Net Neutrality | General Discussion Topics | Forum

Please consider registering
Forum Scope


Forum Options

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
Net Neutrality
Forum Posts: 621
Member Since:
June 5, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
February 15, 2015 - 5:11 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

A subject I don't know a whole lot about, but, since the FCC will vote later this month to implement, thought a discussion might be started. It still faces some legal hurdles as well in the courts...

"After months of speculation, heated debate and protest from Internet consumers, providers and regulators from President Obama on down, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on Wednesday finally announced his intentions to reclassify and regulate the Internet as a public utility to ensure net neutrality.

Wheeler outlined his intentions to reclassify and regulate broadband, wired and wireless Internet service providers (ISPs) as public utilities under a modernized interpretation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act in a Wednesday Wired op-ed. (RELATED: FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler Announces Net Neutrality Plan)

“Using this authority, I am submitting to my colleagues the strongest open internet protections ever proposed by the FCC,” Wheeler wrote. “These enforceable, bright-line rules will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services.” "...

Keep Reading: ... lity-plan/

Here is an opposing view from a Republican FCC Commissioner...

"Republican FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai on Friday raised the first of many criticisms to come about FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s aggressive net neutrality plan distributed to commissioners Thursday, which Pai described as “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet.”

In a statement released Friday, Pai lamented the fact that the 332-page plan, which he tweeted a picture of himself holding next to a picture of Obama, won’t be released to the public until after the commission votes on its implementation later this month. (RELATED: FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler Finally Reveals His Net Neutrality Plan)

Here is President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet. I wish the public could see what’s inside.

— Ajit Pai (@AjitPaiFCC) February 6, 2015

“President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works,” Pai said. “The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.” "...

Keep Reading: ... -internet/

And something to perhaps better understand the debate...

A Super-Simple Way to Understand the Net Neutrality Debate

..."For all the arcana in telecommunications law, there is a really simple way of thinking of the debate over net neutrality: Is access to the Internet more like access to electricity, or more like cable television service? ...

I pay my local electric utility (mine is Pepco, which serves Washington) a nice fee for this service every month, tied to how much of this energy I use and its current price per kilowatt hour, with some money built in for the utility to make a comfortable profit. But beyond that, Pepco has no role in determining what I use that electricity for. ...

Things are completely different with cable service.

Comcast, my cable provider, offers me a menu of packages from which I might choose, each with a different mix of channels. It goes through long and sometimes arduous negotiations with the owners of those cable channels and has a different business arrangement with each of them. The details of those arrangements are opaque to me as the consumer; all I know is that I can get the movie package for X dollars a month or the sports package for Y dollars and so on.

Local regulators can restrict pricing for the most basic cable offerings. But more extensive cable service is considered a discretionary good, and cable companies have wide latitude to price their offerings at whatever the market will bear, and offer whatever mix of channels they think best. ...

One theory of the case, and the one that the Obama administration embraced Monday, is that the Internet is like electricity. It is fundamental to the 21st century economy, as essential to functioning in modern society as electricity. It is a public utility. “We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas,” the president said in his written statement."...

Keep Reading: ... 0002&abg=0

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." - James Madison

Forum Posts: 674
Member Since:
May 30, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
February 15, 2015 - 4:49 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thanks for the super simple explination part. I never read much on it because like most things involving the government, we the people have little to no control in changing. I know that's a defeatist attitude but I'm tired. No surprise this is more about taking control for tax dollars than keeping illegal scams, child pornography, etc off the internet. Or at least that's the way it seems from the information you posted.

"That's the problem with drinking ... If something bad happens you drink in attempt to forget; if something good happens you drink in order to celebrate; and if nothing happens you drink to make something happen." -- Charles Bukowski

Forum Posts: 621
Member Since:
June 5, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
February 22, 2015 - 9:24 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Glad it helped you as well and you're welcome. Sorry so late, but I've been sick lately with a really nasty bug and didn't want to spread it around the interwebz. (rimshot please) I agree that, at least on the surface, this government control scheme seems to be more about the money than anything else, but, of course, they would have us believe it's nothing more than their duty to once again fight the faceless bogeyman and save us from ourselves. 🙄 My opposition to their plan is pretty basic and uncomplicated - 'If it aint broke, don't fix it'. Why would we want or even need their interference in something that is clearly running along just fine? Let them get their fingers in this and it's just a matter of time... But the machine loves it some lifeblood and structure and will probably get it because, as you point out, the little people have been written out of this equation some time ago and, it appears, won't even get the opportunity to see the 'plan' before it's voted on in less than a week. How's that for some democratic process and transparency. :dance:

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." - James Madison

Forum Posts: 119
Member Since:
January 11, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
February 24, 2015 - 3:22 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

My red flag is the fact they don't want to make it public until after the vote. Says to me they are hiding something.

They keep trying to pass these things saying they are trying to save us money. But it always ends up costs us more.

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles
Most Users Ever Online: 332
Currently Online:
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
greeney2: 10324
bionic: 9871
Lashmar: 5290
tigger: 4577
rath: 4298
DIss0n80r: 4162
sandra: 3859
frrostedman: 3816
Wing-Zero: 3279
Tairaa: 2843
Newest Members:
Craig K. Harris
Donald Morgan
graham day
Angela vara
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 31
Topics: 9408
Posts: 125025


Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2
Members: 25167
Moderators: 0
Admins: 2
Administrators: John Greenewald, blackvault