Will the FCC Regulate the Net?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Will the FCC Regulate the Net?

Posted by ryuzaki0 on Wednesday December 21, 2005 @04:54AM from the someone's-gotta-regulate-everything dept.

Lam1969 writes "Computerworld's Robert Mitchell wonders if the FCC could one day have regulatory power over the Internet. The causes? As telephone calls are increasingly delivered as an IP service, and traditional telephony fades away, traditional telephone companies are demanding a level regulatory regimen for all service providers. From the article: "Assuming that the FCC buys arguments such as this, we could see a new regulatory focus on the Internet and a decline in the hands-off attitude shown in the past. From the regulators' viewpoint, the Internet increasingly may be viewed as just another utility that requires oversight.""

10 of 287 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

not the internet by tarmithius · 2005-12-21 04:55 · Score: 5, Informative

The FCC has no juristiction outside the US. Plus the article in question pertains to VOIP and telephony not the entire internet.
1. Re:not the internet by keraneuology · 2005-12-21 05:53 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Lawpoop asked: "How will the FCC distinguish VOIP and telephony packets over other packets?"
  Enter IMlogic, a Waltham, Mass.-based IM management software provider. The company today announced IM Detector Pro, free downloadable software designed to detect and block unmanaged IM, P2P and VoIP activity.
  
  A seven-year-old Mountain View, Calif., company, Narus Inc., has devised a way for telephone companies to detect data packets belonging to VoIP applications and block the calls. For example, now when someone in Riyadh clicks on Skype's "call" button, Narus's software, installed on the carrier's network, swoops into action. It analyzes the packets flowing across the network, notices what protocols they adhere to, and flags the call as VoIP. In most cases, it can even identify the specific software being used, such as Skype's.
  
  --
  If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
FCC authority by RNLockwood · 2005-12-21 05:00 · Score: 4, Informative

I had occasion to consult the FCC a few years ago and was told that a major function of the FCC was to ensure that the governmnet didn't take all the aavailable frequencies. There are other regulatory needs for control of frequencies and power of course but I would hope that we can stop them from expanding their control over what should be non-issues for them. Trouble is that the foxes want to control the hen house and this administration favors that view.

--
Nate
Re:Geek revolt by bitkari · 2005-12-21 05:11 · Score: 3, Informative

Of course 'they' can, and probably will.

Mechanisms such as the WIPO and WTO are incredibly influential entities, and have already been able to leverage many governments to implement laws governing media, and other communications [see: DMCA, EUCD].

Most of this work is due to the lobbying from large multi-nationals, as it is their interests that are at stake. In the case of the Internet, it would be logical to assume that affected corporations will lobby the relevant organizations to ensure global enforcement of rules that benefit them.

It is sensible to expect then, that in lieu of any bold moves to stop it happening, a similar fate will befall the internet.
Re:Who cares? The future needs no FCC. by Lehk228 · 2005-12-21 05:13 · Score: 4, Informative

without the FCC you would never know when you turn on the TV if the rich prick down the street is broadcasting goatse over all the channels at 5000 watts

--
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Re:Geek revolt by Viper+Daimao · 2005-12-21 05:13 · Score: 3, Informative

There's already opposition. It's bill number is S.2113, write to your Senators for support.

--
"In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
Re:Who cares? The future needs no FCC. by Lehk228 · 2005-12-21 05:28 · Score: 2, Informative

one would not need to broadcast all simultaniously, just long enough to interrupt the signal and hang the display enough for the viewer to see

--
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Working on a project... by tfcdesign · 2005-12-21 05:55 · Score: 2, Informative

t-tag.com

That sends messages over IP to landlines. The FCC is already involved.
Why not? Secret Service does it for every printer by elrous0 · 2005-12-21 09:05 · Score: 2, Informative

So now you have the FCC putting wiretaps... on every router?
You're right, it would be totally impractical for a government agency to put spying technology on an entire line of computer products. Yeah, no need to worry about THAT ever happening.
-Eric

--
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Some of those charges are phony by Animats · 2005-12-21 09:16 · Score: 2, Informative

The "FCC line charge" is not a Government charge. It's a fraudulent misrepresentation by the telephone company of one of their own fees. The FCC just sets a cap on that charge. The telco gets the money.
What you're paying for is the ability to connect to a separate long-distance carrier. This charge keeps going up, even though the cost of providing bulk transport keeps going down.