CFIF often highlights how the Biden Administration's bizarre decision to resurrect failed Title II "…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: U.S. Internet Speeds Skyrocketed After Ending Failed Title II "Net Neutrality" Experiment

CFIF often highlights how the Biden Administration's bizarre decision to resurrect failed Title II "Net Neutrality" internet regulation, which caused private broadband investment to decline for the first time ever outside of a recession during its brief experiment at the end of the Obama Administration, is a terrible idea that will only punish consumers if allowed to take effect.

Here's what happened after that brief experiment was repealed under the Trump Administration and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai - internet speeds skyrocketed despite late-night comedians' and left-wing activists' warnings that the internet was doomed:

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="515"] Internet Speeds Post-"Net Neutrality"[/caption]

 …[more]

April 19, 2024 • 09:51 AM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Home Press Room Xfinity TV Partner Program Announcement Demonstrates the Folly of FCC's Set-Top Box Regulatory Proposal
Xfinity TV Partner Program Announcement Demonstrates the Folly of FCC's Set-Top Box Regulatory Proposal Print
Wednesday, April 20 2016

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) today highlighted how today's Xfinity TV Partner Program announcement demonstrates the folly of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC's) new proposal to regulate set-top cable boxes. 

“Obama's FCC seeks to impose a 1990s-vintage, one-size-fits-all mandate to make cable TV set-top boxes artificially compatible with third-party devices," said Timothy Lee, CFIF's Senior Vice President of Legal and Public Affairs.  "As we have detailed, the proposed regulation constitutes crony capitalism in its worst form, it poses a threat to consumer privacy, it undermines the creative community and it jeopardizes intellectual property protections by potentially facilitating piracy. It also constitutes an anachronism in that it freezes in place an outdated set-top box model that is already being left behind by technological advance and private sector innovation. Cable companies and other entertainment industry players are already abandoning traditional cable boxes in favor of devices owned and maintained by individual consumers as they choose," Lee added. 

Today's announcement of the new joint Xfinity Partner Program between Comcast, Samsung and Roku illustrates that reality.  Under the new partnership, consumers can access their cable subscription via a simple app, without the need for a set-top box at all.  Accordingly, it will allow access to live, on-demand, cloud, DVR and other televised content on smart TVs and other IP-enabled technology. 

"This shows that the video entertainment and app markets continue to evolve alongside consumer demand, rendering the FCC's set-top box proposal obsolete before it can even be imposed," Lee said.  "The new regulation would disrupt market innovation of this sort. The marketplace is working, and this latest FCC 'solution' to a non-existent problem will only create more problems. Congressional leaders, the innovation community, consumer groups and everyday American consumers should stand together and oppose this latest FCC overreach." 

Read CFIF's full commentary on the import of today's announcement here

###

 

Related Articles :
Notable Quote   
 
"Remember when progressives said the Trump Administration's rollback of net neutrality would break the internet? Federal Communications Commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel now concedes this was wrong, yet she plans to reclaim political control over the internet anyway to stop a parade of new and highly doubtful horribles.The FCC on Thursday is expected to vote to reclassify broadband providers as…[more]
 
 
— Wall Street Journal Editorial Board
 
Liberty Poll   

If TikTok's data collection or manipulation under Chinese ownership is the grave danger that our government says it is (and it may well be), then wouldn't the prudent action be to ban it immediately rather than some time down the road?