U.S. Appeals Court Rules in Favor of FCC Net Neutrality Rules

[Benjamin Frost]

Can't stand Net Neutrality. It's OrwellSpeak like Love is Hate or War is Peace. The complete opposite to what it stands for.

Why can't we pay for superior service? I don't want my service slowed to a crawl by scum downloading torrents and pirating. Do we insist that everyone has to travel at the speed of the slowest car? No. We have multiple lanes. Net Neutrality is the Democrats trying to impose socialism on us. They can bugger off.

 

[CFreymarc]

Lmao "the whims of regulators"... what, so like, looking out for the average person? I bet they hate unions too.

Here we go. Unions are great for the common man but have a habit of suppressing the extraordinary man. I'm mostly a serial entrepreneur and first with a college degree in my family history. I was appalled how much I was cut out of family socials and other neighborhood gatherings since I was now "one of them" not participating in collective bargaining. I ended up moving out of town to a more friendly career environment.

 

[bradl]

So there really isn't a victory yet. The telecoms will fight this all the way to the Supreme Court.

Look at the current makeup of SCOTUS: 8 justices, one waiting in the wings, and not even taking into account the POTUS election coming up, if the case were held now, you're looking at a pretty much split decision, making the Appeals court ruling stand..

.. and in regards to the 'constitutional free speech rights for the ISP' comment, it is a very very hard stretch to apply Citizens United as the means to throttle one service for another, and require the people to pay more to have that service unthrottled. There is no 'free speech' justification there.

Either way, even if taken on appeal, SCOTUS won't be hearing the case this season; they'll be lucky to get it 8 - 10 months down the road, putting a new Congress, new administration, and new SCOTUS justice on the bench, changing the landscape for the entire case.

The ISPs are taking the gamble of a coin toss on November 8th, and could potentially find themselves better off with the ruling they have now, than having something worse then.

[doublepost=1466014722][/doublepost]

Can't stand Net Neutrality. It's OrwellSpeak like Love is Hate or War is Peace. The complete opposite to what it stands for.

Why can't we pay for superior service? I don't want my service slowed to a crawl by scum downloading torrents and pirating. Do we insist that everyone has to travel at the speed of the slowest car? No. We have multiple lanes. Net Neutrality is the Democrats trying to impose socialism on us. They can bugger off.

Your service won't be slowed to a crawl. That's the point of Net Neutrality. You obviously don't understand it, nor what it means to you, the consumer.

BL.

 

[Renzatic]

The prince may have won the castle but the merchants can still refuse to keep the route.

Kind of an backwards analogy, considering it's the merchants that most benefit from net neutrality. They can deliver the content straight to your homes without the local dukes demanding a two way toll.
[doublepost=1466015012][/doublepost]

Why can't we pay for superior service? I don't want my service slowed to a crawl by scum downloading torrents and pirating. Do we insist that everyone has to travel at the speed of the slowest car? No. We have multiple lanes. Net Neutrality is the Democrats trying to impose socialism on us. They can bugger off.

You can pay for superior service. Net neutrality assures that that's all you pay for. If you want a gigabit connection, you pay for it, then get access to everything at up to gigabit speeds. It's the way the internet works now.

Without net neutrality, you'd pay for a gigabit connection, then the ISPs could make you pay extra to access content at gigabit speeds. Like you want to watch Amazon Video? That gigabit connection isn't enough, because that's just for the basic internet service. Comcast throttles people down to 2Mbps if they aren't paying extra for the Comcast Internet Video Line (but Comcast's Movie Service isn't throttled at all on that basic connection...how convenient).

Do you see how this works? You won't be paying more for better. You'll be nickel and dimed to get what you're getting now.

edit: it's funny how everyone brings up the OMG SOCIALISM I LIKE MUH FREEDOMS argument as a kneejerk reaction to net neutrality. The fact is, the internet as it is right now is the most free market in the entire world. If you want to make something, and make money off of it, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from doing so. You could challenge Facebook, and make a billion dollars if you have the right idea. Your only limits are your skills, your talent, and your dedication.

ISPs are merely gateways to the internet. Without net neutrality in place, they'd control their customers access to everything beyond them. You would have to get on bended knee and ask the last mile ISPs if they'd be so kind as to allow your content through their networks to your customers without any restrictions or boundaries.

Is that something you all really want?

 

[tennisproha]

The court also rejected legal arguments from telecommunications industry groups that the rules should not apply to mobile phone web use or that they violated the constitutional free-speech rights of internet service providers

wow they'll basically throw anything at the wall and see what sticks. Piece of **** *******s. I swear if I had records and phone convos of the **** at&t has pulled over me the last 15 years, I'd be taking their ass to court. Lying, scheming, scamming little **** ****ers.

Edit: that's a lot of asterisks! you can't say ****?! What about my freedom of speech?

Edit 2: damnit! It did it again

Wow, the audacity these scumbags have...

Glassed Silver:mac

No kidding. Well said.

 

[nt5672]

Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality and everything to do with government control. While you might be tempted to say, "Yeh, this will stop those evil corporations", the problem is when you start thinking about a little longer timeframe. Lets say Democrats are in power, and a strong Democrat contributor, say the evil US Telecom, makes a big contribution in return for some rules that no longer protect freedom or neutrality. Guess what the government can do, they just issue a new ruling. Does not have to go through Congress, they just will it to happen. Then what, another Supreme Court battle, and 2 years later it will be too late to change it. This is a huge loss for freedom that will not being taken advantage of today, will be taken advantage of later. Oh and BTW, it works the same way if the Republicans are in charge.

 

[tennisproha]

Also, that poor eagle is getting electrocuted in the FCC seal. What the ****?!

 

[Renzatic]

Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality and everything to do with government control.

So what you're saying is that no matter what we do, we're all gonna end up getting ****** by someone, so why even try?

Remember, the internet was governed under Title II Net Neutrality laws, set by the FCC, back when it was still primarily a copper based service. It was the same FCC that set a more relaxed stance back in, I think, 2006 or so. It was when our telcos and ISPs started abusing the more lax standards that brought us back to where we are today.

 

[chown33]

That FCC badge looks like an effort from a baked student.

It uses secret electronics symbols only engineers know. I could tell you, but then I'd have to shunt you to ground.

 

[pat500000]

Why is this a good news? Why is this a bad news?

 

[BeefCake 15]

The last mile for internet will always be the problem.

 

[bradl]

Why is this a good news? Why is this a bad news?

The good news, which I'll quote from @Renzatic:

You can pay for superior service. Net neutrality assures that that's all you pay for. If you want a gigabit connection, you pay for it, then get access to everything at up to gigabit speeds. It's the way the internet works now.

Without net neutrality, you'd pay for a gigabit connection, then the ISPs could make you pay extra to access content at gigabit speeds. Like you want to watch Amazon Video? That gigabit connection isn't enough, because that's just for the basic internet service. Comcast throttles people down to 2Mbps if they aren't paying extra for the Comcast Internet Video Line (but Comcast's Movie Service isn't throttled at all on that basic connection...how convenient).

Do you see how this works? You won't be paying more for better. You'll be nickel and dimed to get what you're getting now.

ISPs are merely gateways to the internet. Without net neutrality in place, they'd control their customers access to everything beyond them. You would have to get on bended knee and ask the last mile ISPs if they'd be so kind as to allow your content through their networks to your customers without any restrictions or boundaries.

Why is this bad news? Those screaming the 'bad news' really are not understanding how Net Neutrality works, and what it is designed to prevent, which is the 2nd paragraph of Renzatic's post, as quoted above.

BL.

 

[pat500000]

The good news, which I'll quote from @Renzatic:



Why is this bad news? Those screaming the 'bad news' really are not understanding how Net Neutrality works, and what it is designed to prevent, which is the 2nd paragraph of Renzatic's post, as quoted above.

BL.

Okay. I see how it works. I get the speed that I pay for..that's great and they can't screw me over....and there is no bad news other than isp trying t fight it.

 

[Renzatic]

Okay. I see how it works. I get the speed that I pay for..that's great and they can't screw me over....and there is no bad news other than isp trying t fight it.

The ISPs are fighting it because it's cutting off an easy revenue stream. They could doublecharge you for what you're getting now by throttling down or outright blocking any internet content you're not subscribed to receive.

The best way to explain it would be to think of the internet divided up like cable TV subscriptions. Instead of getting all the internet for a flat fee, you have to pay to get your social media packages, your movie packages, your google account packages, etc. etc. etc.

 

[pat500000]

The ISPs are fighting it because it's cutting off an easy revenue stream. They could doublecharge you for what you're getting now by throttling down or outright blocking any internet content you're not subscribed to receive.

The best way to explain it would be to think of the internet divided up like cable TV subscriptions. Instead of getting all the internet for a flat fee, you have to pay to get your social media packages, your movie packages, your google account packages, etc. etc. etc.

It's almost like apps with in-apps. Yuck.

 

[Renzatic]

It's almost like apps with in-apps. Yuck.

Kindasorta, yeah.

Though if you want to get into the more economically philosophical aspects of it, ISPs could prioritize their own services over 3rd parties, offering them up for less money, choking out their competition. Large internet services like Amazon and Facebook could do the same, paying for priority over a network, pushing out the little guys.

The way things are right now, where data is data, and ISPs don't concern themselves over what it is or where it came from unless it's effecting network stability, is the way the internet has always been ran, and the way it should always be ran. You get more competition, better quality services, and anyone can come up with the next big thing.

 

[pat500000]

Kindasorta, yeah.

Though if you want to get into the more economically philosophical aspects of it, ISPs could prioritize their own services over 3rd parties, offering them up for less money, choking out their competition. Large internet services like Amazon and Facebook could do the same, paying for priority over a network, pushing out the little guys.

The way things are right now, where data is data, and ISPs don't concern themselves over what it is or where it came from unless it's effecting network stability, is the way the internet has always been ran, and the way it should always be ran. You get more competition, better quality services, and anyone can come up with the next big thing.

I guess this is why net neutrality is important. But the fight is ongoing.

 

[kdarling]

That FCC badge looks like an effort from a baked student.

It's a 1935 update of a 1926 seal. What do you expect from back then?

Yeah, needs updating. It shows radio antennas, plus telephone and telegraph lines. Probably need to replace the latter two with satellites and fiber optics.

It uses secret electronics symbols only engineers know. I could tell you, but then I'd have to shunt you to ground.

Not only that, but the particular version shown in the article has a known wiring mistake in it !

(Hint: look at where each of the three antenna feed lines go.)

 

[chown33]

Not only that, but the particular version shown in the article has a known wiring mistake in it !

(Hint: look at where each of the three antenna feed lines go.)

Don't be giving away teh secret symbols. I'll report you to the High Capacitor, and you'll be discharged.

For those who wish to join the secret society, I refer you to the Inductor.

I think the wiring error is funny. It's not like the FCC has a shortage of free graphics for their seal:
https://www.fcc.gov/general/logos-fcc

 

[Renzatic]

I'll report you to the High Capacitor, and you'll be discharged.

I see what you did there.

 

[chown33]

I see what you did there.

Ω I.

 

[Renzatic]

Ω I.

I'm gonna upvote you, laugh, and pretend I get the joke.

 

[chown33]

... and pretend I get the joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm

I'm gonna upvote you, laugh,

A chortle or giggle is more apropos on PRSI. <snicker, sigh>

 

[Renzatic]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohm

...and then suddenly I get it. What's worse is that I knew that was the symbol for ohms. I was sitting here going omme? Ommeye? Omega I? Wuh?

Then I see it spelled out, and think...oh my. OH, GOD! I'M SO DUMB!

A chortle or giggle is more apropos on PRSI. <snicker, sigh>

EYEROLL!

 

[chown33]

...and then suddenly I get it. What's worse is that I knew that was the symbol for ohms. I was sitting here going omme? Ommeye? Omega I? Wuh?

Then I see it spelled out, and think...oh my. OH, GOD! I'M SO DUMB!

I was trying to come up with a usable pictograph, and thought of

, but it might be too obscure.

Also thought of √-1 but that's a bit obscure, too.