The following can be attributed to Chris Lewis, Vice President of Public Knowledge:
“Public Knowledge is very disappointed to see the conversations about net neutrality led by ISOC being misrepresented in The Hill. Like many stakeholders, Public Knowledge attended ISOC’s meetings, but eventually withdrew due to fundamental disagreement with its direction. It is clear that the final product values the perception of consensus over the substance of consumer protection.
“ISOC’s op-ed misleadingly asserts its net neutrality principles were produced by a diverse set of policy experts and that participants came close to reaching consensus. In reality, participants never approached any meaningful consensus, which is reflected by the fact that the report has not been endorsed by even a single participant in the process — not even ISOC itself. Furthermore, there were deep disagreements about process, substance, and ISOC’s role that led most consumer protection and public interest organizations, as well as some industry stakeholders, to abandon these talks altogether.
“While we are always happy to engage with stakeholders, we disagree with the substantive points in the ISOC report and ISOC’s misleading characterization of the process that led to the report’s creation. We would welcome efforts by ISOC to put forth its own views on these matters, rather than attributing them to others.”