Slashdot Mirror


Net Neutrality Bill in Congress

hip2b2 writes "The US Congress is finally doing something to prevent large bandwidth providers and network operators from charging (or putting restrictions on) competing web and other Internet media content providers. According to this NetworkWorld article, the new bill sponsored by Democratic Representatives Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Jay Inslee of Washington state, Anna Eshoo of California and Rick Boucher of Virginia in the House and Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon in the Senate. I am not a big fan of legislation, but, I hope this bill keeps the Internet a freer place." Here is our coverage of the first round.

11 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. Won't make it out of committee by Thanatopsis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My prediction is that this bill will never even make it out of committee. Far too many telco lobbyists on K Street to let that happen.

  2. Re:Legislation != Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the real problem is that some ISPs want to sell "Internet connections" while giving their customers old-style AOL gated network services. There's a word for taking someone's money for a service, and giving them something different in return: fraud.

    When someone advertises Internet access, people expect just that. "Net neutrality" is just a fancy term for the way the Internet is supposed to work. Fraudulent "internet service providers" should be sued, civilly and/or criminally, and shut down.

  3. Don't miss the comparison... by QuaintRealist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    at the end - the Senate bill would only require that net neutrality be "studied", not enforced. This is a tactic employed by both parties - introduce a bill for publicity in one branch of the legislature, introduce a version which is watered down into oblivion in the other, and kill it in committee during the process of "reconciling" the House and Senate versions.

    This is particularly often seen with the House bill being the publicity seeker - Reps need to run for office every 2 years...

    --
    Using plain ol' text since 1968
  4. Re:Legislation != Free by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Government legislated control of Internet traffic management is the exact opposite of most any definition of "free".

    These companies were granted the rights to lay cable on public land via legislation in the first place.

  5. absurd by penguin-collective · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Your statement is absolutely absurd, and it is an insult to centuries of struggle for democratic government.

    In fact, it is the primary purpose of our government to keep us free, and the primary instrument our government has for that is legislation: legislation that keeps people from harming each other, legislation that keeps companies from distorting a free market, and legislation that establishes institutions that protect us from external threats.

    Government legislated control of Internet traffic management is exactly what it means for our government to keep us free.

    Now, I'll give you this much: our government sometimes does the wrong thing, either because of misguided people (like you!) or because of outright corruption. But the solution is not to get rid of democratic government and legislation (we had that for a few millennia and it wasn't pretty and certainly not free), the solution is to fix government and make sure the legislation is good legislation.

    1. Re:absurd by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Government legislated control of Internet traffic management is exactly what it means for our government to keep us free.

      Nonsense. If a private company providing a service in a market where many other companies are doing the same wants to offer special pricing or performance options to customers that want to pay for such, they are (or should be) free to do so. It's no "distortion" of the market to change your offering to suit your own business objectives. You, as a customer, can just "distort" it right back by taking your business to another provider that suits your tastes.

      In fact, it is the primary purpose of our government to keep us free,

      No. It is your primary purpose to do so, and mine. The government's obligation is to stay out of our way, and to be there in case someone decides to prevent you (or me) from doing so.

      and the primary instrument our government has for that is legislation:

      Yikes! No. It's the Constitution that does that. Legislation comes and goes, but the key structural pillars of the government are set forth in the Constitution.

      legislation that keeps people from harming each other,

      Legislation doesn't do any such thing. People either do, or do not, harm each other. Legislation may set forth such penalties as are trotted out after that happens. Otherwise, you're talking about prior restraint... to which our courts are thankfully generally allergic.

      legislation that establishes institutions that protect us from external threats

      No, that's the executive branch's job. They do that through the military and various other supporting agencies. Certainly the legislative bodies approve funding, etc., but from a Founding Fathers perspective, defense against "external threats" is something the C-in-C and his branch is supposed to take care of.

      Now, I'll give you this much: our government sometimes does the wrong thing

      And the more you stick the government in the middle of transactions between private parties, especially where evolving technology is concerned, the more mistakes happen.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. governmental interference by wall0159 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I am not a big fan of legislation, but..."

    I've read this a few times on Slashdot now. It's usually followed by some comment about a special case (or special interest?) where legislation is a Good Thing. This bugs me, because it's hypocritical.

    As an example, the entire concept of laissez-faire (free-market) economics (thank you, Adam Smith!) is based upon assumptions that do not hold in the real world. If we want an economy that even approximates a 'free-market', then we need legislation.

    Look at Microsoft, or AT&T. Were it not for legislation, there's be no check to their anti-competitive practices. In my opinion (FWIW) the natural end-consequence of a totally free market (in the absence of any control) are cartels - massive companies bribing (what remains of) the government, and helping their cronies and friends.

  7. Re:The system by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Call, Fax or write each of the sponser, tell them you like the bill.
    Ask them if they know the stance your representitive is taking. Probably not, but if the do it can prepare you to tlak to your representitive.
    Contact your congress critter, ask them where they stand. They may not even know about it yet. In your letter be sure to use the correct name of the legislation.

    Depending on your state, you may be able to get a face to face with the senator. If you do , for the love of god, dress appropriatly, i.e. Suit.

    Go to all the local User groups, even one you wouldn't normally be interested. Ask for 2 minutes in front of the group. Tell them you are orginizing people to get your congress to vote for the bill. Get names and cards of people willing to sign a petition.

    Find our how much it cost to get a not for profit.
    IF it is too expensive for you to shell out the cash,
    Contact the people who signed the petition, tell what you are trying to do, ask for their help.

    Once you have your organization set up, use it to get a meeting with your congress person. If you have any business owners that signed your petition, try damn hard to get them to go if you get a face to face. Politician like business.
    Any businessman worth theis salt should jump at the opportunity to get a face to face with a politician.

    All that isn't as much work as it seems. And yes, it can work. WIll it work? I don't know, depends on other factors because it is politics. I can tell you this: It wo't work if you don't try.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  8. Re:Democrats again by stinerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I'd like to agree with you, that statement is essentially bullshit. There are a few Democrats who have signed on as sponsors, but I'm reasonably sure that less than half of congressional Democrats would vote for the bill. Telcos, like Hollywood, give generously to both sides of the aisle.

  9. Keep Legislators Accountable by ncfoster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As noted elsewhere in this thread, be very careful about getting too excited about this bill. I'm all for network neutrality, but if the re-introduction of the broadcast flag is the price we pay for it, I'm not sure what to think. We need to stand up to our legislators and get them to pass an honest bill. We're not talking about a little pork project added onto an otherwise good bill. Rather, this bill now is now a complete mess, giving corporations less control over the internet, but more control over digital media. The only difference is which big corporate entities stand to benefit most on the backs of consumers. Do not stand for this kind of garbage, and contact your representative and senator today, because no informed American would want the broadcast flag, even if it is wrapped up in a pretty little bow that says "network neutrality" on it.

  10. Re:Wait until the bill reaches the floor by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Without pressure from constituents, it is even less likely that a bill will ever reach the floor.

    Proposed legislation is just as important as legislation that reaches the floor, potentially more so -- once it reaches the floor, most legislators have already decided where they stand on the issue.

    Now, in the formative stages of legislative thought, is when it is MOST important to make sure your legislators support your views on issues like this. Waiting until it hits the floor is like waiting to have your brakes fixed until you need to stop to keep from rear-ending someone while barreling down a hill at 80 miles per hour. Our legislature needs 'preventative maintenance' just as much as your car does.

    Contact your legislators early. Contact them often.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai