Slashdot Mirror


No, Net Neutrality Doesn't Violate the 5th Amendment

An anonymous reader writes "Yesterday we discussed the theory that net neutrality might violate the 5th Amendment's 'takings clause.' Over at TechDirt they've explained why the paper making that claim is mistaken. Part of it is due to a misunderstanding of the technology, such as when the author suggests that someone who puts up a server connected to the Internet is 'invading' a broadband provider's private network. And part of it is due to glossing over the fact that broadband networks all have involved massive government subsidies, in the form of rights of way access, local franchise/monopolies, and/or direct subsidies from governments. The paper pretends, instead, that broadband networks are 100% private."

3 of 322 comments (clear)

  1. Best way to fix it by Darkness404 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    And part of it is due to glossing over the fact that broadband networks all have involved massive government subsidies, in the form of rights of way access, local franchise/monopolies, and/or direct subsidies from governments. The paper pretends, instead, that broadband networks are 100% private

    The best way to fix it is to... not give handouts, special privileges, or otherwise interfere with private enterprise. Every time the government does it, it fucks up the economy. Every. Single. Time.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Best way to fix it by SpaceCadetTrav · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      But it's different this time!

    2. Re:Best way to fix it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Gee that's funny, because I'm pretty sure the GOVERNMENT has no concept of, or right to, ownership.
      "Owned by the government" means "belongs to the people" since WE paid for it.

      Also, when you add sarcasm, it helps to be correct. When you try to use sarcasm to make such a blatantly incorrect point, you just make yourself look like an absolute jackass.