<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>The Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Here We Go Again</title><link>http://tlf.disqus.com/</link><description>The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:52:21 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Here We Go Again</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2006/04/19/here-we-go-again/#comment-1445550</link><description>You are far too kind to Art Brodsky.  I've yet to see him write anything about net neutrality that didn't &lt;a href="http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/04/talking-points-memo-gets-it-completely.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;contain misconceptions and errors of fact&lt;/a&gt;.  I have no confidence that he understands the technological or legal framework of the Internet.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Your points are right on the mark.  I would add that imprecise definitions are a huge concern because the FCC has a history of making regulations in *conflict* with the enabling statutes that give them the rule-making capability.  Two examples are the requirement for applying CALEA wiretapping requirements to broadband in spite of Congress' specific exemption of information services and the Internet, and their creation of an established business relationship exemption for prerecorded telemarketing advertisements where no such exemption exists in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">lippard</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:52:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Here We Go Again</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2006/04/19/here-we-go-again/#comment-1445552</link><description>I for one do not think that any government agency is capable now or would be capable of doing a good and meaningful job of enforcing net neutrality legislation. I think that they will actually mess things up worse by creating unintended consequences like they always do.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">pkp646</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:26:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Here We Go Again</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2006/04/19/here-we-go-again/#comment-1445551</link><description>It's not what I want, tpwk!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">hush</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:46:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Here We Go Again</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2006/04/19/here-we-go-again/#comment-1445553</link><description>You bet there will be intense lobbying and litigation over the question of how government should regulate.  Once government gets its regulatory mitts on this issue, it will be a feast for lobbyists.  Given the atmosphere in Washington of late, is this really what we want for the Internet?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">tpwk</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:29:13 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>