Ajit Pai Quotes

The FCC should facilitate, rather than frustrate, innovation.

I think it was a major mistake to revisit Title II.

You do not need the government to protect open internet; the marketplace was doing it and will continue to do it. All you are doing is adding a burden that does not need to be there.

The Open Internet principles were not legal rules adopted by the FCC; they were effectively a press statement posted on the FCC website.

The issues of wireless versus wireline gets very messy. And that's really an FCC issue, not a Google issue.

Net neutrality isn't a government takeover of the Internet, as many of my Republican colleagues have alleged.

AT&T will not block access to the public Internet or degrade service, period.

To go back to a 1950s voice mentality with Title II and net neutrality would be a tremendous mistake for our country.

Notably, the FCC fact sheet regarding the net neutrality plan does not mention any accommodations for small providers.

I support greater access to the Internet, but going back to Obama-era regulations is not the answer.

Beginning in the Clinton administration, there was, for nearly two decades, a broad bipartisan consensus that the best Internet policy was light-touch regulation - rules that promoted competition and kept the Internet 'unfettered by federal or state regulation.' Under this policy, a free and open Internet flourished.

Net Neutrality originally referred to management of the 'last mile' of the network over which data flows into a person's home, but the debate has grown beyond that in recent years.

Although the FCC has tried to introduce net neutrality rules to avoid abusive practices like favoring your own services over others, they have struggled because there has been more than one court case in which it was asserted the FCC didn't have the authority to punish ISPs for abusing their control over the broadband channel.

The FCC has made it clear it would punish a cable or phone company for deviating from providing 'neutral' access.

We support an open Internet and having rules - the right kind of rules that are legally enforceable and allow for investment and innovation.

The Internet freedom issue we need to focus on is network neutrality.

The Federal Communications Commission, where I have the pleasure of serving, generally has done a good job of providing an environment for Wi-Fi to flourish in the U.S.

The legend of a cable company trying to break the Internet makes scary bedtime stories for children of telecom geeks, but it is not reality.

I think there's a short-term legislative strategy. I think there's a longer-term legislative strategy in terms of enshrining net neutrality principles into law rather than a rule, and I think there's an election strategy.

I think there wouldn't be a Net neutrality debate in this country if we really had a competitive environment for access.

In the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, the FCC strengthened its transparency rule so that Internet service providers must make public more information about their network management practices. They are required to make this information available either on their own website or on the FCC's website.

I think net neutrality needs to be explored in a broader sense.

The significant regulatory impact of reclassifying broadband services is not something that should be taken lightly and should not be done without additional direction from Congress.

At its core, the FCC's plan to regulate the Internet will force businesses and people to check first with the government and get permission to innovate.

Comcast rents modems directly to consumers, thereby competing directly with companies like Zoom. It has every reason to make Zoom modems more expensive or even to drive companies like Zoom out of business.