1. Akshay Masand's Avatar


    If you’ve been living under a rock, you may not have heard that the US Federal Communications Commission recently voted in favor to enforce net neutrality rules. The FCC claims that it will help protect freedom of expression and innovation on the Internet. As part of the ruling, the FCC classifies broadband service as a utility and prevents Internet providers from blocking or throttling traffic or offering prioritized service through so-called Internet “fast lanes” for payment. FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, had the following to say regarding the matter:

    The Internet is the most powerful and pervasive platform on the planet. It is simply too important to be left without rules and without a referee on the field. Think about it. The Internet has replaced the functions of the telephone and the post office. The Internet has redefined commerce, and as the outpouring from four million Americans has demonstrated, the Internet is the ultimate vehicle for free expression. The Internet is simply too important to allow broadband providers to be the ones making the rules.
    Furthermore, the ruling will be classifying fixed and mobile broadband as telecommunications service and Internet providers will be regulated under Title II of the Communications Act. Prior to the decision, Internet providers such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon heavily contested the rules due to the fact that they hinder company freedom to an extent. On the other hand, FCC officials believe that Type II reclassification will give them more legal authority to prevent net neutrality rules from being overturned.

    It should be noted that although the new requirements are an attempt to ensure that the Internet remains fast, fair and open, the FCC didn’t end up following through with last-mile unbundling that would have required Internet service providers to sell wholesale access to their networks. The decision would allow new competitors to enter local markets and sell broadband service using the existing infrastructure that was set up by larger providers.

    The recent orders could potentially face legal challenges and action from Congress which points toward the debate surrounding net neutrality from being far from over. As of right now, the rules are set to go into effect after 60 days of being published in the US Federal Register.

    How do you feel about the decision? Share your thoughts below!

    Source: FCC via Ars Technica

    Twitter: @AkshayMasand
    2015-02-28 10:39 AM
  2. gdd2010's Avatar
    What rules? I haven't been able to read them. I'm pretty sure a majority of the public hasn't been able to, either. Also a "Told ya so" moment is gonna kick in, this screams that the FCC did NOTHING to help smaller telecom companies at all - " the FCC didn’t end up following through with last-mile unbundling that would have required Internet service providers to sell wholesale access to their networks." What does that say? Comcast, ATT and the big guys OWN our gov't, plain and simple. We are so screwed.
    2015-02-28 05:00 PM
  3. smittyjf's Avatar
    The sad part is, and this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality, but cable still has the monopoly on the fastest most widely available service. Here in North East Pa, the best DSL you can get is a 1.5mbs to at the most 3 Mbs. and FIOS is basically unavailable everywhere unless you near a Big City. Comcast is unwilling to even give you contract price even if you want to sign another 2 years.
    Your basically stuck with Month to Month price unless you disconnect for 6 months and go with another ISP.
    2015-02-28 08:00 PM
  4. fleurya's Avatar
    Once again rethuglicans are spreading misinformation like wildfire. It's sad how many people I have seen complaining about "government-run internet" which couldn't be further from the truth.

    Also, those same people still seem to be under the delusion that the US has the fastest and best internet in the developed world and are scared regulations will stifle that and put us far behind. The truth is that was are pretty far fro the top on speed and continually sliding down, while being almost at the top in consumer cost! So basically their worst fears are being realized without any government interference at all!

    The fact is that the internet has become too big and vital to our society as whole to leave it completely under the control of a few large corporations that make up the greedy, colluding oligarchy that are the gatekeepers of all information in our modern society. Also, this never would have even happened had that oligarchy not forced their hand when they tried to create internet SLOW LANES for those who don't cough up enough money (not fast lanes as their propaganda claims).

    What rules? I haven't been able to read them. I'm pretty sure a majority of the public hasn't been able to, either.
    "the ruling will be classifying fixed and mobile broadband as telecommunications service and Internet providers will be regulated under Title II of the Communications Act"

    I guess go read Title II for a start. And also they just voted to classify it as a utility. Do you really think they're going to have a bunch of well thought out rules overnight??
    2015-03-01 02:10 PM
  5. King_O_Hill's Avatar
    It was a 332 page document that they voted on. It would have been nice to read it. I gotta think there's more to it than just a classification. I'm not even getting into some of the ramifications that are just racing through my mind. If were all good, then why keep it a secret. Trust me, we got screwed!

    Check out WW3 for iOS 9/10 - Widget-Weather 3.0
    2015-03-02 03:12 AM
  6. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
    The problem I see is that this bill was designed to address the symptoms, not the problem itself. The problem is that where I live there are exactly 2 ISPs, and I've been told I'm better off than most. My options are Mediacom (voted the second worst ISP in America) and AT&T (who only offers DSL). The problem is the monopolistic practices that aren't being stopped. I think this was proposed with good intentions, but I don't know that any real conceivable benefits will come of it.

    ......beware......
    Just your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man!
    2015-03-02 04:08 AM
  7. King_O_Hill's Avatar
    The problem I see is that this bill was designed to address the symptoms, not the problem itself. The problem is that where I live there are exactly 2 ISPs, and I've been told I'm better off than most. My options are Mediacom (voted the second worst ISP in America) and AT&T (who only offers DSL). The problem is the monopolistic practices that aren't being stopped. I think this was proposed with good intentions, but I don't know that any real conceivable benefits will come of it.
    But this is why we have anti-trust laws. If we're not using the laws on the books now, what makes you think a new law would help?

    Check out WW3 for iOS 9/10 - Widget-Weather 3.0
    2015-03-02 04:08 PM
  8. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
    But this is why we have anti-trust laws. If we're not using the laws on the books now, what makes you think a new law would help?
    I guess that came off badly. We desperately need to implement the anti trust laws already on the books.

    ......beware......
    Just your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man!
    2015-03-02 05:39 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD