Slashdot Mirror
House Committee Approves 'Net Neutrality' Bill
An anonymous reader writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the US House Judiciary Committee approved a bill yesterday that will prevent broadband providers from charging extra fees to websites for delivering their content to users." Ars's response is only guarded optimism, unfortunately. From the article: "The fate of the bill is not clear, as there are now two competing bills vying for the attention of the House floor. HR 5252, the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act, was overseen by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and is expected to be considered by full House. That bill is seen by some proponents of 'Net neutrality as being too weak, particularly after a Committee vote tossed aside an amendment put forth by Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) that would have enshrined the principle of network neutrality into US law. There is speculation that today's bill, HR 5417, could be proposed as an amendment to HR 5252."
I for one am pleased with this bill. Net Neutrality is a very sensitive matter and this is exactly what needed to be done. I offer my thanks to all those that wrote their congressmen and urged them to consider the ramifications of such a law. This indeed will help maintain the Internet as it was meant to be and prevent the Teleco's from making even more money with their sometimes highly expensive services.
Check out Savetheinternet.com.
Grass roots campaign for the Net Neutrality bill. They have been helping out by giving information to people on how to contact their reps and so on.
Heck even Moby supports them.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
...one, zero... Howdy, I'm your man!
You don't understand the libertarian viewpoint: Libertarians aren't against all regulation. We are against regulation that interferes with business. Regulation of natural monopolies, such as companies that own phone lines and carry the data, is necessary.
Now, specifically on net neutrality: net neutrality promotes fair access to a monopolized resource. That is good for business. It is good for everyone. I strongly support net neutrality.
http://www.handsoff.org/ is the website for the supporters of Net Neutrality.
Personally, I prefer SaveTheInternet. But you can't really understand your own position without knowing your opponent's.
Those who care about it will have the choice to buy from someone else
What your diatribe fails to take into account is that broadband consumers have only three choices: one, their current broadband provider, be it their local phone or cable company; two, the other company not specified by number one; and three, no broadband at all.
If we had true consumer choice in network providers, then we wouldn't need network neutrality laws - the market would work things out for itself. But that's not the case. As with any oligopoly, the government may need to intervene to ensure that the lack of competition isn't being leveraged at the expense of the consumer.
...Wikipedia Link
In other words, QoS and the like is still allowed, it just has to be fair. You can't give one company (or one P2P network) higher QoS than another.
That statement in the article is, in-fact accurate, and further reading reveals that you're completely wrong about the rest of your assertions as well...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Fair enough. I am probably not really a libertarian, I just find that my ideas fall in that direction and it is the best way for people to understand my viewpoints. Most people don't understand that it is possible to have opinions that don't match a pre-defined label.
Regarding the platform on monopolies: WTF? Monopolies are created by the government? Did these people miss macroeconomics 101? Even with no government, natural monopolies exist, even if the libertarians pretend they don't exist. I really hope that the FAQ is just an oversimplification.