22 Quotes by Gigi Sohn

The fact that it's a bipartisan bill is tremendously important.

The provisions will not stop the cable and telephone companies from degrading Internet traffic and they do not contain strong enough penalties to discourage misbehavior.

We're concerned that even if you have a robust basic Internet and higher-speed lane, they will only make it available to their favorite partners, and that's discrimination.

Should Congress grant video providers the extraordinary regulatory relief represented by national broadband video franchises -- turning nearly 40 years of local control of video services on its head -- Congress must also ensure net neutrality. Such a policy would ensure that those same companies make their broadband networks available to all applications, content and service providers on a nondiscriminatory basis.

My concern is they would say 'well you know we only have enough bandwidth to provide that quality of service for our service'.

Permitting broadband video providers to avoid negotiating thousands of individual franchise agreements will bring more competition to markets faster, resulting in greater consumer choice and lower prices.

One of the parts we really don't like is the net neutrality provision because it's extraordinarily weak. It does suffer from the same problem as the House bill to the extent that there's nothing about discrimination in there.

Basically this merger will mean even less competition for broadband Internet, and frankly that makes a Net neutrality requirement even more imperative. If there was real competition in the provision of high-speed Internet access we might not be having this conversation, but now the world has gotten even smaller than it was before.

pleased to see many of the pro-competitive features of the draft.