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

# data[].attributes.body
What I learned about Ethan padlet is that net neutrality is the worst in 2015 millions of activist pressured the federal commutation 1 and 2 i learned alot

# data[].attributes.body
What I learned was that the internet can be slower than the ones that actually pay for it.

# data[].attributes.body
one thing i learned from Savannah Padlet is that with net neutrality your wifi can move slowly

# data[].attributes.headline
I learned from alyssas padlet is that many people don't know what net neutrality is so they would have no clue what is going on and pay for something a higher price and not know why

# data[].attributes.subject
I learned from alyssas padlet is that many people don't know what net neutrality is so they would have no clue what is going on and pay for something a higher price and not know why

# data[].attributes.body
I learned from Juliana's that if we don't have Net Neutrality then we would have to pay a lot more than we do now.

# data[].attributes.body
What i learned from Tyler Masters padlet is that the internet is constantly changing

# data[].attributes.body
What i learned from Julianna's padlet is that if we did not have Net Neutrality we would be paying tons of money to use social media and the internet. I also learned that the rules for companies would be different.

# data[].attributes.body
I learned from Tyler masters that the internet is constantly changing.

# data[].attributes.headline
What will happen if Net Neutrality disappears?

# data[].attributes.subject
What will happen if Net Neutrality disappears?

# data[].attributes.body
If Net Neutrality goes away then we will have to pay 2 times or even 3 times more than normal. There could be some controversy with the public and the companies that made this happen.

# data[].attributes.body
Three facts about Net neutrality is that the providers like AT&T, Comcast, and Sprint can not be trusted because of their non-interest in customers saving money. Instead of selling you the cheaper advice they would try to sell you the newer and more expensive device.  Another reason net neutrality is not good because its always changing which will mean that its not the same for everybody.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use. Net Neutrality is the way that the internet has always worked.

In 2015, millions of activists pressured the Federal Communications Commission to adopt historic Net Neutrality rules that keep the internet free and open - allowing people to share and access information of their choosing without interference.

But right now the internet is in peril. On Dec. 14, 2017, the FCC's Republican majority approved Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to gut the Net Neutrality protections.

A former Verizon lawyer and a Trump appointee, Pai ignored the widespread outcry against his plan from millions of people, lawmakers, companies andco public-interest groups.

We can't let Pai have the last word on this - which is why we're calling on Congress to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's vote to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

Urge lawmakers to reverse the FCC vote today.
What is Net Neutrality?
Net Neutrality is the internet's guiding principle: It preserves our right to communicate freely online. Net Neutrality means an internet that enables and protects free speech. It means that ISPs should provide us with open networks - and shouldn't block or discriminate against any applications or content that ride over those networks. Just as your phone company shouldn't decide who you call and what you say on that call, your ISP shouldn't interfere with the content you view or post online.

The internet without Net Neutrality isn't really the internet.
What will happen to the internet now?
Without the Net Neutrality rules, companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be able to call all the shots and decide which websites, content and applications succeed.

These companies can now slow down their competitors' content or block political opinions they disagree with. They can charge extra fees to the few content companies that can afford to pay for preferential treatment - relegating everyone else to a slower tier of service.

The consequences will be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve. People of color, the LGBTQ community, indigenous peoples and religious minorities in the United States rely on the open internet to organize, access economic and educational opportunities, and fight back against systemic discrimination.

Without Net Neutrality, how will activists be able to fight oppression? What will happen to social movements like the Movement for Black Lives? How will the next disruptive technology, business or company emerge if internet service providers let only incumbents succeed?
Tell me about the Title II rules we just lost. Why is Title II so important?
After a decade-long battle over the future of the internet, in 2015 the FCC adopted strong Net Neutrality rules based on Title II of the Communications Act, giving internet users the strongest protections possible.

Courts rejected two earlier FCC attempts to craft Net Neutrality rules and told the agency that if it wanted to adopt such protections it needed to use the proper legal foundation: Title II. In February 2015, the FCC did just that when it reclassified broadband providers as common carriers under Title II.

Title II gave the FCC the authority it needed to ensure that companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon can't block, throttle or otherwise interfere with web traffic. Title II preserved the internet's level playing field, allowing people to share and access information of their choosing. These rules ushered in a historic era of online innovation and investment.

The Title II rules also withstood two challenges from industry. Free Press helped argue the case defending the FCC - and on June 14, 2016, a federal appeals court upheld the open-internet protections in all respects.

We're now preparing to sue the FCC to restore the Title II rules.
Why is Net Neutrality so crucial for communities of color?
The open internet allows people of color to tell their own stories and organize for racial justice. When activists are able to turn out thousands of people in the streets at a moment's notice, it's because ISPs aren't allowed to block their messages or websites.

The mainstream media have long misrepresented, ignored and harmed people of color. And thanks to systemic racism, economic inequality and runaway media consolidation, people of color own just a handful of broadcast stations.

This dynamic will only get worse: In 2017, Chairman Pai demolished most of the remaining media-ownership rules. The lack of diverse ownership is a primary reason why the media have gotten away with criminalizing and dehumanizing communities of color.

The open internet allows people of color and other vulnerable communities to bypass traditional media gatekeepers. Without Net Neutrality, ISPs could block speech and prevent dissident voices from speaking freely online. Without Net Neutrality, people of color would lose a vital platform.

And without Net Neutrality, millions of small businesses owned by people of color wouldn't be able to compete against larger corporations online, which would deepen economic disparities.
Why is Net Neutrality important for businesses?
Net Neutrality is crucial for small business owners, startups and entrepreneurs, who rely on the open internet to launch their businesses, create markets, advertise their products and services, and reach customers. We need the open internet to foster job growth, competition and innovation.

It's thanks to Net Neutrality that small businesses and entrepreneurs have been able to thrive online. But without Net Neutrality, ISPs will exploit their gatekeeper position and destroy the internet's fair and level playing field.

Without Net Neutrality, the next Google or Facebook will never get off the ground.
What can we do now?
Congress has the power to reverse the FCC's vote. Urge your lawmakers to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's decision to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

The Trump administration is doing everything in its power to clamp down on dissent. If we lose Net Neutrality, it will have succeeded.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net Neutrality: What You Need to Know Now

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

# data[].attributes.body
The the facts about net neutrality are
1.)  On Dec. 14 2017 the FCC’s Republican majority approved Chairman Ajit Pais plan to gut the Net Neutrality protections
2.) If you don't pay for the internet the internet would be really slow.
3.) Companies can call shots on what websites succeed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use. Net Neutrality is the way that the internet has always worked.

In 2015, millions of activists pressured the Federal Communications Commission to adopt historic Net Neutrality rules that keep the internet free and open - allowing people to share and access information of their choosing without interference.

But right now the internet is in peril. On Dec. 14, 2017, the FCC's Republican majority approved Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to gut the Net Neutrality protections.

A former Verizon lawyer and a Trump appointee, Pai ignored the widespread outcry against his plan from millions of people, lawmakers, companies andco public-interest groups.

We can't let Pai have the last word on this - which is why we're calling on Congress to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's vote to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

Urge lawmakers to reverse the FCC vote today.
What is Net Neutrality?
Net Neutrality is the internet's guiding principle: It preserves our right to communicate freely online. Net Neutrality means an internet that enables and protects free speech. It means that ISPs should provide us with open networks - and shouldn't block or discriminate against any applications or content that ride over those networks. Just as your phone company shouldn't decide who you call and what you say on that call, your ISP shouldn't interfere with the content you view or post online.

The internet without Net Neutrality isn't really the internet.
What will happen to the internet now?
Without the Net Neutrality rules, companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be able to call all the shots and decide which websites, content and applications succeed.

These companies can now slow down their competitors' content or block political opinions they disagree with. They can charge extra fees to the few content companies that can afford to pay for preferential treatment - relegating everyone else to a slower tier of service.

The consequences will be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve. People of color, the LGBTQ community, indigenous peoples and religious minorities in the United States rely on the open internet to organize, access economic and educational opportunities, and fight back against systemic discrimination.

Without Net Neutrality, how will activists be able to fight oppression? What will happen to social movements like the Movement for Black Lives? How will the next disruptive technology, business or company emerge if internet service providers let only incumbents succeed?
Tell me about the Title II rules we just lost. Why is Title II so important?
After a decade-long battle over the future of the internet, in 2015 the FCC adopted strong Net Neutrality rules based on Title II of the Communications Act, giving internet users the strongest protections possible.

Courts rejected two earlier FCC attempts to craft Net Neutrality rules and told the agency that if it wanted to adopt such protections it needed to use the proper legal foundation: Title II. In February 2015, the FCC did just that when it reclassified broadband providers as common carriers under Title II.

Title II gave the FCC the authority it needed to ensure that companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon can't block, throttle or otherwise interfere with web traffic. Title II preserved the internet's level playing field, allowing people to share and access information of their choosing. These rules ushered in a historic era of online innovation and investment.

The Title II rules also withstood two challenges from industry. Free Press helped argue the case defending the FCC - and on June 14, 2016, a federal appeals court upheld the open-internet protections in all respects.

We're now preparing to sue the FCC to restore the Title II rules.
Why is Net Neutrality so crucial for communities of color?
The open internet allows people of color to tell their own stories and organize for racial justice. When activists are able to turn out thousands of people in the streets at a moment's notice, it's because ISPs aren't allowed to block their messages or websites.

The mainstream media have long misrepresented, ignored and harmed people of color. And thanks to systemic racism, economic inequality and runaway media consolidation, people of color own just a handful of broadcast stations.

This dynamic will only get worse: In 2017, Chairman Pai demolished most of the remaining media-ownership rules. The lack of diverse ownership is a primary reason why the media have gotten away with criminalizing and dehumanizing communities of color.

The open internet allows people of color and other vulnerable communities to bypass traditional media gatekeepers. Without Net Neutrality, ISPs could block speech and prevent dissident voices from speaking freely online. Without Net Neutrality, people of color would lose a vital platform.

And without Net Neutrality, millions of small businesses owned by people of color wouldn't be able to compete against larger corporations online, which would deepen economic disparities.
Why is Net Neutrality important for businesses?
Net Neutrality is crucial for small business owners, startups and entrepreneurs, who rely on the open internet to launch their businesses, create markets, advertise their products and services, and reach customers. We need the open internet to foster job growth, competition and innovation.

It's thanks to Net Neutrality that small businesses and entrepreneurs have been able to thrive online. But without Net Neutrality, ISPs will exploit their gatekeeper position and destroy the internet's fair and level playing field.

Without Net Neutrality, the next Google or Facebook will never get off the ground.
What can we do now?
Congress has the power to reverse the FCC's vote. Urge your lawmakers to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's decision to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

The Trump administration is doing everything in its power to clamp down on dissent. If we lose Net Neutrality, it will have succeeded.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net Neutrality: What You Need to Know Now

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

# data[].attributes.body
Three facts about Net Neutrality are that prices for things we have now will be raised to higher prices, also most people didn't know what Net Neutrality was, and lastly people get mad that they have to pay more money for just little things.

# data[].attributes.body
And a lot of states have net neutrality

# data[].attributes.body
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(https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/net-neutrality-will-be-enforced-in-new-york-under-orders-from-governor/)  Through an executive order, Gov. Steve Bullock declared on Monday that any internet service provider with a state government contract cannot block or charge more for faster delivery of websites, two core aspects of net neutrality, to any customer in the state(https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-neutrality.html) the Nytimes states that if they wouldn’t have passed that law the city would have suffered

# 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
Another fact is that people get really mad over net neutrality

# data[].attributes.body
Three key points are no competition at all exists for more than 56 million households with wired 25MB broadband. 2.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats announced on Tuesday that they were one supporter away from winning a vote to restore the so-called net neutrality rules that the Federal Communications Commission rolled back in December.

But even if Democrats win that vote, Democrats have a long ways to go before they are able to reinstate rules that prevent internet service providers from creating fast and slow lanes for online users. Here is a look at their difficult road ahead, and some of the motivations:
What are the Senate Democrats doing?
Senate Democrats said on Tuesday that all 49 members of their caucus had agreed to sign on to a resolution that would overturn the F.C.C. repeal of net neutrality rules. They are using a tool of the Senate, the Congressional Review Act, which requires a simple majority to overturn a recent order by a federal agency.

The Democrats also have the support of at least one Republican, Senator Susan Collins of Maine. So that leaves them searching for one more Republican to join their effort to get the necessary 51 votes.

"Given how quickly we have gotten 50, we have a real chance of succeeding," Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, said in a statement.
If this passes, are the rules automatically reinstated?
No. The House would have to pass a similar resolution, also using the Congressional Review Act, and the chances there are slim. Representative Mike Doyle, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, is leading the effort there and has 80 Democrats on board so far. But Speaker Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, could refuse to bring it to a vote. And 218 signatures would be needed to send it to the floor through a petition.

Finally, the president would have to sign the legislation. That, too, seems unlikely, since the White House has said it supported the F.C.C.'s vote.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Senate Democrats Push for a Net Neutrality Vote. Do They Have a Chance?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats announced on Tuesday that they were one supporter away from winning a vote to restore the so-called net neutrality rules that the Federal Communications Commission rolled back in December.

# data[].attributes.body
The three key points are;
1- if we don't have net neutrality we would be paying a lot more than we should
2-without the net neutrality rules companies like comcast, at&t and verison  will be able to call all the shots and decide which websites, contacts and applications
3-we would have to pay way more then we already do and people would lose money faster

# data[].attributes.body
1. If you pay less you get horrible quality/slow WiFi/internet
2. You will get less quality things from you internet provider.
3.If you pay more you will have better quality and more things that the network provides.

# data[].attributes.body
Three facts about net neutrality is that prices of things can get raised

# data[].attributes.body
The three key points about Net Neutrality that stood out to me are.
1. The FCC described the Internet as constantly changing.
2. To cut through the jargon of telecommunications policy, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler called the proposal the “strongest open Internet protections ever proposed by the FCC."

3. The rules as described in an FCC fact sheet would also ban service providers from prioritizing Internet traffic belonging to any of their affiliates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Internet rules the Federal Communications Commission proposed Wednesday would apply to fixed and wireless broadband, regulate interconnection deals, and ban fast lanes.

To cut through the jargon of telecommunications policy, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler called the proposal the "strongest open Internet protections ever proposed by the FCC."

Wheeler's proposal would reclassify broadband Internet like a utility, similar to traditional telephones. The stronger authority, recommended by President Obama, would ban service providers from blocking or slowing Internet traffic, while also blocking companies from negotiating deals for faster service.

While the FCC detailed its plan Wednesday, the hundreds of pages of regulations will not be released until after a vote on Feb. 26. And it could be tweaked before then as the commissioners deliberate.

The rules meant to enforce the principles of net neutrality - the idea no piece of Internet traffic should be prioritized over another - have been a year in the making after previous rules were struck down in court last year.

The proposal calls for the commission to reclassify the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act. Broadband Internet would be treated as a "telecommunications service," which comes with stricter regulations than its current designation as an "information service."

Below are six key portions of the plan.
FAST LANES
Advocates had called for reclassification in order to ban companies from negotiating deals for faster service. Advocates for strong rules said the commission's draft proposal last year did not go far enough, because it would leave open the possibility of "fast lane" deals if they were found to be commercially reasonable.

The rules described Wednesday would ban Internet service providers such as Comcast and Verizon from charging web companies to prioritize their Internet traffic in exchange for a fee. Along with preventing service providers from blocking or slowing content, banning fast lanes was a key pillar of net neutrality principles.

The rules as described in an FCC fact sheet would also ban service providers from prioritizing Internet traffic belonging to any of their affiliates. But it would give leniency for "reasonable network management," so long as commercial benefits are not part of the equation.
REGULATING FUTURE CONDUCT
The FCC described the Internet as constantly changing and pointed to the need for a broad standard to regulate future abuse. The FCC's fact sheet said the proposal contains a "general open Internet conduct standard" that would prevent Internet service providers from harming consumers or content providers.

INTERCONNECTION

For the first time, the FCC will have authority to review complaints about deals governing interconnection points. These points are where data is transferred from the backbone networks of the Internet to the last mile, where Internet service providers like Comcast route the content to customers.

Netflix has lamented that it has been forced to pay millions to service providers to relieve congestion at the points of interconnection in order to have its videos stream smoothly. It has been one of the biggest advocates for net rules to cover these deals.

The interconnection deals were exempt from previous net neutrality rules. The commission will allow these deals to go forward, but it will be able to field complaints and take enforcement action against deals it determines are not "just and reasonable."
MOBILE BROADBAND
The rules announced Wednesday would apply to mobile broadband as well as fixed broadband. Previous rules exempted most mobile service from being regulated under previous net neutrality rules. But Wheeler's office noted the increased significance of mobile broadband, citing statistics that 55 percent of traffic is carried over wireless networks.

The Wireless industry has argued that specific sections of the Communications Act bar mobile broadband from being regulated under utility style regulations. But the FCC says the order "persuasively rebuts" those claims.

"We are concerned that the FCC's proposed approach could jeopardize our world leading mobile broadband market and result in significant uncertainty for years to come because the FCC lacks congressional authority to impose Title II public utility regulation on mobile broadband services," CTIA-The Wireless Association said in a statement.
FORBEARANCE
The FCC will not apply a number of provisions that go along with reclassification. Of the dozens of sections of regulations that apply to Title II, the FCC wants about 13 to apply to broadband service.

The most important section would allow the commission to ban "unjust and unreasonable practices," which allows it to enforce the no blocking, throttling or "fast lane" principles. Other sections that will apply relate to allowing consumer complaints, consumer privacy and protecting people with disabilities. The FCC will apply a section meant to boost broadband deployment by providing "fair access to poles and conduits."
UNIVERSAL SERVICE FEES
The new rules will not require broadband providers to pay into an FCC fund that promotes Internet connectivity for poor, rural and otherwise needy people. Phone companies currently pay into that program, called the Universal Service Fund, and the charges are passed along to people through their monthly phone bill. But FCC officials said that those fees would not be extended to Web subscribers, even after reclassification.

The FCC pointed out that the Internet Tax Freedom Act also blocks state and local taxation on Internet service. But some have warned that many local fees would be exempt from that ban.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Internet rules the Federal Communications Commission proposed Wednesday would apply to fixed and wireless broadband, regulate interconnection deals, and ban fast lanes. To cut through the jargon of telecommunications policy, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler called the proposal the "strongest open Internet protections ever proposed by the FCC."

# data[].attributes.body
1.The three key points that stood out to me was net neutrality is taking over the time and making it slower,faster.2. You should never pay more for something less like going to buy some supplies or food. 3. Montana's governor issue something against net neutrality in the article everyone is coming together to save the internet.The FFC was voting to keep the internet accessible

# 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, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Minnesota, have announced their intention to sue to challenge the FCC's Net Neutrality.
- The Net Neutrality first approved by the FCC in 2015
-  Even before the recent wave of bill proposals, states appeared to be on a collision course with the federal government on this issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The next stage in the battle over regulating the internet could take the form of a legal showdown between states and the federal government.

A growing number of Democratic state legislators are proposing bills to preserve net neutrality rules within their borders, following the Republican-led Federal Communications Commission's vote to repeal the protections last month.

Lawmakers in states like New York, Washington and Massachusetts have proposed bills in recent weeks to enforce the principles of net neutrality, which are intended to keep the internet open.

This week, California legislators followed suit by proposing two separate bills to establish net neutrality protections.

"We won't let the Trump-led FCC dismantle our right to a free and open internet," Senator Scott Wiener, a Democrat representing San Francisco, said in a statement introducing one of the bills. "We won't let them create a system where internet providers can favor web sites and services based on who pays more money."

Related: The end of net neutrality: What it all means

The net neutrality rules, first approved by the FCC in 2015, require internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon to treat all online content the same. Providers are barred from deliberately speeding up or slowing down traffic from specific websites, and from putting their own content at an advantage over rivals.

The FCC's decision to overturn these protections has been championed by the telecom industry, but widely criticized by technology companies and consumer advocacy groups.

Given the broad disapproval for the repeal, particularly in blue states, lawmakers may find traction with the bills to preserve net neutrality. If successful, however, this local legislation could hit a legal wall.

A spokeswoman for the FCC directed CNNMoney to a section of the final order for net neutrality, in which the FCC asserts authority to prevent states from pursuing laws inconsistent with the net neutrality repeal.

"We conclude that we should exercise our authority to preempt any state or local requirements that are inconsistent with the federal deregulatory approach we adopt today," according to the final order.

In the section, the FCC also stresses that the burden placed on internet service providers by forcing them to "comply with a patchwork of separate and potentially conflicting requirements" across the country.

Jim Speta, a law professor at Northwestern, says U.S. courts have previously upheld the FCC's ability to preempt state regulations concerning the telecommunications market. These rulings "do provide a basis for the FCC's action to preempt state and local net neutrality," he told CNNMoney.

Even before the recent wave of bill proposals, states appeared to be on a collision course with the federal government on this issue.

The attorneys general of several states, including New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Minnesota, have announced their intention to sue to challenge the FCC's net neutrality repeal.

More than a dozen attorneys general had previously called for the FCC to delay the vote, citing concerns about fraudulent comments filed with the FCC as part of a public feedback period about the proposed net neutrality rollback.

The states will receive some tech support, too. The Internet Association, a trade group representing internet companies like Facebook , Google and Amazon , said Thursday it intended to join the upcoming legal fight to preserve net neutrality.

"Either on the appeal from this order or in a suit directly challenging a state or local law establishing net neutrality," Speta says "I think it a certainty that the courts will be asked to decide the question."

There is still time, however. An FCC official told CNNMoney in December that it could take up to "several months" for the net neutrality repeal to be formally approved by the Office of Management and Budget. Until then, the old rules remain in place.

CNNMoney (New York) First published January 5, 2018: 3:25 PM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net neutrality: States propose bills to preserve protections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A growing number of Democratic state legislators are proposing bills to preserve net neutrality rules within their borders, following the Republican-led Federal Communications Commission's vote to repeal the protections last month. Lawmakers in states like New York, Washington and Massachusetts have proposed bills in recent weeks to enforce the principles of net neutrality, which are intended to keep the internet open.

# data[].attributes.body
Three key points about net neutrality is
1.  Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers. From speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use.
2.  In 2015, millions of activists pressured the Federal Communications Commission to adopt historic Net Neutrality rules that keep the internet free and open — allowing people to share and access information of their choosing without interference.
3. Neutrality is the internet’s guiding principle: It preserves our right to communicate freely online

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality is the basic principle that prohibits internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites you want to use. Net Neutrality is the way that the internet has always worked.

In 2015, millions of activists pressured the Federal Communications Commission to adopt historic Net Neutrality rules that keep the internet free and open - allowing people to share and access information of their choosing without interference.

But right now the internet is in peril. On Dec. 14, 2017, the FCC's Republican majority approved Chairman Ajit Pai's plan to gut the Net Neutrality protections.

A former Verizon lawyer and a Trump appointee, Pai ignored the widespread outcry against his plan from millions of people, lawmakers, companies andco public-interest groups.

We can't let Pai have the last word on this - which is why we're calling on Congress to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's vote to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

Urge lawmakers to reverse the FCC vote today.
What is Net Neutrality?
Net Neutrality is the internet's guiding principle: It preserves our right to communicate freely online. Net Neutrality means an internet that enables and protects free speech. It means that ISPs should provide us with open networks - and shouldn't block or discriminate against any applications or content that ride over those networks. Just as your phone company shouldn't decide who you call and what you say on that call, your ISP shouldn't interfere with the content you view or post online.

The internet without Net Neutrality isn't really the internet.
What will happen to the internet now?
Without the Net Neutrality rules, companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be able to call all the shots and decide which websites, content and applications succeed.

These companies can now slow down their competitors' content or block political opinions they disagree with. They can charge extra fees to the few content companies that can afford to pay for preferential treatment - relegating everyone else to a slower tier of service.

The consequences will be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve. People of color, the LGBTQ community, indigenous peoples and religious minorities in the United States rely on the open internet to organize, access economic and educational opportunities, and fight back against systemic discrimination.

Without Net Neutrality, how will activists be able to fight oppression? What will happen to social movements like the Movement for Black Lives? How will the next disruptive technology, business or company emerge if internet service providers let only incumbents succeed?
Tell me about the Title II rules we just lost. Why is Title II so important?
After a decade-long battle over the future of the internet, in 2015 the FCC adopted strong Net Neutrality rules based on Title II of the Communications Act, giving internet users the strongest protections possible.

Courts rejected two earlier FCC attempts to craft Net Neutrality rules and told the agency that if it wanted to adopt such protections it needed to use the proper legal foundation: Title II. In February 2015, the FCC did just that when it reclassified broadband providers as common carriers under Title II.

Title II gave the FCC the authority it needed to ensure that companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon can't block, throttle or otherwise interfere with web traffic. Title II preserved the internet's level playing field, allowing people to share and access information of their choosing. These rules ushered in a historic era of online innovation and investment.

The Title II rules also withstood two challenges from industry. Free Press helped argue the case defending the FCC - and on June 14, 2016, a federal appeals court upheld the open-internet protections in all respects.

We're now preparing to sue the FCC to restore the Title II rules.
Why is Net Neutrality so crucial for communities of color?
The open internet allows people of color to tell their own stories and organize for racial justice. When activists are able to turn out thousands of people in the streets at a moment's notice, it's because ISPs aren't allowed to block their messages or websites.

The mainstream media have long misrepresented, ignored and harmed people of color. And thanks to systemic racism, economic inequality and runaway media consolidation, people of color own just a handful of broadcast stations.

This dynamic will only get worse: In 2017, Chairman Pai demolished most of the remaining media-ownership rules. The lack of diverse ownership is a primary reason why the media have gotten away with criminalizing and dehumanizing communities of color.

The open internet allows people of color and other vulnerable communities to bypass traditional media gatekeepers. Without Net Neutrality, ISPs could block speech and prevent dissident voices from speaking freely online. Without Net Neutrality, people of color would lose a vital platform.

And without Net Neutrality, millions of small businesses owned by people of color wouldn't be able to compete against larger corporations online, which would deepen economic disparities.
Why is Net Neutrality important for businesses?
Net Neutrality is crucial for small business owners, startups and entrepreneurs, who rely on the open internet to launch their businesses, create markets, advertise their products and services, and reach customers. We need the open internet to foster job growth, competition and innovation.

It's thanks to Net Neutrality that small businesses and entrepreneurs have been able to thrive online. But without Net Neutrality, ISPs will exploit their gatekeeper position and destroy the internet's fair and level playing field.

Without Net Neutrality, the next Google or Facebook will never get off the ground.
What can we do now?
Congress has the power to reverse the FCC's vote. Urge your lawmakers to use a "resolution of disapproval" to overturn the FCC's decision to dismantle the Net Neutrality rules.

The Trump administration is doing everything in its power to clamp down on dissent. If we lose Net Neutrality, it will have succeeded.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Net Neutrality: What You Need to Know Now

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn't messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Without Net Neutrality, we would have to pay for social media apps and we would have to pay more money for fast internet
2. Massive innovation on the Internet since its creation occurred in 2005 on protecting Net Neutrality
3.  Today's vibrant Internet economy resulted from Net Neutrality protection during the Internets infancy.

# 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."