Re: DC Circuit denies stay on Neutrality

["Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>]

Hundreds of people / companies on both sides. 

The point of the article is not "Verizon lost", but that the FCC was not "crazy power-usurping unlawful" (direct quote 
from article).

I.e. The FFC has at least a moderate chance of prevailing.

Whether they should or not is actually not the point and only slightly related to the decision. Legal decisions are 
often misinterpreted by the press and lay people, and I'm sure this one will be to a great extent. I think the article 
did a good job of explaining it to anyone who reads it with an open mind. 

-- 
TTFN,
patrick

Composed on a virtual keyboard, please forgive typos. 


> On Jun 12, 2015, at 11:25, Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:
>
> It wasn't only the big guys requesting a stay. 
>
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
>
>
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> http://www.midwest-ix.com 
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Jay Ashworth" <jra () baylink com> 
> To: nanog () nanog org 
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 10:20:28 AM 
> Subject: DC Circuit denies stay on Neutrality 
>
> Here is a delightful wacky weekend starter culture for you: a backgrounder on exactly what it means that the DC 
> Circuit denied Verizon et alia a stay of execution on Title II reclassification. 
>
> Complete with bonus brony references. 
>
> http://www.wetmachine.com/tales-of-the-sausage-factory/net-neutrality-litigation-round-1-goes-to-the-fcc/ 
>
> Cheers, 
> --jra 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.