the creation of "fast lanes" to cases in which a broadband provider can demonstrate that it would be in the public interest. California, likewise, is considering two separate bills that would mandate net neutrality.

If Washington or California pass one of these bills, the FCC will likely challenge the states. But LeBlanc thinks the states have a strong case that the FCC lacks authority to preempt state laws over net neutrality. "It's hard to say there's a conflict with federal rules when the FCC is removing rules, and it's hard to say the government has occupied the field, when they're not doing anything on the field," he says.

There's no guarantee the states will act. After Congress overturned a set of broadband privacy protections last year, lawmakers in 22 states proposed their own privacy rules, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But only Colorado has adopted one of these proposals so far.

Another challenge for states trying to police net neutrality will be determining whether internet providers are favoring certain content. That's the challenge that New York City is tackling with its request for proposals. Software such as the new iPhone app WeHe tries to spot net neutrality violations by comparing the connection speeds of various video sites to see if some are significantly faster or slower than others. But it can be tough to prove that such disparities are caused by deliberate action on the part of broadband providers, as opposed to temporary network congestion or other technical issues.

LeBlanc says that's one advantage of having net neutrality protection shift to states and cities for the time being: Each one can experiment with different policies and enforcement techniques.

Updated 1/24/2018, 1:00pm EST: This story has been updated to include New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's executive order.

Staying Neutral

After remaining muted for most of last year, big tech companies recently pledged to join lawsuits to preserve net neutrality.

Net neutrality is likely to be a campaign issue in congressional and other elections this year.

Without net neutrality, the internet may begin to resemble mobile-data plans, where preferred services are exempt from data caps.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
States and Cities Keep the Battle for Net Neutrality Alive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
States are starting to make good on their promises to fight for net neutrality in the wake of the Federal Communications Commission's decision to jettison rules that banned broadband providers from blocking or discriminating against internet content. On Monday, Montana Governor Steve Bullock signed an executive order effectively barring state agencies from doing business with internet service providers that violate net neutrality.

# data[].attributes.headline
Montana Governor Signs Order to Force Net Neutrality 

# data[].attributes.subject
Montana Governor Signs Order to Force Net Neutrality 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
But Mr. Bullock and some public interest advocates who have advised him argue that the state has wide latitude to set conditions to any contracts with the government - one of the biggest customers in most cities and states - to get around the F.C.C.'s restrictions.

"If you want to do business with Montana, there are standards on net neutrality you will have to follow," Mr. Bullock said.

The idea is similar to bills in New York and Rhode Island that are also trying to use government contracts to regulate the practices of internet service providers. Those efforts are proceeding slowly, along with multiple lawsuits filed last week by more than 20 state attorneys general and public interest groups.

Broadband providers say they will have difficulty following different state laws related to net neutrality. Various trade groups said they were watching Montana's action and other state bills and were considering lawsuits.

"Following patchwork of legislation or regulation is costly and makes it even harder to invest in networks," said Matt Polka, president of the American Cable Association, a lobbying group for small- and midsize broadband providers.

Mr. Bullock, a Democrat, said the executive order was the fastest and surest way to bring back net neutrality rules and to head off any decisions by internet service providers to begin throttling or charging websites more to reach consumers.

"There is a long history of government using its procurement power to get companies to adopt requirements, and this is no different," said Travis LeBlanc, an enforcement chief for the F.C.C. during the Obama administration. "This action by Governor Bullock will provide immediate relief."

Though the order applies only to Montana, it could have a spillover effect, as seen with auto emissions rules and cybersecurity notification laws that began in a few states but eventually became national standards.

"This is simple plug and play for other states to do as well," Mr. Bullock said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Montana Governor Signs Order to Force Net Neutrality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
But Mr. Bullock and some public interest advocates who have advised him argue that the state has wide latitude to set conditions to any contracts with the government - one of the biggest customers in most cities and states - to get around the F.C.C.'s restrictions.

# data[].attributes.body
What if all content vanishes without warning or explanation? You would most likely think that something is wrong with your Wi-Fi. But it would because the F.C.C. The F.C.C wanted to repeal Net Neutrality. Which meant that you have to pay more money to get high speed internet. Not everyone could afford to pay just to look something up on the internet. For example a lot of people shop online they would have to pay money just to pay more money to buy something offline. Its just not fair.

# data[].attributes.body
The Effects Of Ending Net Neutrality

1. The federal communication commission on Thursday abrogated the very limited net neutrality regulations.
2. It is hardly a secret that a American telecommunications markets are monopolized by a very few large corporations.
3.  Mr. Pai and the end of net neutrality basically explains everything that is currently wrong with Washington.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/15/opinion/fcc-net-neutrality.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FNet%20Neutrality

# data[].attributes.body
Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order Wednesday in an attempt to boost net neutrality in New York. Internet providers will have to continue to follow net neutrality regulations in New York if they want to have contracts with state government.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CLOSE

ALBANY - Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order Wednesday in an attempt to promote net neutrality in New York.

Internet providers will have to continue to follow net neutrality regulations in New York if they want to have contracts with state government, Cuomo said, despite the repeal by the Federal Communications Commission last month.

"The FCC's dangerous ruling goes against the core values of our democracy, and New York will do everything in our power to protect net neutrality and the free exchange of ideas," Cuomo said in a statement.

"With this executive order, we reaffirm our commitment to freedom and democracy and help ensure that the internet remains free and open to all."

More: Don't panic over net neutraility

New York to look at legalizing recreational marijuana

Analysis: Cuomo eyes harmony in Albany, acrimony with Washington

The governor's executive order directed the state not to have any contracts for internet services unless those internet service providers were willing to agree to follow the net neutrality rules.

Without net neutrality rules, internet service providers have the right to slow down internet speeds, block or prioritize certain webpages and content over others and could require users to pay higher rates to have access to certain online content.

The Trump administration said the change was important because more government regulation of the internet could hurt providers, as well as allowing for more choices for consumers.

But Cuomo knocked the federal regulation, and, under his order, any new or renewed internet contract with the state signed after March 1 will require the internet provider to sign an agreement to abide by the net neutrality laws.

The executive order notes that many of the internet-service providers in New York have already made public pledges to continue to have a free and open internet despite the FCC's recall of net neutrality.

After the initial ruling to repeal net neutrality by the FCC, 21 states, including New York, filed legal papers to fight the ruling.

Last Monday, the governor of Montana signed a similar executive order to attempt to protect net neutrality there.

School districts in New York said they too are looking at their legal options.

"Net neutrality prevents ISPs from blocking or discriminating against online educational content, or charging small online education companies significantly more to deliver content. That could impact school districts," the state School Boards Association said.

Read or Share this story: http://on.rocne.ws/2FaOxGJ

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality: Forget about working in NY without it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CLOSE ALBANY - Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order Wednesday in an attempt to promote net neutrality in New York. Internet providers will have to continue to follow net neutrality regulations in New York if they want to have contracts with state government, Cuomo said, despite the repeal by the Federal Communications Commission last month.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Montana is the first state to rewrite the net neutrality. Internet service providers can't block or slow down or create internet fast lanes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-neutrality.html
2. AT&T urges congress to rewrite net neutrality.  On Wednesday to write new laws to govern the internet.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-att/att-urges-congress-to-rewrite-net-neutrality-rules-idUSKBN1FD2CP
3.  New York's governor has signed a order on net neutrality. The state is the second to collide with net neutrality.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/01/24/defying-the-fcc-new-yorks-governor-has-signed-an-ex
I learned from Alyssa Santiago post that the University of Maryland's school has an 83% of people are against the F.C.C.'s Plan.

# data[].attributes.headline
PA Pursuing Legal Action  After Net Neutrality Repeal

# data[].attributes.subject
PA Pursuing Legal Action  After Net Neutrality Repeal

# data[].attributes.body
1)  Pennsylvania is working with other states to vote to rollback net neutrality.

2.  University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy has 83% of people are against of the FCC plan to take away net neutrality.

3.  Apparently that 2 million comments on net neutrality were fake and sent to the FCC.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pennsylvania will join other states in pursuing legal action following the Federal Communications Commission's vote to rollback net neutrality.

State Attorney General Josh Shapiro's office released a statement noting that the 3-2 decision by the FCC commissioners on Thursday will "face serious legal challenges."

"The vote by the Federal Communications Commission to gut net neutrality could end the internet as we know it. The FCC action undermines free speech and is bad for consumers and business-especially startups and small businesses," Shapiro said.

Net neutrality goes on the idea that internet traffic should be treated on a level playing field and service providers are not able to favor certain services or content providers based on how much customers pay. Opponents have stated their worries that cancelling regulations on net neutrality would create an unfair advantage to large content producers, internet service providers and streaming services while potentially cost consumers more money. To calm fears, those in support of the repeal have said the free market would make sure the playing field remains level.

Shapiro and 17 other attorney generals asked federal officials to delay their vote after discovering as many as 2 million comments on net neutrality that were submitted to the FCC were fake.

In Pennsylvania, between 50,000 to 99,000 fake comments using stolen identities were filed, New York investigators said before Thursday's vote.

"The theft of someone's voice in our democracy cannot stand, and we must first get to the bottom of this massive identity theft," Shapiro stated.

State officials have set up a website where Pennsylvanians can check their names were used without permission.

LevittownNow.com Publisher Tom Sofield joined Local Independent Online News Publishers (LION), a group of 180 local news publishers across the United States, in opposing the regulations that they fear would hurt small businesses and independently owned local news outlets.

A poll by University of Maryland's School of Public Policy states that 83 percent of respondents are against the FCC's plan to repeal net neutrality regulations. The support against the proposal, according to the survey, was bipartisan.

The fight to keep net neutrality rules in place will be fought in the courts and halls of Congress, which can vote to overrule the FCC decision.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
PA Pursuing Legal Action After Net Neutrality Repeal - NewtownPANow.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pennsylvania will join other states in pursuing legal action following the Federal Communications Commission's vote to rollback net neutrality. State Attorney General Josh Shapiro's office released a statement noting that the 3-2 decision by the FCC commissioners on Thursday will "face serious legal challenges."