SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Advocates for net neutrality protest the federal repeal in San Francisco, California. (Photo: Credo Action/Flickr/cc)
California's Net Neutrality Bill Is Strong Again Because You Spoke Out
This is what real net neutrality looks like. And it all happened because people spoke out.
Jul 06, 2018
After a hearing that stripped California's gold standard net neutrality bill of much of its protections, California legislators have negotiated new amendments that restore the vast majority of those protections to the bill. The big ISPs and their money did not defeat the voices of the many, many people who want and need a free and open Internet.
On June 20, the Communications and Conveyance Committee of the California Assembly, after having rejected proposed amendments to move Senator Scott Wiener's S.B. 822 and Senator Kevin de Leon's S.B. 460 forward as a package, also voted to gut S.B. 822's strong net neutrality protections. It was a move that resulted in a hollowed-out version of S.B. 822 that left huge loopholes for ISPs.
Since then, there's been an outcry from Team Internet in California, making clear how important effective, strong net neutrality protections are. Senator Wiener, Senator de Leon, Assemblymember Rob Bonta, and Assemblymember Miguel Santiago, the Chair of the Assembly Committee on Communications and Conveyance that voted on the watered-down bill, have all come to an agreement that once again makes California's proposed legislation the strongest net neutrality bill in the country.
The willingness of Assemblymember Santiago to listen to his constituents' opinions and realize their needs, as opposed to those of large ISPs like AT&T, is laudable. And the resulting agreement puts California net neutrality back on track.
As was initially proposed by Senator Wiener and Senator de Leon, both net neutrality bills will now become a package. The ban on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization remains--paid prioritization has been a particular target of misleading ISP arguments. The ban on certain kinds of zero rating--the kinds that lead consumers to services that ISPs want them to use rather than giving them choices--also remains. And so does the ban on access fees, which means ISPs will not be able to get around these protections by charging fees at the places where data enters their networks.
This is what real net neutrality looks like. And it all happened because people spoke out. You sent emails, called offices, crowdfunded a billboard--all of that was heard. People's voices trumped company money this time.
The fight's not over: these bills still need to be passed by the California legislature and signed by the governor. So keep telling them to vote for S.B. 822.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Katharine Trendacosta
Katharine Trendacosta is a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Follow on Twitter: @k_trendacosta
californiacorporate powerdemocratic partyelectronic frontier foundationnet neutralityopen internetpeople powertechnology
After a hearing that stripped California's gold standard net neutrality bill of much of its protections, California legislators have negotiated new amendments that restore the vast majority of those protections to the bill. The big ISPs and their money did not defeat the voices of the many, many people who want and need a free and open Internet.
On June 20, the Communications and Conveyance Committee of the California Assembly, after having rejected proposed amendments to move Senator Scott Wiener's S.B. 822 and Senator Kevin de Leon's S.B. 460 forward as a package, also voted to gut S.B. 822's strong net neutrality protections. It was a move that resulted in a hollowed-out version of S.B. 822 that left huge loopholes for ISPs.
Since then, there's been an outcry from Team Internet in California, making clear how important effective, strong net neutrality protections are. Senator Wiener, Senator de Leon, Assemblymember Rob Bonta, and Assemblymember Miguel Santiago, the Chair of the Assembly Committee on Communications and Conveyance that voted on the watered-down bill, have all come to an agreement that once again makes California's proposed legislation the strongest net neutrality bill in the country.
The willingness of Assemblymember Santiago to listen to his constituents' opinions and realize their needs, as opposed to those of large ISPs like AT&T, is laudable. And the resulting agreement puts California net neutrality back on track.
As was initially proposed by Senator Wiener and Senator de Leon, both net neutrality bills will now become a package. The ban on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization remains--paid prioritization has been a particular target of misleading ISP arguments. The ban on certain kinds of zero rating--the kinds that lead consumers to services that ISPs want them to use rather than giving them choices--also remains. And so does the ban on access fees, which means ISPs will not be able to get around these protections by charging fees at the places where data enters their networks.
This is what real net neutrality looks like. And it all happened because people spoke out. You sent emails, called offices, crowdfunded a billboard--all of that was heard. People's voices trumped company money this time.
The fight's not over: these bills still need to be passed by the California legislature and signed by the governor. So keep telling them to vote for S.B. 822.
Katharine Trendacosta
Katharine Trendacosta is a policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Follow on Twitter: @k_trendacosta
After a hearing that stripped California's gold standard net neutrality bill of much of its protections, California legislators have negotiated new amendments that restore the vast majority of those protections to the bill. The big ISPs and their money did not defeat the voices of the many, many people who want and need a free and open Internet.
On June 20, the Communications and Conveyance Committee of the California Assembly, after having rejected proposed amendments to move Senator Scott Wiener's S.B. 822 and Senator Kevin de Leon's S.B. 460 forward as a package, also voted to gut S.B. 822's strong net neutrality protections. It was a move that resulted in a hollowed-out version of S.B. 822 that left huge loopholes for ISPs.
Since then, there's been an outcry from Team Internet in California, making clear how important effective, strong net neutrality protections are. Senator Wiener, Senator de Leon, Assemblymember Rob Bonta, and Assemblymember Miguel Santiago, the Chair of the Assembly Committee on Communications and Conveyance that voted on the watered-down bill, have all come to an agreement that once again makes California's proposed legislation the strongest net neutrality bill in the country.
The willingness of Assemblymember Santiago to listen to his constituents' opinions and realize their needs, as opposed to those of large ISPs like AT&T, is laudable. And the resulting agreement puts California net neutrality back on track.
As was initially proposed by Senator Wiener and Senator de Leon, both net neutrality bills will now become a package. The ban on blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization remains--paid prioritization has been a particular target of misleading ISP arguments. The ban on certain kinds of zero rating--the kinds that lead consumers to services that ISPs want them to use rather than giving them choices--also remains. And so does the ban on access fees, which means ISPs will not be able to get around these protections by charging fees at the places where data enters their networks.
This is what real net neutrality looks like. And it all happened because people spoke out. You sent emails, called offices, crowdfunded a billboard--all of that was heard. People's voices trumped company money this time.
The fight's not over: these bills still need to be passed by the California legislature and signed by the governor. So keep telling them to vote for S.B. 822.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.