FCC to Propose Regulating Internet Service as a Utility for Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

[Renzatic]

Actually, we don't have "net neutrality" since ISPs can prioritize traffic.

What you may be thinking of is US oversight over ICANN (who assigns IP numbers and manages the DNS), which has kept the infrastructure supporting the free flow of information generally free of government control. Actually, the current administration was planning to cede US control over ICANN later this year, but Congress pushed forward a 2-year extension in the December budget bill. The concern is that if the US doesn't oversee ICANN, then countries like China will want to impose direct controls over the internet (right now they need to employ a massive national firewall).

They can now. Up until recently, the FCC had it set so that ISPs were forbidden from prioritizing traffic, but never officially classified them as a utility. Rather, they were information service, as they're currently classified as now.

This is ultimately what tripped up the works, and lead to the hooplah we're now deeply involved in. Apparently, when it comes to legal matters, you have to call a spade a spade, rather than an onion to make it kosher. Information services aren't beholden to nearly as many restrictions as utilities are, and it was thus illegal to hold them accountable as such. Someone sued, can't remember who, and now we're having this discussion.

The important thing to remember is that while there is no restriction on ISPs prioritizing traffic, we've effectively been functioning in a net neutrality-like environment since the 90's at least.

----------

If the telecom companies won't tolerate VPNs being legal, what makes you think that they will tolerate the net-neutrality laws that you are in favour of?

They don't. Haven't you seen the advertisements? Read the reports? Seen the astroturfing? Comcast, Verizon, and Co. are very much against Net Neutrality.

 

[coolfactor]

FCC, please tell the major ISPs to lower their prices for internet access. I pay around $35 for 3 Mbps DSL... come on...

But.... I'm curious.... if you added up all of the fast food, junk food, and coffee stops you make over the course of a month, what would it add up to? More or less than your internet fee? $35 is not a high price. 3Mbps is not that fast in this day and age. I guess you should be fighting for a better balance, but what are you willing to give up to achieve that balance in your own life so that $35 a month doesn't seem like such a big deal?

 

[Aspasia]

But.... I'm curious.... if you added up all of the fast food, junk food, and coffee stops you make over the course of a month, what would it add up to? More or less than your internet fee? $35 is not a high price. 3Mbps is not that fast in this day and age. I guess you should be fighting for a better balance, but what are you willing to give up to achieve that balance in your own life so that $35 a month doesn't seem like such a big deal?

Now I'm curious. What makes you presume the poster gorges on fast food, junk food, and coffee?

 

[Gasu E.]

If you're going to go down that road, here we go.

My health insurance plan has not changed. It has not changed for the past 7 years. But if you'd like to discuss this, start another thread, and we'll definitely discuss it.

BL.

My health plan changed a little bit-- it got better.

 

[Renzatic]

But.... I'm curious.... if you added up all of the fast food, junk food, and coffee stops you make over the course of a month, what would it add up to? More or less than your internet fee? $35 is not a high price. 3Mbps is not that fast in this day and age. I guess you should be fighting for a better balance, but what are you willing to give up to achieve that balance in your own life so that $35 a month doesn't seem like such a big deal?

Considering I pay $50 for a 50/50 fiber connection...

But then again, I live just south of Chattanooga. Competition here is fierce.

 

[Tech198]

all i know is 3Mpbs someone must be far from their local exchange.

 

[A MacBook lover]

But.... I'm curious.... if you added up all of the fast food, junk food, and coffee stops you make over the course of a month, what would it add up to? More or less than your internet fee? $35 is not a high price. 3Mbps is not that fast in this day and age. I guess you should be fighting for a better balance, but what are you willing to give up to achieve that balance in your own life so that $35 a month doesn't seem like such a big deal?

For some, $35 is a lot. And fast food and junk is all they can afford.

 

[gavroche]

Not for nothing, but are you employed, and has your employer-sponsored health plan changed?

If it hasn't, your statement holds no water.

For people to not see widespread changes and cancellations of a wide swath of health care plans out there... requires a complete avoidance of all news sources.

----------

How will it lead to the destruction of the internet? All data being treated the same is exactly how it's been administrated for the last 30 odd years!

He most likely was referring to the idea of going down that road of treating the Internet like a utility. Question: Name me one utility in the United States that does NOT have a tax imposed on it?

----------

If you're going to go down that road, here we go.

My health insurance plan has not changed. It has not changed for the past 7 years. But if you'd like to discuss this, start another thread, and we'll definitely discuss it.

BL.

Wow... so you in particular have not had your particular plan changed... so you must mock and ridicule all those that have had theirs changed or cancelled. Glad you are so caring for your fellow countrymen that have had a lot of problems result.

 

[mozumder]

The proper solution is complete government provided internet.

We do not want private companies determining access to the internet. We want to make sure internet is a public utility and service, like the Postal Service or the roads or defense.

It's only a matter of time before we get rid of the middleman controlling internet access. There is absolutely no benefit for internet access to be privatized.

Private companies are, as always, far less efficient than government. That is why you only need to pay $.50 for mailing a letter via the USPS, instead of $10 for mailing something via FedEx.

Private companies just simply cannot compete against government, and so they should be removed from this service because they are such failures at it.

In fact, the government created the internet via ARPA. It should remain a government product.

I, and most people, do not trust private companies to provide services.

The only people that trusts private companies are wasteful spenders.

 

[Deelron]

"If you like your internet you can keep your internet"...

The Internet is the most free venue for thoughts, creation, and ideas- it has done just fine without government intrusion- how many support other countries governments censoring the Internet or controlling it in any way shape or form.

Net neutrality is bad.

The Internet is not the same thing as the people who provide access to it.

 

[Meandmunch]

"if you like you health plan you can keep it."

i don't believe anything that spews from his mouth....

Another sheeple clueless about the topic at hand.

Want to live in a world where a just handful of companies dictate everything (how, when, how fast and how much), thats where we are heading without this.

 

[tomwvr]

1) I don't want the government involved here - all they will do is what government does best - mess it up, make it more expensive and block content. That is where it is headed

2) Look at the Gas Companies - they make about 15 cents a gallon profit the governments (state and fed) make almost 40-50 cents a gallon in taxes - this is what will happen - government taxes on the the internet

3) If they want it to be fair - like our tax system (HA HA HA) they will make it more expensive for people with higher incomes - since they will have faster speeds since they can afford it.

4) Just remember this great line - from a former president - the most dangerous words you will ever here are ---"Im from the government and Im here to help"

 

[mozumder]

We need more government control.

The Republicans/Libertarians showed us how badly companies have failed America, and how much better and more efficient government is at running things.

The corporatists are truly dangerous.

 

[brinary001]

I'm not as educated on this matter as I should be, so I won't take a side. But anything that gives me lower Internet bills and faster speeds is fine with me. #

 

[i-John]

That would be amazing if it actually happens.

Yeah, we see how great a job they have by overly regulating other industries.

Tech and the internet needs to be left to the people who actually know what they are doing.

 

[2010mini]

Yeah, we see how great a job they have by overly regulating other industries.

Tech and the internet needs to be left to the people who actually know what they are doing.

Who? the cable companies???? Yeah they have done a bang up job so far.

 

[mozumder]

Yeah, we see how great a job they have by overly regulating other industries.

Tech and the internet needs to be left to the people who actually know what they are doing.

Yes, like the government that invented it.

----------

"If you like your internet you can keep your internet"...

The Internet is the most free venue for thoughts, creation, and ideas- it has done just fine without government intrusion- how many support other countries governments censoring the Internet or controlling it in any way shape or form.

Net neutrality is bad.

Is this like when the tea-party scream "Keep your government hands off of our medicare!"

I'm not sure you knew this, but the Internet was invented by the US government.

 

[Mtmspa]

The proper solution is complete government provided internet.

We do not want private companies determining access to the internet. We want to make sure internet is a public utility and service, like the Postal Service or the roads or defense.

It's only a matter of time before we get rid of the middleman controlling internet access. There is absolutely no benefit for internet access to be privatized.

Private companies are, as always, far less efficient than government. That is why you only need to pay $.50 for mailing a letter via the USPS, instead of $10 for mailing something via FedEx.



Private companies just simply cannot compete against government, and so they should be removed from this service because they are such failures at it.

In fact, the government created the internet via ARPA. It should remain a government product.

I, and most people, do not trust private companies to provide services.

The only people that trusts private companies are wasteful spenders.

The goberment is more efficient at nothing. Obama will tax the hell of this and that is his reason for wanting this to be government owned.

If this happens, kiss another freedom good goodbye.

----------

We need more government control.

The Republicans/Libertarians showed us how badly companies have failed America, and how much better and more efficient government is at running things.

The corporatists are truly dangerous.

You are so wrong.

 

[mozumder]

The goberment is more efficient at nothing. Obama will tax the hell of this and that is his reason for wanting this to be government owned.

If this happens, kiss another freedom good goodbye.

I'm sorry, but did you mistakenly think this was a free country? I thought this was the country where the public decides what you can/cannot do? I didn't know you could do what you want? I guess all those laws exist for no reason?

The more government control, the better. We need to reign in and control these dangerous people.

----------



You are so wrong.

You are incorrect.

You agree with me, because you pay $.50 for mail, instead of $10 for fedex.

 

[ellsworth]

While I like the idea, I fear that we'll not only face higher rates, but that the gov't will start taxing internet service like they do phone lines, which will add more to our bills.

Just wanted to quote this so that more people read it.

 

[moderately]

Reference my earlier post...
As for my healthcare...used to be $350 a year, now in CA, it's running me $15000 a year starting this year since it goes up every year. I make too much to get any credits.

At $350/yr you weren't buying healthcare, you were making a donation.

 

[skottichan]

Just wanted to quote this so that more people read it.

Internet access is already taxed.

Both on the federal level and some states are taxing it as a telecomm (Tennessee being one).

At $350/yr you weren't buying healthcare, you were making a donation.

I know right?

I'd sell my soul for $30/mo insurance... granted, it probably would never paid for anything when I needed it tho.

 

[SlugBlanket]

As far as I know, The Pirate Bay was only ever blocked in the UK. Here, we've only had occasional rumors of bittorrent throttling, but no outright blocks.

I was making the point that sites are routinely blocked on both sides of the pond.
Perhaps I should have used wiki leaks to appease the pedants✊✊#

 

[btbeme]

Here's my problem with all of this...

We remove our right to choose an ISP based on our needs, their speed, a price we are willing to pay, availability, etc. Granted, in some areas this isn't much of a choice, but it IS a choice. We then place that responsibility into the hands of a half-dozen appointed officials who have zero accountability to the very folks they are charged with serving.

Zero. Accountability.

Because when was the last time your ballot included a box for choosing the FCC Director? Or the FAA director? Or the EPA Director? Or...

These agencies run roughshod over everyday people. All the time. And they cannot be held to account, or sued for their misdeeds, or battled or reversed or even persuaded by anything less than a very very big check. Certainly not easily. And never in a timely fashion. And then only maybe.

Quit selling out to Big Brother, folks. You can still vote with your wallet - unless you give that vote away. And then you get what you get, with no way to change it.

 

[skottichan]

Here's my problem with all of this...

We remove our right to choose an ISP based on our needs, their speed, a price we are willing to pay, availability, etc. Granted, in some areas this isn't much of a choice, but it IS a choice. We then place that responsibility into the hands of a half-dozen appointed officials who have zero accountability to the very folks they are charged with serving.

Zero. Accountability.

Because when was the last time your ballot included a box for choosing the FCC Director? Or the FAA director? Or the EPA Director? Or...

These agencies run roughshod over everyday people. All the time. And they cannot be held to account, or sued for their misdeeds, or battled or reversed or even persuaded by anything less than a very very big check. Certainly not easily. And never in a timely fashion. And then only maybe.

Quit selling out to Big Brother, folks. You can still vote with your wallet - unless you give that vote away. And then you get what you get, with no way to change it.

So, where's my ability to vote to only have TWC as my broadband provider. Then who's accountable when the advertised speed 30Mb up/10Mb down isn't even close to accurate (currently, it's ~6Mbps/.5Mbps), and after the 10th visit by a tech and just as many modems, I've seen zero improvement.

I guess I could go back to DSL, but guess what, it tops out at what TWC's **** service is giving me now.

I trust big business about as far as I can throw them.

Oh and by the way, you can easily sue the FCC/EPA/etc, it happens every year. By the big businesses you want to give absolute freedom to. They sue the government, so they can dump into our water, or control what you can access on the internet.