[dd36]

The FCC is exempting the ISPs from those archaic rules. Who is going to challenge the FCC on that?

So this guy is arguing that NN is bad under Title II so we should pass a different law to regulate it? So new regulations without a long history of case law? And that’s less burdensome?

[apple4ever]

Yes exactly. Then we have a properly written law to address the issue, not shoehorn in the issue into an old unrelated law. And that is much less burdensome.

The FCC is right now exempting the ISPs, but that could change under a new administration, and that should be greatly feared.

[ABCLAW]

Want to know how these things are done normally when actual legislative reform is contemplated?

First you draft a bill. Then you have a bunch of people debate the bill. Then you have the bill have a section which describes how it comes into force, listing deadlines, target dates for various provisions, etc. That way you can phase the Title II -> Legislation transfer smoothly.

That isn't what's happening here. There is no discussion about amending legislation, nor has the FCC discussed implementing non-Title II forms of Open Internet Style regulation.

Because they can't.

[dd36]

That’s a red herring.

Then pass the law. Title II is the only solution until then per the courts. If the ISPs are exempt from the archaic rules, then there’s literally nothing but imaginary future harm. As where we’ve seen real abuses by ISPs. Pai is not acting in the public interest.