http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-297946A1.pdf

that he wishes to limit forbearance or make it impermanent; the oogle lobbying group Public Knowledge is likewise asking the FCC to forbear fron less than originally stated and to make provisions to undo that forbearance in the future. In its ex parte memo at

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020493265

the group urges the FCC to “address the feasiblity of ‘undoing’ forbearance.” In short, despite having praised the idea of a “light touch,” the group now admits that what it really wants is to get the camel’s nose into the tent so that any and all regulation of the Internet (including “decency” regulation applying to content!) becomes fair game.

This is the danger of the Commission’s proposed approach — and the reason why network operators — large and small — have no choice but to oppose it. Investors are already walking away…. All of the investors in my small ISP have.

Given that the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has ruled that the FCC lacks statutory power to assure the “openness” of the Internet via highly prescriptive regulations, how about doing it via competition? The Commission has just invested 9 months of hard work in a Broadband Plan that lays out a clear path to that goal. Why not table the NPRM proceeding (it would have to be “rebooted anyway, because the authorities listed in the Notice are invalid) and focus on executing the plan and doing it well — with a special emphasis on increasing competition? Rather than expending more time and energy on the NPRM, the Commission could accelerate other vital proceedings, such as putting an end to the “special access” price gouging that hobbles broadband competition and deployment in many areas of the country.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by jenhoward80: @FCC Chairman Genachowski: “An Internet in the dark runs too great a risk of becoming a closed Internet” http://bit.ly/cuKejZ (transcript)…

Your blog post is a good example of the lack of transferrance. Despite your legal brilliance, you have not a clue of how communications networks function. Four months after your post, not one respondent has supported your blog’s position.

Maybe this can be salvaged. With the DC Court of Appeals unanimously confirming that the FCC’s jurisdiction does not extend to regulating the Internet (read: doing Google’s bidding for free, permissive access to infrastructure that others pay for), are you planning to let loose that formidable legal mind on getting legislation through Congress regarding updating communications laws? Chairmam Genachowski seems to be shying away from that.

I love his broadband plan – can you help this country to get it in place, or are you going to deplete those neurons playing Google’s fool and continue bashing those of us who work putting broadband in place? Come over and help us – we NEED YOU!!!