Eric Schmidt Quotes

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.

Almost everything the FCC does is challenged in court. There is no clean solution because we have a Communications Act that wasn't written for broadband.

Rules designed for the Ma Bell monopoly during the era of rotary phones were a poor fit for the greatest innovation of our time, the Internet.

The United States needs modern, flexible, light-touch network regulation, not a one-size-fits-all utility model from the 1930s.

The FCC should facilitate, rather than frustrate, innovation.

Simply put, broadband voice is an interstate matter that must be dealt with through clear national standards.

No country should waste wireless spectrum. Especially not India, where the cellphone has become the personal computer.

When the government handed over the running of the Internet backbone to commercial Internet providers, it was the largest legal creation of wealth in the history of the planet.

Wireless carriers certainly don't need the federal government's help.

I oppose any proposal for the federal government to build and operate a nationwide 5G network.

The bottom line is this: I want America to be at the forefront of innovation in the broadcast sector, the wireless sector, and every other sector of the communications industry.

Broadband Internet access service is inherently an interstate service, and that is not a determination that just the FCC has made.

Government must start to look at mobile infrastructure as a critical national resource and not just a resource for tax dollars.

Seriously, we are in the midst of the convergence of voice and data and that is challenging the infrastructure of the telephone companies. There are huge commercial interests in the basic technology, but even more so in content delivery and control of content.

There needs to be some regime that is overseeing access to broadband to make sure we have openess; otherwise, there is a risk it won't be open anymore. We spent quite a bit of time with Verizon policy people in addition to participating in a multilateral discussion with the Federal Communications Commission.

Reclassifying the Internet as a telecommunications service will have dangerous repercussions for years to come.

We should be careful and deliberate in how we allow public entry into our vibrant communications marketplace... This is an issue that should be left to our states.

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

Leadership in telecommunications is also essential, since we are now in the age of e-commerce.

Whether you are a consumer, a hardware maker, a software developer or a provider of cool new services, it's hard to make a move in the American cellphone world without the permission of the companies that own the pipes.

How do we say to the phone companies that you have to maintain an affordable [subsidized] system for everybody in America and the data companies can do whatever they want? It gives us two different Americas.

The current FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, is highly regarded, but some distrust him because he is the former head lobbyist of both the cable and wireless phone industries. He's also made some statements suggesting he doesn't understand or opposes network neutrality.

President Obama's FCC Chairman, Julius Genachowski, has a reputation in D.C. of being a 'tepid' regulator. From reports of his net neutrality proposal, he's living up to that reputation.

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

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