FCC to re-regulate internet in order to enforce net neutrality
By Nilay Patel 
posted May 5th 2010 6:03PM
posted May 5th 2010 6:03PM
posted May 5th 2010 6:03PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
@s73v3r I'm fully aware that not everyone has the option of other broadband ISP's. I feel for you, but that doesn't change anything. If a company is doing something wrong, you don't reward them for it by giving them money. Pure and simple.
That's also why I said I would be more in favor of spending our tax dollars to lay down new pipelines, or buy existing one's from whatever company currently owns them, then turn around a lease the networks to multiple ISP's instead. I am not against more open access to all, I'm completely in favor of it. Which is why I'm opposed to net neutrality. I know it sounds like an oxymoron, but if you read the net neutrality proposals, they are not good for us consumers in the long run.
All I'm saying is people are looking in the wrong direction for a solution.
@Larz well it used to be that ISPs were required to lease their lines to competitors and fair market value. The problem with this is that the big boys make a whole lot less money wholesaling bandwidth to a smaller ISP than it does ass raping its own customers. SO there isnt any incentive for them.ALso it has been stated before most of us dotn really have a choice, and simply not having internet isnt one of them. SO my dollars keep going to comcast even though they throttle the fuck out of my downloads.
Frankly i think that there should be some kind of government incetivised program to run faster pipes to at least the box in the neighborhood, if not to the door. Maybe use a 60 40 agreement, where said company pays for 60 percent of the cost of the cabling, and thats how much access they get.
good...hopefully FCC can Engadget to stop spamming people with apple news.
This should have happened right after invention of internets
In your face, opponents of Net Neutrality.
For all you idiots bashing Net Neutrality and saying this a socialist agenda and all such.. YOU ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT NET NEUTRALITY REALLY MEANS.
From wikipedia:
Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions by Internet Service Providers or governments on content, sites, or platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed, as well as communication that is not unreasonably degraded by other traffic.
The GOVERNMENT IS FOR THIS. They want the net to be LIKE IT IS NOW. The telephone companies are the ones that want to CHANGE IT and start charging based on a tiered system.
The Government is NOT trying to censor your information for Christ's sake.
@dieselstation Get off Wikipedia, it's as liberal as you are!! And less accurate! Read the actual legislation for facts.
You need less regulation, which will increase competition. More competition you get lower prices. It's basic economics.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2006/06/Broadband-Regulation-Will-Congress-Neuter-the-Net
@dieselstation Yeah! tehs wikipedias! Like GOD wrote that right? How COULD it possibly be wrong about ANYTHING!.
Thanks for the laugh..
@dieselstation
The regulation of TV/radio was started to ensure that stations didn't operate on the same frequency.
Now the government uses its regulatory authority to censor content.
Why is this concept so hard to understand?
@ptysell It's hard to understand because you guys are pulling the CENSOR bullcrap out of thin air, when the FCC has clearly stated what their intentions are for Net Neutrality.
Basically.. I have proof to back up my claim.. and all you guys have.. is FEAR.
@annonymiss Well.. care to explain how wikipedia is wrong? Are the links they provided to FCC statements incorrect? In fact.. SHOW ME what is incorrect on that Wikipedia site.
@dieselstation
Fuck Yea! We all know the government is completely trustworthy. If you don't believe me, just go ask an American Indian.
@dieselstation
Here's another Wikipedia link for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
What makes you think greed and short-term self interest stop when one accepts a government job? The only thing that stops is a profit motive that makes you interested in your customers' requirements so they don't move to your competition.
@charles hamilton Fuck Yeah!! Big Corporation is all about looking out for the little guys and our best interests. I mean.. just look at any health insurance company for inspiration.
Oh but watch out for those big government agencies like the USDA, NHTSA, FDA, USPS, FAA, etc.. all these big mean government agencies that do nothing to improve our lives and keep us save.
@desmo frankly we need all the regulation that we can get. The reason that things have gotten so out of hand in the United States has been the repealing of so many of the regulations that we used to have that kept business in check. Clinton gave us prosperity, but he also gave us businesses that are too big to fail. Also they gave us nafta which lets companies manufacture stuff right across the border in mexico and then sell in in the us as if it were made here. WE NEED TO REGULATE THE SHIT OUT OF THESE COMPANIES. Or they will take us for everything we've got.
@desmo
I'll wager you did not bother to check out any of the 88 citations for that Wikipedia article.
It is not as if it was created out of thin air.
It is laughable when people say they one have 1 internet provider.
I can think of 3 separate internet providers off the top of my head that provide access anywhere in the wold via satellite.
@ptysell yeah and satellite internet is really competitive in price and speed.
Your ignorance stems from greed.
The demagoguery based on hypothetical situations is out of control. It is a fear based response on both sides of the debate, with no real concrete examples of ISP abuses. Unless you count Comcast throttling illegal file sharing, which they can lawfully do.
This is all about money (taxes), politics, and access to information. The FCC will start mandating what content you can put on your website, and create a huge regulatory commission with hundreds or thousands of employee's.
Said commissions first targets will most likely be political dissenters spreading "lies and misinformation".
Liberal hipsters should go hang themselves.
Regulators are usually lawyers who have failed to succeed in the pirvate sector. The private sector is filled with lawyers who have achieved success.
The private sector lawyers are far more competant than those working for the government. These lawyers will devise ways to get around any legislation that gets passed. All you will end up with is a lot of unintelligible legalese at the bottom of every contract. Even more than there is now.
The government hasn't written a law that a private sector lawyer can't find a loophole through.
@TheDudeCool I see two gigantic problems with your argument -- first, by your estimation the government has never won a case against the private sector that's resulted in substantive change. That's simply not true.
Second, where do you think judges come from? They're government-employed lawyers, after all. Why do they always pick the other side?
@Nilay Patel
Actually I wasn't making an argument against the government. the point I was shooting for and missed is the fact that no matter what regulations the government comes up with the coprorate sector will find ways around them, it has always been thus and always will
The only ones who suffer are "we the people" the status quo is fine for myself and probably 80% of internet users who have no problems with their bandwidth or access in any way shape or form
Any regulations the government comes up with will be circumvented
EXAMPLE: the government makes it that unlimited high speed downloads actually means UNLIMITED okay the ISP simply doesn't have any unlimited contracts and they limit everyone to 2 gigs( or some other arbitrary number) and charge extra for any overage. Or worse they could block your access for the rest of the month, or severly impede your access speed.
If you think competition will lower consumer costs I give you the airline industry. Ticket fees go down but incedental costs continue to be added and increase. I was only 10 when the airlines were deregulated but the bulk of my flying was done between '86 and '06 when flights were cheap and all your needs were met.
Anyone who remembers AT&T before deregulation undersatnds how good we've got it now.
I'm not sure I understand the point or the relevance of your Judge comment but it's late and I'm tired, I'll check back in the morning (maybe).
Anyhow to reiterate. It does not matter what regulations the FCC creates as ISP's will find ways around them and pass the costs on to us.
Unsure how I feel about all this. On the one hand, the status quo kinda blows, what with the stranglehold ISPs have on the system...but can the FCC do any better? Their track record with music and television, etc isn't exactly stellar; I know bringing the China example into this is a bit over the top, but the idea of the government thinking it "knows best" is probably pretty close to accurate.
This is a tough issue. Both sides have pros and cons.
Great...from a threat of corporate censorship to the threat of government censorship. Truth is, people have never been more free to express themselves as they are today with the help of the internet. Ya, It's a real shame that we have to play by the rules laid out by the companies that have built and paid for the whole thing. All this is, is a regulation to solve a problem that doesn't even exist!
What most people fail to realize is that regulation of the internet IS GOING TO AFFECT YOUR POCKETBOOK. PERIOD. The higher cost incurred upon ISPs is going to force them into metered internet. Just like most of your other bills (power, water, phone in some cases) you will pay based upon your usage. You can't have your cake and eat it to.
I'm all for net neutrality, but I'm always concerned when a government agency who is almost always behind the technology curve wants to take over something that's beyond them.
I work in DC for government agencies, one look at the technology the have and you'll understand why I'd be concerned.
for once i see the future and i actually like it.
cenor our shat so we can end up like google in china?
I found a great article that shows why Net Neutrality would be good for all of us ISP customers.
http://wistechnology.com/articles/6649/
it shows that companies won't be able to monopolize services and there will be more open ISP choices for customers. this is needed.
We will now get all the news that the government deems acceptable to us lowly masses. Are we not old enough to think on our own, and make our own decisions?
My goodness, Americans have to be the most intellectually bankrupt people in the developed world. And I say this being an American. The number of blind, anti-government rants just boggles my mind.
@sonicmerlin I prefer to be blindly skeptical of governmental power (as the founders intended and encouraged) than to blindly follow the government and assume that it has my best interests in mind. What amazes me is that so many people are skeptical of corporations because of their greed but are not skeptical of the government over-reaching and seizing powers not granted to them under the ultimate law of the land, the Constitution.