[Chicago] Thanks for having me!

Sat Aug 12 14:51:14 EDT 2017

So, staying on the topic of net neutrality, and the specific issues relating to its possible upheaval, what would be the argument in favor of reclassifying ISPs as only subject to Title I?

John Oliver has been having a pretty poor record lately. And some of the issues he latches onto are too little, too late, and too much bias. Though I do think he's funny, I don't think he's honest.

Ajit Pai says the people it would help are those not getting internet service now. If he's right, then you wouldn't expect these people to comment on the FCC website anyways...

Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 12, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Nick Timkovich<prometheus235 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> It sounds like you're conflating this with a third, unrelated title. The argument wasn't to change "Title II", which in the context of net neutrality refers to "Title II of the Communications Act of 1934", but to stop the FCC from reclassifying ISPs as only subject to Title I (of the Communications Act) laws. The FCC cannot change law, and that law only had seven titles.
> 
> Your initial email seems to be in reference to titles I and II of the "Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005", which I'm not sure how is connected.
> 
> Then, title 47 with respect to the FCC usually means "Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)" which I'm only familiar with from the rules it sets out regarding radio transmissions, both for ham radio and ISM bands. It looks a great deal larger though; could you help us out and point to the specific section you're referring to: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/
> 
> Nick
> 
>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Michael Tamillow <mikaeltamillow96 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> You know, I don't know that much about it. I think it may be related to Title 47. Maybe Title 2 should stay the way it is. 
>> 
>> I don't want to live in a world where the internet belongs to those who can afford it either, when there is more than enough to go around for everybody's true interests.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Chris Foresman <foresmac at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I’ve read extensively about the various lawsuits, etc, involving Backpage, I have I yet to see anywhere they claim Title II “protects” them. I believe they have appealed more to First Amendment rights and DMCA safe harbor provisions. What about Title II ISP net neutrality regulations can “protect” them from abetting human trafficking? I’m not asking to watch a movie on the subject, and I don’t think it’s unfair to explain the reasoning behind such an incredible claim.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Chris Foresman
>>> foresmac at gmail.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:41 AM, Michael Tamillow <mikaeltamillow96 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> It is explained in the movie, I Am Jane Doe, which is generally a legal movie.
>>>> 
>>>> Backpages has been sued many times, and continues to win every lawsuit on the defense that Title 2 protects them.
>>>> 
>>>> Title 2 is not causing the Human Trafficking. It is just not preventing it adequately.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Chris Foresman <foresmac at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> You have failed to establish any causal link between the implications of Title II and human trafficking. Please explain.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Chris Foresman
>>>>> foresmac at gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 11:26 AM, Michael Tamillow <mikaeltamillow96 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would take everything John Oliver says with a grain of salt. Looks like your analysis is most likely correct but I don't see any code, and the level of fraud seems very amatuer - including the FCC's filtering of comments. Do we live in 1960?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> One of the strongest outcries against title 2 is human trafficking, which is being perpetrated on and by Backpages.com, but they repeatedly deny it because they hide behind vague terminology. Likewise, there are some sites that have sprung up as a chance to extort people based on lewd photos. You've got to crack a few eggs to make an omelette, right?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.iamjanedoefilm.com/
>>>>>> http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/parents-found-missing-daughter-backpage-fight-justice-part-44753036
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Google's corporate policy used to be "Don't be evil" but it seems they have succumbed to the hypocrisy of the world. Can't everyone get behind what's right? It's not changing title 2 that matters. It is how is it changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Chris Sinchok <chris at sinchok.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hey All,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks for having me last night to talk about my FCC project.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If anyone is interested, you can view the slides here: https://gitpitch.com/csinchok/chipy-fcc-presentation
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My original blog post is here: https://medium.com/@csinchok/an-analysis-of-the-anti-title-ii-bots-463f184829bc
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For further reading on this issue:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> http://jeffreyfossett.com/2017/05/13/fcc-filings.html
>>>>>>> https://medium.com/@nhf/whats-up-with-all-of-those-identical-comments-on-the-fcc-net-neutrality-docket-105835f59c3e
>>>>>>> http://gizmodo.com/can-john-oliver-s-pro-net-neutrality-commenters-compete-1795095982
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For anyone with questions, etc, feel free to reach out, this is a topic I am pretty obsessed with. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Chris Sinchok
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Chicago mailing list
>>>>>>> Chicago at python.org
>>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Chicago mailing list
>>>>>> Chicago at python.org
>>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Chicago mailing list
>>>>> Chicago at python.org
>>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chicago mailing list
>>>> Chicago at python.org
>>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chicago mailing list
>>> Chicago at python.org
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chicago mailing list
>> Chicago at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Chicago mailing list
> Chicago at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/chicago
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/chicago/attachments/20170812/ae41b3a5/attachment.html>