<story><title>Ajit Pai calls California’s net neutrality rules “illegal”</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/09/ajit-pai-calls-californias-net-neutrality-rules-illegal</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>TYPE_FASTER</author><text>From the transcript:&lt;p&gt;So in early August, we adopted a policy that would allow a single entity to do the requisite work on the utility pole—a policy commonly known as “one-touch make-ready.” This policy could substantially lower the cost and shorten the time to deploy broadband on utility poles.&lt;p&gt;But according to &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arstechnica.com&amp;#x2F;tech-policy&amp;#x2F;2018&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;fcc-gives-google-fiber-and-new-isps-faster-access-to-utility-poles&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;arstechnica.com&amp;#x2F;tech-policy&amp;#x2F;2018&amp;#x2F;08&amp;#x2F;fcc-gives-google...&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;p&gt;Despite today&amp;#x27;s vote, the FCC hurt the cause of faster pole attachment when it deregulated the broadband industry last year, according to Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Legislative Counsel Ernesto Falcon. The FCC&amp;#x27;s anti-net neutrality vote removed the classification of broadband as a common carrier service—that now-repealed classification &amp;quot;ensure[d] that every broadband provider has the legal right to gain access to many of the poles that run along our roads,&amp;quot; the EFF wrote last year.&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;I wonder if the anti-net neutrality crowd understands that Title II&amp;#x27;s regulation of poles and conduit is now limited to telephone&amp;#x2F;cable TV thanks to [the] Restoring Internet Freedom Order,&amp;quot; Falcon tweeted today. &amp;quot;The ISPs that are broadband-only will not get the benefit, thus limiting its positive impact.&amp;quot;</text></comment>
<story><title>Ajit Pai calls California’s net neutrality rules “illegal”</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/09/ajit-pai-calls-californias-net-neutrality-rules-illegal</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>zwerdlds</author><text>&amp;gt; &amp;quot;only the federal government can set regulatory policy in this area&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Regulatory policy that apparently he wants to set - but specifically gave that ability to the FTC.&lt;p&gt;Seems like he wants to have his cake and eat it too?  Am I misunderstanding this?</text></comment>