It looks to me like the format changed somewhat from the last version we saw from the committee, so be sure to get the latest version from the FCC Order. Check the WISPA list for Steve Coran’s posts on this topic. This is a “safe harbor” template meaning it is optional but if you use it, at least you won’t get fined for the format. It does not provide safe harbor for the content.
Here is another article that is somewhat critical of the templates: http://gizmodo.com/the-fccs-new-broadband-explainers-just-make-it-more-com-1768948403 I have also seen articles comment along the lines of wouldn’t it have been easier to just require ISPs to advertise their actual prices including all fees, similar to airline tickets. From: Bill Prince Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 7:34 AM To: Motorola III Subject: [AFMUG] FCC wants "nutrition labels" for broadband This is, sadly, on topic. The FCC has proposed something akin to "nutrition labels" for broadband that will "clearly" show such things as speed, caps, and hidden fees. This is an ars technica article about the proposal: http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/04/fccs-nutrition-labels-for-broadband-show-speed-caps-and-hidden-fees/ -- bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
