Looks like we're back to net neutrality for the time being

[admiralsnackbar]

WASHINGTON–Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski (http://topics.wsj.com/person/g/julius-genachowski/5359) has decided to reregulate Internet lines to protect net neutrality, siding with consumer groups and Internet companies worried that Internet providers have too much power. On Wednesday, Mr. Genachowski's staff began briefing the FCC's commissioners on how they will propose to regulate Internet lines under rules that were written for traditional phone networks. Some of those rules won't be applied to Internet networks, FCC officials say, but others will be used to enforce net neutrality, or regulations that require Internet providers to treat traffic equally and not slow or block websites.
Phone and cable companies opposed the FCC reclassifying regulation of Internet lines under Title 2 of the Communications Act, which was written for traditional phone networks and includes provisions such as rate regulations.
Internet providers fear the agency could try to impose rate controls or require them to share their networks with rivals and warned the decision could prompt them to stop investing in new Internet lines. FCC officials say Mr. Genachowski's proposal won't suggest that and that the agency will propose only applying some parts of Title 2 rules to Internet lines.
A FCC spokeswoman didn't return calls or emails for comment.



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104575226583645448758.html?m od=WSJ_latestheadlines

[Stringer_Bell]

I need a bit of a refresher...so this is a good thing, right?

As long as we aren't subjected to the limits of pages we can view per month, blocked cites, and "download" limits - where all limits can be expanded by paying a higher price for what should be free as we roam the internet - then everything should be cool. Who are the people (names and companies if you know) against what is great about the internets?

[ElNono]

We'll see how much leeway they have, considering Comcast just won a case (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/technology/07net.html) against the regulatory authority of the FCC when it comes to this exact thing.
I guess this is the FCC's response to that.

[admiralsnackbar]

We'll see how much leeway they have, considering Comcast just won a case (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/technology/07net.html) against the regulatory authority of the FCC when it comes to this exact thing.
I guess this is the FCC's response to that.

It is -- they got carpet-bombed by casual internet users after the ruling.

[admiralsnackbar]

Who are the people (names and companies if you know) against what is great about the internets?

Basically all service providers have been pushing against net neutrality for profit motives (as you mentioned, a tiered system allowing greater bandwidth for more money).

Beyond this, given most providers are arms of media conglomerates, the 1st amendment concerns about sites being blocked would initially extend to torrent and sharity sites.

[exstatic]

Basically all service providers have been pushing against net neutrality for profit motives (as you mentioned, a tiered system allowing greater bandwidth for more money).

Beyond this, given most providers are arms of media conglomerates, the 1st amendment concerns about sites being blocked would initially extend to torrent and sharity sites.

Sprint would fuck it up for the other providers. Their cell business is in the toilet, they have no media connections that I'm aware of, but they could REALLY clean up with Clear as a refuge for fleeing internet users. Shit, TWC is piggy-backing on them and selling Clear under their product umbrella. It's better or comparable to anything other than RR turbo.

[Drachen]

Sprint would fuck it up for the other providers. Their cell business is in the toilet, they have no media connections that I'm aware of, but they could REALLY clean up with Clear as a refuge for fleeing internet users. Shit, TWC is piggy-backing on them and selling Clear under their product umbrella. It's better or comparable to anything other than RR turbo.

Also, the speed difference is very very small, at least when I tested the Home version of the clear internet.

[mogrovejo]

Great news for Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and all the big corporations that are successfully using the government to keep their gigantic profits at the expenses of the regular user and to protect their incumbency and dominant position at the expenses of innovation.

[boutons_deux]

FCC is trying to get around the Comcast court decision.

Something's got to give, as IPTV, video, and other bandwidth hogs on PCs and PDAs make unsupportable, unsustainable demands on bandwidth.

I have no confidence that the government will make the right decision, because even if it's approximately right, the Repugs will block it.

[greyforest]

I need a bit of a refresher...so this is a good thing, right?


A good thing if you aren't rich or an ISP CEO

[EricB]

God this administration is just so much full of win.

[LnGrrrR]

Great news for Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and all the big corporations that are successfully using the government to keep their gigantic profits at the expenses of the regular user and to protect their incumbency and dominant position at the expenses of innovation.

Considering that other big corporations, telecoms, were on the other side of the fight, I don't quite think you can portray this as corporations vs average joe.

[ChumpDumper]

How are Google, Microsoft and Yahoo keeping their gigantic profits at my expense?

[admiralsnackbar]

Ad campaign to derail US net plan
By Maggie Shiels
Technology reporter, BBC News, Silicon Valley
A $1.4million TV advertising blitz has been launched across the US in an attempt to derail efforts to increase regulation of broadband services.
The ads claim "Washington wants to spend billions to take over the internet" and urges the public to help stop the "Washington takeover".
The campaign is a response to new "net-neutrality" rules that require cable firms to treat all net traffic equally.
The rules are part of plans to bring high speed net access to every citizen.
"This is a naked power grab," Phil Kergen of Americans for Prosperity told BBC News.
He described the new rules as an "aggressive regulatory approach".
"The FCC wants to reduce the internet to an old-fashioned government-regulated utility," he said.
Some of the other groups involved included the National Taxpayers Union, Free State Foundation and the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council.
Market failure
The regulation was introduced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) following a high-profile spat with cable firm Comcast.
A court ruled that the regulator did not have the power to sanction the firm for selectively slowing down the connections of subscribers who downloaded large files.


Advocacy groups said that the ruling threatened net neutrality as well as putting plans to provide every American citizen with access to high speed internet in "legal limbo".
Last week the FCC said it would reclassify broadband services from an information service to a telecommunications service.
For cable companies and internet service providers this means moving from a light-touch regulatory system to a more hands on one.
Commission chairman Julius Genachowski said the reclassification is needed for it to pass formal net neutrality rules and to implement parts of its national broadband plan, released in March.
Meanwhile one lawmaker is seeking to strip the FCC of its power to regulate internet access services without evidence of a market failure.
"I see no reason for internet regulation," said Republican Representative Cliff Stearns who is also a senior member of the Communications, Technology and Internet subcommittee.
"If there is ever a cause for regulation, it is a decision to be made by Congress - not the FCC."
In October, Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, and Representative Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, introduced bills to prohibit the FCC from creating formal net neutrality rules, after the agency launched a rule-making process to do so. Both bills have gone nowhere
'Misinformation'
As the advertising strategy was announced, advocacy group and net neutrality supporters Free Press hosted a day-long forum on media reform.
At the event, FCC member Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat, hit out at "misinformation" efforts by groups opposed to the FCC's course of action.
"An unfortunate reality is that having an open forum with reasonable and honest debate in this sphere appears unlikely," said Ms Clyburn.
"Instead, the lobbying machine for some extremely powerful interests has already been churning out quote-worthy lines at a rapid rate. We are merely looking to preserve the authority that almost everyone assumed we had ... prior to the court's decision."
The voice-over internet telephone service Skype, with over 560million users, is a supporter of the FCC's attempts to shore up its power to oversee broadband services.
"We don't see this as about regulating the internet. It is just making sure that people who control the on-ramp to the internet provide fair and balanced access," Josh Silverman, Skype's chief executive officer told the BBC.
"The right answer is for Congress to mandate and give the FCC the appropriate authority. Providing open access to content is a fundamental principle of the internet," he said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/technology/8678750.stm