Slashdot Mirror
FCC Wants Net Neutrality Suits Stopped
adeelarshad82 writes "The FCC moved to dismiss the net neutrality challenges filed by MetroPCS and Verizon, claiming they were 'filed prematurely.' Verizon and MetroPCS have both sued the FCC, arguing that the commission did not have the authority to hand down its December net neutrality rules. The FCC maintains that it does indeed have the right to regulate broadband, thanks to provisions in the Communications Act."
The FCC loses... because the FCC *always* loses. They've lost every major case for the last fifteen years.
If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
Corporations don't want to be regulated because it can cut into their profits. The FCC wants to regulate the corporations not the Internet. The corporations want to regulate the Internet for profit. So they jump the gun on filing a law suite. They will refile and in the meantime they push the cost of the law suite onto their customer. It's just a sad state of affairs. Actually the FCC should just proceed and get the law suite over with and not challenge that they filed to early. Why postpone the inevitable?
its built on public land, but WE own the infrastructure and can decide what you can do with it.
this is what the ISPs say. they are attempting to do make monkeys out of the people, on people's land, with people's money, with people's rules.
Read radical news here
We shall fight them in the lawcourts, we shall fight them in the media... you may take our lives but you'll never take your freedom.
Love
Corporate Exec
>Fuhrer
Saw this.
Stopped reading. No matter what your point was, it was drowned out by your moronic comparison to Hitler.
You're dumb. You're the dumbest thing to come to Dumbtown since Dumb came to Dumbtown.
Get the hell off the Internet and set your computer alight.
--
BMO
Strawman argument.
Net neutrality = "Every packet is treated the same on the internet". It has nothing to do with the government enforcing regulations on the internet. It has everything to do with the government enforcing that NOBODY should enforce regulations on the internet.
>Calls me a troll
Riiiiight.
Read this.
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/21/131490398/-nazis-a-word-with-deep-and-brutal-meaning
Now get out.
--
BMO
Comcast has repeatedly been caught, and admitted to, committing offences that would be in violation of net neutrality rules, unfortunately the FCC had previously classified the internet as something that it couldn't regulate so they suffered no penalties.
When given a choice between government control or corporate control, I will always choose government control. The government may be slow or difficult change, but at least the people have the ability to affect change in it's policies. We don't have the same control over corporations, despite what free market zealots claim.
Perhaps it has the right to regulate it, after all they do regulate telecommunications. Isn't the internet kinda like a digital form of that. I fail to see why everyone is so uptight about the FCC. If they can force the carriers to treat each and every packet the same I'm all for it. You know, just like how the carriers treated phone calls the same.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
what a waste... can't people just stop bickering about meaningless things
will it matter next week? next month? in a year?
For you this may be a waste. But the average person has no clue as to the extent and importance of net neutrality. The more discussion about this subject and the higher the profile of this subject, we might actually begin to get some real discussion on net neutrality. Currently, the discussion centers around which version of targeted net neutrality will be implemented to benefit a special group instead of society as a whole.
Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
WICKARD v. FILBURN, 317 U.S. 111 (1942)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
...has moved for dismissal.
Amazing. I'm sure glad you told us this. I certainly never would have guessed that the defendant in a lawsuit would move for dismissal.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Are you that clueless? Or are you being deliberately obtuse?
The FCC is appointed by elected representatives of the people, they can be unappointed at any time if the people elect new representatives, or if the people apply sufficient pressure to the existing representatives to act. The FCC gets its mandate from the government.
By your reasoning, the fire department and the police are not "the government" because they're hired positions instead of elected. Besides the Chief/Sheriff/Commissioner in some cities/counties, the rest are all appointed positions chosen by elected officials. Are you saying that police officers have no authority because they were not elected?
Nitwit.
your argument about business size is disingenuous. how big do you have to be *not* to implement a tiered service structure, which no ISP in the US has yet implemented? Seems like a regulation that says 'keep doing what you've been doing' isn't too hard to comply with.
For bias purposes, you should know I want the FCC to mandate net neutrality.
Browsing with classic discussion, noscript, at -1 and nested
no hidden comments and I only mod UP
Repeating your strawman tripe doesn't make it true. The government isn't "regulating the packet" whatever the hell that means. The government is regulating the companies... telling them that they can't play favorites with internet traffic. There's no bureaucrat inspecting each packet as it whizzes by. They wouldn't have the funding to do that if they wanted.
I know Fox told you that government is always bad, but you really got to think for yourself. Major corporations (like News Corp!) have a vested interest in demonizing government regulation of major corporations.
An unregulated internet will quickly come to resemble cable TV. Having the FCC enforce some basic standard of net neutrality prevents that.
That decision has haunted us for 70+ years and given the government virtually unlimited control to regulate our households. - How much energy we use, whether or not our water is drugged, what kind of low-flow toilet we buy (and which requires two flushes), and so on. THIS decision regarding whether the FCC can regulate private websites streaming over private cables into private homes is just as far-reaching.
The precedent could easily be used by a future FCC lawyer to argue they not only have the right to regulate the Private Internet, but also Private Cable TV and censor what is transmitted (i.e. goodbye FOX/MSNBC because they are too political, and goodbye swearing/nudity in movies or HBO).
Yet you have no problem with the government taking control of a portion of people's property to allow these companies to put up phones lines. By your logic the private companies should have to negotiate with every single land owner whose land they need to go onto.
If you want any sort of civilisation you do need someone to regulate some things. Otherwise you end up with land being polluted and trashed by corporations, every road being a toll road and the US would be one of the most backwards countries in the world if phone companies were allow to decide who they would provide service to. But I guess most rednecks are ok with that seeing how they are some of the most backwards people already.
By you logic as well there is no need for a federal government and there should be no national military. The idea that the government fucks up everything except the military is at best retarded. Fuck it, let everyone defend themselves. Surely it will be a piece of cake with all that money they'll save with no national government.
The FCC is all about regulating communications. What exactly do you think the internet is used for? The age of the FCC has no bearing on this mainly because no one within the FCC upon it's start is there now.
And before all the idiots come in here have a circle jerk over FDR and the FCC you have to keep in mind the FCC is only effectively an upgrade from the existing Federal Radio Commission which began under Republican Calvin Coolidge in 1926. Before that the government was regulating radio with the Radio Act of 1912.
Not that it matters if it was a republican or democrat who started this. Anyone with half a brain realises that something that greatly affects the whole nation and its education and economy should be watched over to ensure it's not shat on by corporations.
Mind you Republicans were different in those days. They didn't have an army of retards watching Fox News damaging their party.
A government agency is a very dangerous beast. You have to be careful.
As are corporations which is why we need the government to watch over them and why people are supposed to watch over the government and vote accordingly, protest where necessary and keep in contact with their congressmen and senators.
I know people rather just assume the evil FDR magically started this communication regulation to start a new world order to enslave us and expect the government to sort itself out without any effort on their behalf other than watching Fox News but those people are idiots.