The (flawed) reasoning behind Net Neutrality, explained

[TemplarKormac]

Nyvin, stop pulling a Nancy Pelosi and read the damned thing before lecturing me, okay?

 

[thereisnospoon]

The law, Section 706(a) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has been used twice before by the FCC to regulate broadband providers, and twice before has been struck down by the courts as not granting the FCC any specific authority to do so.

Specifically Comcast Corp. vs FCC, decided on April 6, 2010, in which was discussed whether the issue of ancillary authority exerted by the FCC had any merit. The assertion was struck down by the District of Columbia Circuit Court:

Instead, the Commission [FCC] maintains that congressional policy by itself creates “statutorily mandated responsibilities” sufficient to support the exercise of section 4(i) ancillary authority. Not only is this argum
ent flatly inconsistent with Southwestern Cable, Midwest Video I, Midwest Video II, and NARUC II, but if accepted it would virtually free the Commission from its congressional tether.

...

Because the Commission has never questioned, let alone overruled, that understanding of section 706, and because agencies “may not . . . depart from a prior policy sub silentio,” FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1800, 1811 (2009), the Commission remains bound by its earlier conclusion that section 706 grants no regulatory authority.

And Verizon v. FCC which was handed down On January 14, 2014. In it, the issue of whether the FCC could once again try to compel all broadband service providers to treat all internet traffic as the same, no matter the source, or otherwise known as "net neutrality", was discussed. The FCC's case was struck down once again by the District of Columbia Circuit Court:

We think it obvious that the Commission would violate the Communications Act were it to regulate broadband providers as common carriers. Given the Commission’s still-binding decision to classify broadband providers not as providers of “telecommunications services” but instead as providers of “information services,” see supra at 9–10, such treatment would run afoul of section 153(51): “A telecommunications carrier shall be treated as a common carrier under this [Act] only to the extent that it is engaged in providing telecommunications services.” 47 U.S.C. § 153(51); see also Wireless Broadband Order, 22 F.C.C.R. at 5919 ¶ 50 (concluding that a “service provider is to be treated as a common carrier for the telecommunications services it provides, but it cannot be treated as a common carrier with respect to other, non -telecommunications services it may offer, including information services”)

...

Even though section 706 grants the Commission authority to promote broadband deployment by regulating how broadband providers treat edge providers, the Commission may not, as it recognizes, utilize that power in a manner that contravenes any specific prohibition contained in the Communications Act.

So, I am confident that section 706(a) of the 1996 Telecommunications Act is being used by the FCC to regulate the internet, if that is the case, then this action will be nullified in the courts. Again. The FCC is so thickheaded that it cannot see that their attempts to neutralize the internet is beyond their congressionally granted power.

The FCC like al other federal departments whether partisan or not, seem lately to exist for the sole purpose of doing the bidding of the current president.
Obama wanted his so called 'green energy' agenda pushed forward. He could not persuade the Congress, including many supportive democrats to follow his lead. So he used executive actions to remove Congressional oversight of the EPA.
Obama championed immigration reform( Spelled 'Open Border/Amnesty for illegals'). Once again The Congress refused to go along. Obama issues an executive order to open the border to 5 million illegals....
Now this.
A few weeks ago Obama makes a speech and in it he states that access to the internet is "unfair". That areas of tghe country ( rural and urban) do not have the same access to high speed internet as other places. He pleads with congress to create a :"net neutrality law"..One that would make it possible for "poor people" and others to obtain high speed internet. Obama also claimed that certain providers and distributors were ( here's that word again) "unfair" in the manner in which the internet is used and distributed.
Again, cCongress has detractors on both sides of the aisle.
So Obama turns to an unelected and accountable to no one but the Office of President to do his bidding. In a 100% partisan decision by what is supposed to be a non-partisan arm of the federal government, the FCC decides that the internet is a public utility.
This is going to be another in a long line of disastrous decisions by government that completely ignores the laws of unintended consequences.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Net neutrality = tax revenue mark my words.

Hell yes it is. How long before anything bought or sold is subject to a federal sales tax? Six months?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Everyone should have equal access to the Internet. The speed shouldn't be bought or sold. Making it equal across the board actually makes business more competitive.

Nice job Mao.

 

[Nyvin]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

I'm sure the fruitcakes are selling tinfoil like never before...

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

Why would any carrier block Amazon or Ebay? Why the fuck would that even be a consideration. It's not about them you idiot it's about what you the end user are going to get. Such as everything sold on Ebay and Amazon will now be subject to a federal sales tax.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

I'm sure the fruitcakes are selling tinfoil like never before...

Guess you can skip the tinfoil if your head is planted right up the governments ass hole.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

Like I said, you need to read what's in it before you pass it, Nancy. You do understand this is enforced by the government, right? Did it ever occur to you that the government is the one legalizing or illegalizing what content can be allowed or disallowed?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

No,...This is going to the SCOTUS...No doubt.
Today's decision by the FCC is not only anti technology, it is also anti consumer.
It will cause investors to take a giant step backward. Investment dollars in new technologies, distribution, equipment, etc will slow to a crawl.
ISP's will no longer be permitted to sell their pipelines to those willing to pay a premium for premium access and performance. On other words, if the XYZ Corp needs an ultra high speed connection to conduct its business in the most efficient and cost conscious method possible, the new rules now make that illegal. Consumers who also have no problem paying a premium price will be relegated to the slowest speeds because it is "unfair" that they get to buy what they want while others cannot.. The government argument is that if no one can pay extra for better performance than everyone will get the better performance( higher speeds). The opposite will occur. As government will control consumer prices, ISP's and those who build and maintain physical plant will no longer be able to raise the capital to provide the faster speeds. So in effect, this new regulation will actually slow the internet. Government is demanding the impossible. Equality. Well it is going to get it. It is going to force "equally inferior"....
Of course the libs and other naysayers are going to scream about their internet bills. They believe that the government will make access cheaper to the consumer. That those evil ISP's will have to lower their prices. Ok, suppose they do. Then consumers will get exactly what they pay for...
Hopefully 5 of the 9 wise people in Washington will shoot down this stupid thing once and for all.

 

[Nyvin]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

Like I said, you need to read what's in it before you pass it, Nancy. You do understand this is enforced by the government, right? Did it ever occur to you that the government is the one legalizing or illegalizing what content can be allowed or disallowed?

They can do that already....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

As with everything else you post about, its obvious you have no real knowledge about the FCC.

Big money, will out.

Pay more and get less, cuz its the Great Republican Way, right sonny boy?

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

Since Obama is behind this, if it is repealed. The media and the Obama fluffers on here will scream racism.

You idiot.

President Obama is not "behind" net neutrality and its damn lame of you to play the race card.

Fact is, if you RWs get your way, we will not have equality on the internet.

Oh yes he is.....Net Neutrality A Free and Open Internet The White House
BTW notice the word "Free" here.. The internet is NOT nor should it ever be "free"....Everything has a cost and a price......BTW, Obama is not going pro consumer here. His desire is to regulate content. Specifically political commentary. The liberal democrats cannot stand it that their monopoly on media no longer stands. The internet is the ultimate in public free speech broadcasting. Information is power. Liberals are opposed to anyone other than they having access to such power. Liberals seek to control this and in doing so, will suppress political discourse by controlling information. This is done by regulating content. Just wait and see.
As for your denial that Obama is not in support of net neutrality....What fucking planet do you live on?

 

[Flash]

You idiot.

President Obama is not "behind" net neutrality and its damn lame of you to play the race card.

.

I think if anybody is an idot you just proved you are one.

The Democrat appointed FCC members are the ones that voted for it. You are absolutely wrong. Obama is behind it. He wants government control of the Internet so the filthy ass sonofabitch can tax it and control it. It is part of his oppressive plan to "fundamentally change the USA". Hussein has never been the friend of freedom.

It is the same sorry shit as Obamacare or using the IRS to disenfranchise Americans. Tax it, subsidize the welfare queens and use it to punish the Tea Party or anybody else that doesn't toe the Libtard line.

Obama hates the freedom of the Internet when it not used to further his extreme far Left agenda. Besides he loves anything he can tax.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The best thing about this thread is that the OP.....an unemployed taker....is suggesting that he might have his high speed internet......which is paid for by his Granny...slowed down to match the poor people's speeds.

Weeeeeee!

 

[Nyvin]

Nyvin, your argument died with this statement:

"Net neutrality also prevents ISPs from blocking (legal) content on the internet."

This is why a great deal many of us oppose it. The government gets to decide what content is "legal" on the internet. So uh, do you understand what this will do to the internet? Guess not.

The only premise of the word "legal" is that the ISP cannot block content at their own discretion. Comcast can't block AT&T's website, or they can't get into a deal with Ebay and block Amazon. Everything has to be open.

If you are paranoid about the all-powerful crazy government blocking your internet sites there's some good government conspiracy websites you can go join.

Why would any carrier block Amazon or Ebay? Why the fuck would that even be a consideration. It's not about them you idiot it's about what you the end user are going to get. Such as everything sold on Ebay and Amazon will now be subject to a federal sales tax.

Holy crap....you guys are all really clueless....

Amazon and Ebay were just vague examples, it doesn't matter "if" they would really do it, the fact is now they "can't".

The government could already tax what's sold on the internet...but it doesn't because there is no federal sales tax.

 

[Flash]

Net neutrality = tax revenue mark my words.

Net "neutrality" is the same Libard speech lie as "Affordable Care Act" was with Obamacare.

 

[Nyvin]

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

As with everything else you post about, its obvious you have no real knowledge about the FCC.

Big money, will out.

Pay more and get less, cuz its the Great Republican Way, right sonny boy?

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

Since Obama is behind this, if it is repealed. The media and the Obama fluffers on here will scream racism.

You idiot.

President Obama is not "behind" net neutrality and its damn lame of you to play the race card.

Fact is, if you RWs get your way, we will not have equality on the internet.

Oh yes he is.....Net Neutrality A Free and Open Internet The White House
BTW notice the word "Free" here.. The internet is NOT nor should it ever be "free"....Everything has a cost and a price......BTW, Obama is not going pro consumer here. His desire is to regulate content. Specifically political commentary. The liberal democrats cannot stand it that their monopoly on media no longer stands. The internet is the ultimate in public free speech broadcasting. Information is power. Liberals are opposed to anyone other than they having access to such power. Liberals seek to control this and in doing so, will suppress political discourse by controlling information. This is done by regulating content. Just wait and see.
As for your denial that Obama is not in support of net neutrality....What fucking planet do you live on?

What the hell is it with right wingers fear of taxes?

If anything Republicans would support some kind of tax on the internet because it's a consumption tax and thus would affect the poor more then the wealthy. And if anything the Democrats would oppose it more then the Republicans.

 

[jknowgood]

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

As with everything else you post about, its obvious you have no real knowledge about the FCC.

Big money, will out.

Pay more and get less, cuz its the Great Republican Way, right sonny boy?

Interestingly enough, this issue isn't garnering the response that I thought. I don't think the FCC will get away with this again.

Since Obama is behind this, if it is repealed. The media and the Obama fluffers on here will scream racism.

You idiot.

President Obama is not "behind" net neutrality and its damn lame of you to play the race card.

Fact is, if you RWs get your way, we will not have equality on the internet.

Me stating the truth is not using the race card.

Did someone just say

"Fact is, if you RWs get your way, we will not have equality on the internet." Out loud?

Forgive me for saying so, but wasn't the internet already equal? There are gay sites, black sites, Muslim sites, Jewish sites, Christian sites, Democratic sites, Republican sites, this that or the other sites on the internet. There was nothing to suggest that it was unequal to begin with.

Did someone say they don't know that equality on the internet is threatened by the very Big Business money you worship?

Else, there would be no need to insure "net neutrality".

See how that works?

That makes as much sense as strategic patience.

 

[BluesLegend]

Net neutrality = tax revenue mark my words.

Net "neutrality" is the same Libard speech lie as "Affordable Care Act" was with Obamacare.

It seems like this administration is intent on forcing, daring even the GOP to stop its overreach. Today its a government take over of the internet under the guise of net neutrality. Hours later its being reported this administration is banning 5.56 ammo. So is that how it works now, you fail to win support of your policies in congress, you fail to convince the people's lawfully elected representatives so you just say fuck y'all and do an end run around congress? Is that how it works now presidents can do whatever the hell they like? I can't wait to hear the liberals wailing in agony when a Republican president pulls this same move.