FCC Votes in Favor of Net Neutrality Rules, Classifies Broadband Service as a Utility

[sseaton1971]

I think there are valid arguments for and against Net Neutrality, and I don't think we will fully understand what the FCC's latest decision means for businesses and consumers for some time.

I honestly don't know exactly where I stand on all of this (there are too many variables), but I hope they got it right. I doubt the decision to classify broadband service as a utility will ever be reversed, even if the decision is later determined to be bad for businesses, consumers, or both.

 

[zin]

Someone's got their rose tinted glasses on. I do hope you understand that this is a privacy move. It has nothing to really do with getting fast lane Internet out. If you like China's policies on Internet privacy welcome to the new America in 10 years if this passes. Also what keeps this from spreading since companies like AT&T have broadband all over the world. Verizon is still connected to Vodophone. Now realize this affects everyone from t-Mobile to Hugh's net to your local mom and pop ISPs. Not only will this lead to privacy issue but it will mean fcc fees, federal tax and state tax on your new Internet connection. On the currently federally regulated plain Jane nothing on it telephone lines the fees and taxes are 70-75% of the total amount on the bill. Would you be ok with a 20-40 dollars increase in your Internet bill? I bet most wouldn't.

You are scaremongering.

China has an explicit list of blocked websites. If you access questionable websites often then you're carted off in a van in the middle of the night and disappear. This is nothing like that.

This doesn't affect operations in other countries. AT&T and Verizon do not operationally control their investments internationally; that is up to their local partners. A U.S. Federal court doesn't even have jurisdiction to enforce any orders on international operations. In addition, you'll find that net neutrality or something similar thereof already exists in many other countries, particularly Europe.

How will this lead to privacy issues? This is how the Internet has always worked. Practically nothing changes for the end consumer.

The FCC already stated it will forego the authority to regulate rates. There will be no fees and no taxes. Almost every senator and representative would lose their jobs if that happened.

Your bill is already artificially inflated as a result of local telecoms monopolies. Any increases in prices are due to the telecoms and not due to the FCC.

Also I would like a source on that last point. 75% of your telephone bill being FCC fees and taxes?

----------

The government is in your interwebs regulating now and you're celebrating.
It's like none of you have ever even seen the US government at work. Were a nation trillions of dollars in debt and we just handed them the internet cookie jar. This is NOT going to be a good thing.

Have you even read the FCC brief?

They're not regulating your Internet. They're regulating the providers of your Internet service. Nothing is going to change from the point of view of the consumer. Your Internet experience will be as a great (or bad) as it's always been.

Unless you're a Comcast customer. In which case you'll be relieved that they can't throttle Netflix anymore.

 

[KPOM]

Oh, and when 'a future President Walker or Cruz Administration', I'll do two things. 1) Point out that they're violating the law by doing so. 2) Work against the apparent coup of the legitimate government they deposed.

Except that they won't be breaking the law and you would be.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I hate comments like this, made by people who obviously weren't adversely affected by the ACA...

And I love comments by people that just parrot the crap from Fox News, the GOP, and other sources of FUD.

Yes, the ACA has failed people, but it has helped more than it was failed. Like I said, it could be better, but watch what the GOP has for a replacement. It could be absolutely nothing.

And the rest of the world watches, and shakes their heads.

----------

Yesterday's move is going to increase the influence of lobbyists. How that's a good thing must be something only a "progressive" in the ultra-diverse world of technology could understand.

I prefer to look at it a little more positively. This could be the thing that gets the people back into the game, so to speak, and pulls their politicians nose out of the trough of the lobbyists.

But the first ting people have to realize is that there is enough FUD and lies to fight through to get to the truth that it's going to take their involvement, and 'education'. Yeah, it's hard, but living is too. Being a fear based billiard ball between Fox News, the lying liars, and the industry AstroTurf groups isn't all that easy either.

 

[akm3]

They've made it so you can't throttle or block specific data. They also made it so that state laws disallowing new ISP's from entering areas no longer matter. If you want to not upgrade infrastructure or throttle people, fine, another ISP will come along and take all of your customers. This is a win/win for the people. Costs should go down, speeds should go up. It wouldn't surprised me if this eventually ended data caps, as ISP's are forced to compete.. finally.

But you can't throttle or block specific data FOR BROADBAND. And Broadband was defined as 25mbps down and 3mbps up or greater speeds.

So if you currently have less than that, they can continue throttling or blocking specific data, right? And, they can't advertise it as 'broadband'

AND the telecoms have a disincentive to actually offer broadband because they'd have to stop being net un-neutral.

 

[nt5672]

What exactly did we win? I haven't heard much about this...

We won the right for another government agency (like NSA, IRS, etc) to rule absolutely over the internet. Of course, it looks rosy now, just like Obamacare did, because they need people to think that way in order for those same people to not protest the new government power. Once the power is taken, we begin the slow drip out of the bucket of freedom with no way to get it back.

 

[Renzatic]

Have you even read the FCC brief?

They're not regulating your Internet. They're regulating the providers of your Internet service. Nothing is going to change from the point of view of the consumer. Your Internet experience will be as a great (or bad) as it's always been.

Unless you're a Comcast customer. In which case you'll be relieved that they can't throttle Netflix anymore.

He and others like him need to realize there's a huge difference between regulation of content, and regulation of traffic on the internet. The latter is what net neutrality deals with. The briefing, which I've read through twice now (it's only 5 pages, so it's not exactly like I had to spend a lot of time and effort with it) only concerns itself with the flow of the generic bits and bytes without differentiating between what those bits and bytes are carrying.

As for everyone claiming no one's read the 300 page document, so ANYTHING could be in there...no. The 5 page brief is the Net Neutrality law. Those extra 295 are the FCC giving a detailed line by line explanation and potential outcomes of each and every part of the new law. It's there to cover the FCCs ass for when they inevitably get sued.

It'd be nice to read, admittedly, but it's really nothing more than an overly verbose FAQ for the main set of laws, which are rather simple and plainly detailed.

----------

We won the right for another government agency (like NSA, IRS, etc) to rule absolutely over the internet. Of course, it looks rosy now, just like Obamacare did, because they need people to think that way in order for those same people to not protest the new government power. Once the power is taken, we begin the slow drip out of the bucket of freedom with no way to get it back.

The NSA doesn't need Title II to do what it does.

 

[nt5672]

The final doc was not open for public review and comment. There was a tidal wave of support for this thing called Net Neutrality. A first draft was made, everyone said YAY! A new draft was made, what was in it wouldn't be released until it was passed. It's 332 pages, what is in it? People, congressman all called for some transparency. It wasn't given. They took the wave of support for "Net Neutrality", grabbed a blank book, filled it with regulations, wrote Net Neutrailty on it and passed it to a round of cheers.

What is in it? We don't know, yet we celebrate. The devil I'm sure will be in the details.

Just like ObamaCare and look how that turned out.

 

[marco114]

This whole thing will end up HELPING the telcoms, this is why:

1. FCC Imposes new regulations.

2. Increased regulation = increased costs = LESS freedom

3. Net Neutrality Tax gets added to your bill

4. New regulations makes it even harder for new broadband companies to compete with the giants

5. In the end, the consumer loses. Less choice, higher costs. Same crappy connection.

I wouldn't be surprised if the telcom's REDUCE your speeds and charge for bandwidth/megs.

 

[Renzatic]

Just like ObamaCare and look how that turned out.

You do know that the internet was once regulated under Title II in the not too distant past, right? Modem and DSL internet were regulated up until 2006 I believe, when they were reclassified as information services. All we're seeing here now is the FCC going back to the old standard.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the government wasn't controlling and censoring the internet prior to 2006.

 

[NT1440]

You do know that the internet was once regulated under Title II in the not too distant past, right? Modem and DSL internet were regulated up until 2006 I believe, when they were reclassified as information services. All we're seeing here now is the FCC going back to the old standard.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the government wasn't controlling and censoring the internet prior to 2006.

2002 & 2005 FCC rulings, respectively.

I'm constantly amazed at the number of people who have tons to say on a topic, but can't seem to even look back a decade ago to realize that the internet has NOT been a "common carrier" for merely a blip in the last 20 decades.

Cheers to you for knowing something on the topic!

 

[zin]

This whole thing will end up HELPING the telcoms, this is why:

1. FCC Imposes new regulations.

There are no new regulations, not in that sense. There are no price controls nor regulation of particular fees between providers.

4. New regulations makes it even harder for new broadband companies to compete with the giants

Ironically the FCC did not go far enough to rectify this. They have forfeited their authority to enforce unbundling (which opens up the last mile infrastructure to competitors who can install their own equipment or use existing equipment).

I wouldn't be surprised if the telcom's REDUCE your speeds and charge for bandwidth/megs.

They already do that. That's what you currently pay for.

 

[cocky jeremy]

But you can't throttle or block specific data FOR BROADBAND. And Broadband was defined as 25mbps down and 3mbps up or greater speeds.

So if you currently have less than that, they can continue throttling or blocking specific data, right? And, they can't advertise it as 'broadband'

AND the telecoms have a disincentive to actually offer broadband because they'd have to stop being net un-neutral.

I assume they can throttle for anything that's under that. Not sure though. It won't matter though because if they purposely offer 24.99 Mb/s, another company can come in, offer 50 Mb/s and steal all of their customers. That alone will convince them to keep up rather than purposely stay behind. Especially with the ruling that cities can build their own networks, regardless of state laws now.

 

[citizenzen]

Facts like this will never be revealed in the not too distant future. No one will know, and no one will be upset. With the blessing of Net Neutrality the administration gets their wishes to control what is published. A wonderful system borrowed from the Chinese. They'll wipe Fox News and other entities that upset them off the face of the earth. Free golf balls for all!

That's great. I love golf.

 

[Renzatic]

Cheers to you for knowing something on the topic!

The saddest thing about all this is that just about everything I know about the subject came about from the roughly 15 minutes I spent looking it all up on Google over the last couple of years.

 

[technosix]

Image



You do realize this thread isn't even about net neutrality?

Of course.

Think... And it'll become obvious to you.

It'll also present you with one more opportunity to post another cutesy image to the delight of the juvenile crowd

 

[Renzatic]

Of course.

Think... And it'll become obvious to you.

It'll also present you with one more opportunity to post another cutesy image to the delight of the juvenile crowd

I upvoted his post because it's true. You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[mytdave]

Rip

The truly free (as in freedom) and open internet just died.

It's going to take a while for a number of you propeller-heads to realize what you just lost.

 

[nt5672]

You do know that the internet was once regulated under Title II in the not too distant past, right? Modem and DSL internet were regulated up until 2006 I believe, when they were reclassified as information services. All we're seeing here now is the FCC going back to the old standard.

I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the government wasn't controlling and censoring the internet prior to 2006.

Yes, at one time, we had a government that could be trusted. We did have privacy for telephones, the right to not have our property seized without a court order, etc. And while those laws are still on the books, the government for all practical purposes ignore them on a regular basis. They lie to us every time they want to reduce our freedoms.

This is not directed at one political party, as they are both guilty and that is the problem. Obama was going to close Gitmo, have an open political process, stop the war, etc. None of which he did. He imply told us what we needed to hear to elect him. He told us we could continue to go to our doctor, he would not cancel our insurance, that it would be cheaper, etc. None of which turned out correct.

We will not return to a more honest government until we stop giving them any new powers what-so-ever.

BTW, The rules allow the FCC to address “questionable” ISP practices that the agency hasn’t yet anticipated on a case-by-case basis. Just like the IRS refusing to legally process registrations that were politically contrary to the administrations wishes.

Now the administration can address internet content that is politically contrary to the its wishes (of course on a case by case basis). Just like they used the banking system to target political enemies that were engaged in completely legal activities (an illegal operation called Choke Point run by the Departments of Justice and Treasury). How about the illegal ATF gun walking scandal whose purpose was to generate more gun regulations.

People need to wake up and understand that today, there is no government regulation that is good, no matter what is promised, because it will be misused for the blatant gain of political power and control.

 

[MrX8503]

The truly free (as in freedom) and open internet just died.

It's going to take a while for a number of you propeller-heads to realize what you just lost.

ISPs throttling you based on your content is "freedom"?

 

[i-John]

So "broadband" is a utility and must be net neutral.

But didn't they also say "Broadband" requires a minimum Mbps?

So basically they just made a huge disincentive for cable companies to upgrade the speeds so they can continue to throttle and be net-non-neutral?

The government can also control what you can and can't see on the internet.

----------

ISPs throttling you based on your content is "freedom"?

There was one incident 7 years ago. That's it... just one incident that was reported. Guess what happened? The unregulated internet sorted itself out without the government.

 

[nt5672]

The saddest thing about all this is that just about everything I know about the subject came about from the roughly 15 minutes I spent looking it all up on Google over the last couple of years.

We agree here, because you don't even realize how sensitive you are the propaganda that gets published daily. The truth is there, but it takes really hard work to weed through the misinformation and lies on the internet. Hard work that most people don't want to do. Hard work where people just stop when they find the information that fits their or their friends political views.

Of course what the FCC published makes perfect sense, were it not for the overwhelming untrustworthiness of the government and without a simple analysis on how the new rules could be misused. Most people are just too gullible to ask how the rules could be misused before they laud the benefits.

 

[Renzatic]

We agree here, because you don't even realize how sensitive you are the propaganda that gets published daily.

My government controller does tell me I'm pretty easily led.

Of course what the FCC published makes perfect sense, were it not for the overwhelming untrustworthiness of the government and without a simple analysis on how the new rules could be misused. Most people are just too gullible to ask how the rules could be misused before the laud the benefits.

Though now on a serious note, I've read the rules, and it'd take ignoring them almost entirely to abuse them to the extent you're claiming. It literally says absolutely nothing about the content of information that's being carried over the internet, only that it has to pass unmolested from source to requestee across every network it touches.

What are you seeing that I'm not?

----------

There was one incident 7 years ago. That's it... just one incident that was reported. Guess what happened? The unregulated internet sorted itself out without the government.

So you're saying the internet has been entirely unregulated since its inception, without any government control or contact until now?

 

[Happybunny]

I have just one question for ALL you anti government people on this forum.

You all seem to hate and distrust YOUR own government with a passion, that boarders on out right hatred.

But I would lay odds that you expect and demand that the rest of the world listens with respect to the USA, and does what it's told

My question Why should we?

You hate your government, you cannot in all seriousness expect us to do any different.

 

[ctdonath]

I've read the rules

You have? where are they?
I don't mean a summary/paraphrase/whatever, I mean the actual 300+ pages kept secret up to and past the vote. I'm looking for them, and haven't found 'em anywhere.

----------

I have just one question for ALL you anti government people on this forum. ... I would lay odds that you expect and demand that the rest of the world listens with respect to the USA, and does what it's told

Uh, no, we don't.

You do whatever you like, short of moral outrage (ex.: ISIS should be eviscerated immediately for what it's doing) or attacking our friends (ex.: invade Israel, we'll pound you until you leave).

If you're going to listen to and respect the USA, it's because we've earned your attention and respect, not because we're compelling you to.
Just like we US citizens view our government: consent of the governed, not compulsion of the oppressed.