Now that the rules have been posted, we can extract the following:

299. In the 2014 Open Internet NPRM, the Commission tentatively concluded that it should retain provisions which make clear that the open Internet rules do not alter broadband providers' rights or obligations with respect to other laws, safety and security considerations, or the ability of broadband providers
to make reasonable efforts to address transfers of unlawful content and unlawful transfers of content. We affirm this tentative conclusion and reiterate today that our rules are not intended to expand or contract broadband
providers' rights or obligations with respect to other laws or safety and security considerations-including the needs of emergency communications and law
enforcement, public safety, and national security authorities. Similarly, open Internet rules protect only lawful content, and are not intended to inhibit efforts by broadband providers to address unlawful transfers of content or transfers of unlawful content.

304. In the NPRM, we tentatively concluded that we should retain the definition
of reasonable network management we previously adopted, which does not include preventing transfer of unlawful content or the unlawful transfer of content as a reasonable practice. We affirm this tentative conclusion and re-state that open Internet rules do not prohibit broadband providers from making reasonable efforts to address the transfer of unlawful content or unlawful transfers of content to ensure that open Internet rules are not used as a shield to enable unlawful activity or to deter prompt action against such activity. For example,
the no-blocking rule should not be invoked to protect copyright infringement, which has adverse consequences for the economy, nor should it protect child pornography. We reiterate that our rules do not alter the copyright laws and are not intended to prohibit or discourage voluntary practices undertaken to address or mitigate the occurrence of copyright infringement. After consideration of the record, we retain this rule, which is applicable to both fixed and mobile broadband providers engaged in broadband Internet access service and reads as follows: Nothing in this part prohibits reasonable efforts
by a provider of broadband Internet access service to address copyright infringement or other unlawful activity.

305. Some commenters contend that this rule promotes the widespread use of intrusive packet inspection technologies by broadband providers to filter objectionable content and that such monitoring poses a threat to customers' privacy rights. Certainly, many broadband providers have the technical tools to
conduct deep packet inspection of unencrypted traffic on their networks, and consumer privacy is a paramount concern in the Internet age. Nevertheless, we believe that broadband monitoring concerns are adequately addressed by the rules we adopt today, so we decline to alter this provision. This rule is limited to protecting "reasonable efforts . . . to address copyright infringement or other unlawful activity."We retain the discretion to evaluate the reasonableness of broadband providers' practices under this rule on a case-by-case basis. Consumers also have many tools at their disposal to protect
their privacy against deep packet inspection-including SSL encryption, virtual private networks, and routing methods like TOR. Further, the complaint processes we adopt today add to these technical methods and advance consumer interests in this area.


---
http://DuckDuckGo.com/ a better search engine that respects your privacy.
þ Synchronet þ My Brand-New BBS (All the cool SysOps run STOCK!)