"Net Neutrality" takes it on the Chin

[Oddball]

Finally, some GOOD news, for a *ahem* change.

US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality'

<snip>

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company. It had challenged the FCC's authority to impose so-called "net neutrality" obligations on broadband providers.

The ruling also marks a serious setback for the FCC, which is trying to officially set net neutrality regulations. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski argues that such rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from using their control over Internet access to favor some online content and services over others.

The decision also has serious implications for the massive national broadband plan released by the FCC last month.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100406/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_internet_rules

 

[boedicca]

This is great news!

Property Rights - 1; Big Government - 0

 

[Big Fitz]

Finally, some GOOD news, for a *ahem* change.

US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality'

<snip>

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company. It had challenged the FCC's authority to impose so-called "net neutrality" obligations on broadband providers.

The ruling also marks a serious setback for the FCC, which is trying to officially set net neutrality regulations. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski argues that such rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from using their control over Internet access to favor some online content and services over others.

The decision also has serious implications for the massive national broadband plan released by the FCC last month.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100406/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_internet_rules

More like got its throat slit. I has a happy.

 

[Big Fitz]

Finally, some GOOD news, for a *ahem* change.

US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality'

<snip>

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company. It had challenged the FCC's authority to impose so-called "net neutrality" obligations on broadband providers.

The ruling also marks a serious setback for the FCC, which is trying to officially set net neutrality regulations. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski argues that such rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from using their control over Internet access to favor some online content and services over others.

The decision also has serious implications for the massive national broadband plan released by the FCC last month.

US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality' - Yahoo! News

More like got its throat slit. I has a happy.

 

[Claudette]

Super

 

[WillowTree]

what is "net neutrality" code for?

 

[xsited1]

"Net Neutrality" takes it on the Chin

Good news, but for how long? I fear Big Brother will eventually get "his" way.

 

[Oddball]

what is "net neutrality" code for?

Chinese internet in America.

 

[blu]

what is "net neutrality" code for?

Chinese internet in America.

uh really? net neutrality is GOOD! I will see how happy you are once net neutrality is defeated and your ISP decides that this board isn't worth carrying or that you have to pay an extra $20 a month to access your web-based email

 

[blu]

also many places have no competition. comcast and cox have monoplies in most areas and if you dont like their service once net neutraltiy is gone then you are fucked.

 

[uscitizen]

Property rights for big corporatons scores a win.

Guess who will be paying more and getting less?

 

[The T]

Property rights for big corporatons scores a win.

Guess who will be paying more and getting less?

By this statement...you show that you have NO REGARD for their property, or what they DO with it. This is what you are saying.

When you are on someone's server? That is their Domain, and YOU are subject to their rules/procedures.

Much the same as this Board. They too have RULES. You wanna go to the FCC and complain *IF* you ever get banned?

 

[hyakku]

Do you all even know what net neutrality is? How can any consumer be happy that net neutrality got defeated.

That's like saying, "Jeez, I wish the government would stop making water companies screen for lead poisoning in their water, so fucking intrusive."

Net neutrality isn't code for Chinese internet, how does that even make fucking sense. net neutrality means that your ISP can't throttle bandwith traffic based on how they see fit.

Without net neutrality, you ARE on the internet where big brother (i.e., your ISP) can control EXACTLY what you can and cannot access, what websites are "safe" or "worthy" for you to see or be on their network, and which websites they find "offensive" that they may ban.

Net neutrality is a NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ANY SITE type of law, but leave it up to the dipshits to be excited about this. Thankfully I've got FIOS at home and they don't throttle bandwith, but I know when I visit other state's and friends who have comcast it's abysmal. Legal torrents can be throttled, taking DAYS to download something that should have taken minutes, certain websites of competing ISP's are blocked, it's hilarious. It's like being on an Orwellian internet where Comcast tells you what you can and cannot watch, download, and consume.

God I wish people weren't so stupid.

 

[blu]

Property rights for big corporatons scores a win.

Guess who will be paying more and getting less?

By this statement...you show that you have NO REGARD for their property, or what they DO with it. This is what you are saying.

When you are on someone's server? That is their Domain, and YOU are subject to their rules/procedures.

Much the same as this Board. They too have RULES. You wanna go to the FCC and complain *IF* you ever get banned?

we will see how happy you are when you are forced to pay $100/m for 1mb down and are limited to 20 websites. at least the "free market" will be working then

 

[The T]

Property rights for big corporatons scores a win.

Guess who will be paying more and getting less?

By this statement...you show that you have NO REGARD for their property, or what they DO with it. This is what you are saying.

When you are on someone's server? That is their Domain, and YOU are subject to their rules/procedures.

Much the same as this Board. They too have RULES. You wanna go to the FCC and complain *IF* you ever get banned?

we will see how happy you are when you are forced to pay $100/m for 1mb down and are limited to 20 websites. at least the "free market" will be working then

i see. Then you mark yourself that fears real cometition, and wants Nanny Government to force these evil doers to fall in line with your thinking.

It's their intellectual property, and can run it as they see fit. There ARE plenty of Sites out there that provide a better bang for the buck. Perhaps you're too lazy to go look?

The FCC was wrong in this. They were trying to dictate functions, information, and other rules under the guise of 'Fairness'.

The FCC has no authority for such dictates, especially on Internet Networks.

 

[blu]

By this statement...you show that you have NO REGARD for their property, or what they DO with it. This is what you are saying.

When you are on someone's server? That is their Domain, and YOU are subject to their rules/procedures.

Much the same as this Board. They too have RULES. You wanna go to the FCC and complain *IF* you ever get banned?

we will see how happy you are when you are forced to pay $100/m for 1mb down and are limited to 20 websites. at least the "free market" will be working then

i see. Then you mark yourself that fears real cometition, and wants Nanny Government to force these evil doers to fall in line with your thinking.

It's their intellectual property, and can run it as they see fit. There ARE plenty of Sites out there that provide a better bang for the buck. Perhaps you're too lazy to go look?

The FCC was wrong in this. They were trying to dictate functions, information, and other rules under the guise of 'Fairness'.

The FCC has no authority for such dictates, especially on Internet Networks.

I really don't think you know what you are talking about. there is no inteletucally property involved here. net neutratlity is about forcing ISPs to keep the internet open and allow its customers equal access to all sites. without net neutrality ISPs can pick and choose what sites you can visit, what content you can view, what games you can play, etc.

 

[blu]

what is "net neutrality" code for?

Chinese internet in America.

we will have chinese internet if net neutrality isnt enforced. ISPs will choose what you can see and when, if it all

 

[The T]

Oh and WHY we are at it? BEWARE of 'Marquis of reprisal'

From the Article: "The more likely scenario, Scott believes, is that the agency will simply reclassify broadband as a more heavily regulated telecommunications service. And that, ironically, could be the worst-case outcome from the perspective of the phone and cable companies, he noted."

IF and when that happens? Think they'll try this again?

What do you think?

 

[Darkwind]

what is "net neutrality" code for?

Chinese internet in America.

uh really? net neutrality is GOOD! I will see how happy you are once net neutrality is defeated and your ISP decides that this board isn't worth carrying or that you have to pay an extra $20 a month to access your web-based email

Pure fear-mongering.

 

[The T]

we will see how happy you are when you are forced to pay $100/m for 1mb down and are limited to 20 websites. at least the "free market" will be working then

i see. Then you mark yourself that fears real cometition, and wants Nanny Government to force these evil doers to fall in line with your thinking.

It's their intellectual property, and can run it as they see fit. There ARE plenty of Sites out there that provide a better bang for the buck. Perhaps you're too lazy to go look?

The FCC was wrong in this. They were trying to dictate functions, information, and other rules under the guise of 'Fairness'.

The FCC has no authority for such dictates, especially on Internet Networks.

I really don't think you know what you are talking about. there is no inteletucally property involved here. net neutratlity is about forcing ISPs to keep the internet open and allow its customers equal access to all sites. without net neutrality ISPs can pick and choose what sites you can visit, what content you can view, what games you can play, etc.

I know exactly wat I am talking about. The FCC has no such jurisdiction. YOU are barking UP the wrong tree. Try the First Amendment.