Verizon Policy Statement on Net Neutrality

Fri Feb 27 23:44:58 UTC 2015

To the best of my knowledge, yes.

Owen

> On Feb 27, 2015, at 15:08 , Michael Hallgren <m.hallgren at free.fr> wrote:
> 
> Le 27/02/2015 23:19, Owen DeLong a écrit :
>> Any website which does not violate the law.
>> 
>> In other words, if a lawful takedown order
> 
> So, subject to legal control rather than simply administrative. Right?
> 
> mh
> 
>> has been applied to a website, this code can’t be used to force an ISP to provide illegal access to said site.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>>> On Feb 27, 2015, at 11:14 , Jim Richardson <weaselkeeper at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> From 47CFR§8.5b
>>> (b) A person engaged in the provision of mobile broadband Internet
>>> access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block
>>> consumers from accessing lawful Web sites, subject to reasonable
>>> network management; nor shall such person block applications that
>>> compete with the provider's voice or video telephony services, subject
>>> to reasonable network management.
>>> 
>>> What's a "lawful" web site?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:
>>>> On 02/27/2015 01:19 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
>>>>> We're solving an almost non-existing problem.. by over-empowering an
>>>>> already out of control US government, with powers that we can't even begin
>>>>> to understand the extend of how they could be abused... to "fix" an industry
>>>>> that has done amazingly good things for consumers in recent years.
>>>>> 
>>>> You really should read 47CFR§8.  It won't take you more than an hour or so,
>>>> as it's only about 8 pages.
>>>> 
>>>> The procedure for filing a complaint is pretty interesting, and requires the
>>>> complainant to do some pretty involved things. (47CFR§8.14 for the complaint
>>>> procedure, 47CFR§8.13 for the requirements for the pleading, etc).  Note
>>>> that the definitions found in 47CFR§8.11(a) and (b) are pretty specific in
>>>> who is actually covered by 'net neutrality.'
>>>> 