Verizon Net Neutrality Case Rejected
Back in January, we discussed news that Verizon had filed an appeal to the FCC's net neutrality rules, saying the regulatory agency did not have the legal authority to enforce the mandate. Now, reader olsmeister follows up with this quote from PC World:
"An appeals court Monday dismissed Verizon's challenge of the US Federal Communications Commission's December net neutrality ruling, calling it premature. A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia noted in its decision that the FCC's net neutrality order is a rule-making document subject to judicial review once it is published in the Federal Register. The panel said that the appeal's 'prematurity is incurable.'"
Doesn't change the fact that ISPs are acting like assholes. I understand that they have a fiduciary duty of care to protect their ongoing business affairs and their shareholders, but that doesn't change the fact that they're granted a NATURAL MONOPOLY just to screw over the consumer. If they want their cake and eat it to, then I think Congress needs to get back in session and force the carriers to carry CLECs again at a fixed rate, but this time over copper, fiber, COAX, and any other technology that they're granted a natural monopoly over. The abolishment of the fixed rate is what led AT&T to slither itself back together and push out ALL of their competition off their copper. Now we only have a handful of useful broadband providers that want to add a meter to electrical pulses. Yes, technically electricity isn't free, but its costs are substantially lower than the cost to let's say mine out natural gas, oil, or to find, transport, and clean water.
The issue isn't that you're free to pick your provider, because that's not entirely true. The most consistent internet service will come from fixed lines and those lines are given to specific corporations that don't have their customers best interest in mind. If cable internet didn't exist, DSL would still be a slow and you'd only get it if you live within 1 mile of the CO. If DSL didn't exist, cable internet would be limited, bogged down, and never upgraded to avoid the bottleneck from the technology just being a large LAN. But what competition do these two technologies really halve? 3G? Not even close. 4G? Not even close to being implemented fully. Satellite? Not consistent. So you're stuck with two options, and those two options want to keep competing providers off their granted duopoly and add a toll booth for the consumer that doesn't have any other options. If we take away the monopolies on the poles, then prices will fall and we won't see net neutrality as an issue, the same way we saw the cost of a land line drop and long distance cost dropped. If we force net neutrality, then at least we can have internet that can be used freely without restrictions to competing products and services that the line provider is offering that may be provided somewhere else in the world.
Just because Congress keeps the interest of monopolies closer to heart doesn't mean that we should continue to create laws that are designed to limit competition, raise prices, and choke what little money the consumer has left after trying to survive. Even if the FCC was out of line, the problem is that we don't have a Congress that gives a rats ass about the consumer, and they never will as long as we continue to give corporations unlimited and unchecked power and influence over our government. Furthermore, Congress doesn't have to give an agency specific powers at every turn. Constitutionally, they have the power to regulate interstate commerce. A bit flying all over the globe is definitely in that scope, and if a law doesn't exist as a statute, the Federal regulatory agencies do have the power to create Federal regulations to be followed, and all persons, natural or not, have the right to challenge those regulations in the court of law. But non-natural persons should NOT have the right to influence the law when they don't have the right to VOTE on those laws to begin with.