Internet Neutrality Rules???? - The Drunken stepFORUM - A place to discuss your worthless opinions

Predator24 · #1 09-18-2009, 04:02 PM

New Internet Neutrality Rules??

FCC to Propose 'Net Neutrality' Rules
By AMY SCHATZ
The head of the Federal Communications Commission will propose new rules to prevent Internet providers from selectively blocking or slowing Web traffic, a move that could set off a battle with phone and cable companies that don't want the government telling them how to run their networks.

In a speech Monday, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is expected to outline proposals for new rules that would require Internet providers to treat all legal Web traffic equally, according to people familiar with the proposal. The rules would also be extended to include wireless arms of giants like AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. as well as cable providers like Comcast Corp.

Currently, some wireless Internet providers prevent consumers from using some bandwidth-heavy Internet applications, like video file-sharing services, because of concerns they will slow networks.

If adopted, rules to promote so-called net neutrality could be a win for consumers who want to get movies online or access big data files, and in turn benefit Internet companies like Google Inc. that want to offer new video or other services online. Internet commerce companies have been among the most vocal supporters of government action to prevent selective hobbling of Internet traffic, and they welcomed President Barack Obama's pledges during the campaign to enact stronger "net neutrality" rules.

The FCC currently has four so-called net neutrality principles, which call on Internet providers to treat all legal Internet data equally. The FCC has sought to prohibit companies from deliberately blocking or slowing traffic, based on those principles, but it hasn't adopted formal rules.

Some big internet access providers have fought back, saying they have a right to control traffic on networks they own and operate. Last year, Comcast Corp. challenged an FCC decision that it had violated the agency's net neutrality principles on the grounds that the FCC had never formally adopted such rules. That case is still pending in a federal appeals court. Mr. Genachowski's proposal is to turn the FCC's guidelines into rules, and erase the uncertainty over whether the rules apply to wireless carriers.

Wireless companies have argued that net neutrality rules don't apply to them and that they shouldn't, since data-heavy applications like Internet video can cripple their networks. The FCC's proposed rules are expected to say that the agency plans to take into account the bandwidth limitations faced by wireless carriers, according to someone familiar with the plan.

President Obama had pledged to the technology community that he would support net neutrality, and public interest groups have been waiting for the FCC to get the ball rolling on new rules.

"To me, net neutrality is a signature issue of the president in a tech policy area," said Ben Scott, policy director for Free Press, an public interest group which has pressed for strong net neutrality rules. "He's frequently endorsed the need for net neutrality. The record is by any measure full and expansive and the time for action is now."

Mr. Genachowski is expected to announce plans for the agency to open a formal rule-making process on the issue at its October meeting. The rules would have to be approved by a majority of the FCC's five-person board. Its three Democratic commissioners support net neutrality.

An FCC spokeswoman confirmed Genachowski will speak on Monday.

Write to Amy Schatz at Amy.Schatz@wsj.com

TheJuice · #2 09-18-2009, 04:14 PM

I hope they do make these into rules. Comcast needs a slap on the wrist. I pay too much for crappy service as it is.

Predator24 · #3 09-18-2009, 04:20 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

I honestly can't make heads or tails of this so I posted it in hopes that some of the other members could explain it to me.

#4 09-18-2009, 04:29 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

agreed. save the internet.

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

Fever · #5 09-18-2009, 04:36 PM

My understanding, in a nutshell, is that the access providers (Comcast, AT&T, etc.) have put in effect false 'tiers' of bandwidth loads. Meaning youtube and other video content requires more bandwidth than static content, so they can limit/restrict the size of the available pipeline to end users in favor of other content. And in particular, there seems to be a common belief among the conspiracy theorists that sites like RapidShare, Mega, and other share sites are artificially restricted on some networks to slow share traffic.
The argument from the providers side is that the whole thing will crash if they provide unfettered access to all sites/content, and they need to do it for the integrity of their systems.
I smell bullshit - the bottom line is they are still sore that the market moved away from volume pricing, and they would be happy to just charge us per MB, or whatever.

Predator24 · #6 09-18-2009, 04:40 PM

Thanks posty,

I can;t see straight and everything is in slowmotion.

Thanks dude

#7 09-18-2009, 04:54 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

5char

Fever · #8 10-02-2009, 05:45 PM

Hilarious!
I just read a whole deal on net neutrality, and funny thing - turns out FreedomWorks is lobbying on behalf of the telecoms!
That's right, the same pricks that astroturfed the Tea Parties, hijacked the town halls, and is led by Dick(head) Armey and the rest of the bitter losers, largely funded by the likes of Phillip Morris & GE, and makes money off selling insurance policies to their 'members' has also received major contributions from Verizon & AT&T.
The good thing is that people are getting hip to their illegal lobbying via the manipulation of lemmings and the chooseyourcable propoganda site was immediately discredited, just like the angryrenter website was discredited when they were caught posing as 'concerned citizens'

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

.

Predator24 · #9 04-06-2010, 10:11 AM

US-court-rules-against-FCC

US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality'
Federal appeals court rules for Comcast and against FCC on `net neutrality' case

On Tuesday April 6, 2010, 10:38 am
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks.

Tuesday's 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.

It marks a serious setback for the FCC, which needs authority to regulate the Internet in order to push ahead with key parts of its massive national broadband plan.

nortonburgess · #10 04-06-2010, 12:15 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

Fucking Comcast. I'm waiting for some company to delink and go full-on wireless. I'd personally take great pleasure in knowing all that shitty cable would be rotting on the poles and in the ground.