We support an open Internet and having rules - the right kind of rules that are legally enforceable and allow for investment and innovation.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The industry must adhere to certain consumer protection norms if the Internet is to remain an open platform for innovation.
Net neutrality is the right thing for our democracy, economy, and global competitiveness. And Americans support an open Internet.
The question is not whether we want to keep this open, neutral Internet - we do, or should - but whether government rulemaking can give us the result we want.
Since the web is totally worldwide, we need a set of behavioural rules, laws they are commonly called, that are accepted worldwide. There is a big difference as to how things are treated in the U.S. and Europe and Asia.
The thing we have to be careful of is that the Internet is a global communications medium, and if one country tips the balance in regulating its use or regulating what companies or individuals do on the web, it could have an economic impact that might be unintended, quite frankly, by the regulations themselves.
Vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement today is preferable to the heavy hand of government regulation of the Internet tomorrow.
The Open Internet principles were not legal rules adopted by the FCC; they were effectively a press statement posted on the FCC website.
A free and open Internet should not have to be weighed down by legal challenges - its dynamism is essential to our economy.
At its core, the FCC's plan to regulate the Internet will force businesses and people to check first with the government and get permission to innovate.
No matter what you do, any country in the world is going to have the ability to set its own rules internally. Any country in the world can pull the plug. It's not a question of technical issues, it's not a question of right or wrong, it's not a question of whether global Internet governance is right or wrong. It's just with us.