Editing Net neutrality (section)

===Unnecessary regulations===
According to [[PayPal]] founder and Facebook investor [[Peter Thiel]] in 2011, "Net neutrality has not been necessary to date. I don't see any reason why it's suddenly become important, when the Internet has functioned quite well for the past 15 years without it. ... Government attempts to regulate technology have been extraordinarily counterproductive in the past."<ref name="nationalreview.com"/> [[Max Levchin]], the other co-founder of PayPal, echoed similar statements, telling CNBC, "The Internet is not broken, and it got here without government regulation and probably in part because of lack of government regulation."<ref>[https://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/26/father-of-net-neutrality-rules-wont-kill-spending.html "Father of net neutrality: Rules won't kill spending"], Tom DiChristopher, CNBC, 26 February 2015.</ref>

FCC Commissioner [[Ajit Pai]], who was one of the two commissioners who opposed the net neutrality proposal, criticized the FCC's ruling on Internet neutrality, stating that the perceived threats from ISPs to deceive consumers, degrade content, or disfavor the content that they dislike are non-existent: "The evidence of these continuing threats? There is none; it's all anecdote, hypothesis, and hysteria. A small ISP in North Carolina allegedly blocked VoIP calls a decade ago. Comcast capped BitTorrent traffic to ease upload congestion eight years ago. Apple introduced Facetime over Wi-Fi first, cellular networks later. "FCC chairman Pai wants to switch ISP rules from proactive restrictions to after-the-fact litigation, which means a lot more leeway for ISPs that don't particularly want to be treated as impartial utilities connecting people to the internet." (Atherton, 2017).<ref name="auto3"/> Examples this picayune and stale aren't enough to tell a coherent story about net neutrality. The bogeyman never had it so easy."<ref name="fcc.gov"/> FCC Commissioner Mike O'Reilly, the other opposing commissioner, also claims that the ruling is a solution to a hypothetical problem, "Even after enduring three weeks of spin, it is hard for me to believe that the Commission is establishing an entire Title II/net neutrality regime to protect against hypothetical harms. There is not a shred of evidence that any aspect of this structure is necessary. The D.C. Circuit called the prior, scaled-down version a 'prophylactic' approach. I call it guilt by imagination."{{citation needed|date=October 2020}} In a ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' article, FCC Commissioner Pai and [[Joshua D. Wright|Joshua Wright]] of the [[Federal Trade Commission]] argue that "the Internet isn't broken, and we don't need the president's plan to 'fix' it. Quite the opposite. The Internet is an unparalleled success story. It is a free, open and thriving platform."<ref name="chicagotribune.com">{{cite web|url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-internet-regulations-fcc-ftc-obama-broadband-perspec-0219-20150218-story.html|title=The Internet isn't broken. Obama doesn't need to 'fix' it|author=Chicago Tribune|date=February 18, 2015|website=chicagotribune.com|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150226173240/http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-internet-regulations-fcc-ftc-obama-broadband-perspec-0219-20150218-story.html|archive-date=February 26, 2015}}</ref>