Net Neutrality Bill Aimed At ISP Data Caps Introduced In US Senate

New submitter Likes Microsoft writes "Yesterday, Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) introduced a Net Neutrality bill aimed at ISPs using data caps soley for profiteering purposes, rather than the 'traffic management' purpose they often claim. The text of the bill is available at Wyden's Senate page. It would require ISPs to be certified by the FCC before implementing data caps. It says, in part, 'The [FCC] shall evaluate a data cap proposed by an Internet service provider to determine whether the data cap functions to reasonably limit network congestion in a manner that does not unnecessarily discourage use of the Internet.' In a statement, Wyden said, 'Americans are increasingly tethered to the Internet and connecting more devices to it, but they don’t really have the tools to effectively manage data consumption across their networks. Data caps create challenges for consumers and run the risk of undermining innovation in the digital economy if they are imposed bluntly and not designed to truly manage network congestion.'"

Comments

Sen. Wyden.

[MachineShedFred]

Dear Senator Wyden,

Thank you for actually being a good Senator, that introduces good bills that create or change laws that help out the average US Citizen. I'm glad I voted for you the last time you were on the ballot, and if I still lived in Oregon I'd vote for you again.

Re:Sen. Wyden.

[afidel]

Considering basically every transaction carried out over the internet is an interstate transaction you couldn't be further from reality.

Re:Sen. Wyden.

[Anonymous Coward]

Practical Reason #1: Because nobody else is doing it. ISPs are basically like utilities in function; natural monopolies that are exquisitely well positioned to price-gouge, because the nature of their business is effectively insulated from competition, and they are completely reliant on the government to deploy infrastructure at all in the first place (Can you imagine how many property owners you need to deal with to lay cable?)

Pedantic Legalistic Asshole (This is you) Reason #1 : Because the internet is a needed part of interstate commerce, and by screwing with it locally, you screw with your resident's ability to conduct interstate commerce.

"Go screw yourself" Reason #1 : Because they took federal subsidies to function, you will shut up and listen, or we will yank funding, cripple you, and give it to someone else. See why highway constructors must play nice with the Federal Government or die.

Re:Sen. Wyden.

[fredprado]

When healthy competition does not exist which is more often than not the case in our world, regulation, inefficient as it may be, is the only way to combat abuses.

Re:Sen. Wyden.

[Synerg1y]

4G = wireless, comcast = coaxial, different level of availability and yes speed. No idea why 4g is your only option besides you maybe live more rural in which case I'd look into satellite internet (good d/l bad u/l). Also doesn't t-mobile offer unlimited 4g data? I've seriously considered telling comcast to go fuck themselves and getting t-mobile and paying the different to not deal w comcast anymore.

Wary

[HaZardman27]

Couldn't this serve to discourage ISPs from improving their infrastructure? If they let their infrastructure age, they'd be spending nothing on improvement, and would eventually be allowed to put data caps in place as bandwidth usage increases.

Disclaimer: Didn't RTFA.

Re:Wary

[DigiShaman]

The ISP industry is an oligopoly. In some cases, monopoly depending on where you live. Good or bad, you can thank the government for limiting new players entry into this market. So the idea of 'free market' can be thrown out the window in this discussion.

Caps are bad in that they foster regression of infrastructure. Simply put, there's massive profits in scarcity. That's econ 101.