Slashdot Mirror
Legislation Would Prohibit ISPs From Throttling Online Video Services
Dega704 sends this story from Ars:
"A Senate bill called the 'Consumer Choice in Online Video Act' (PDF) takes aim at many of the tactics Internet service providers can use to overcharge customers and degrade the quality of rival online video services. Submitted yesterday by U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), the 63-page bill provides a comprehensive look at the potential ways in which ISPs can limit consumer choice, and it boots the Federal Communications Commission's power to prevent bad outcomes. 'It shall be unlawful for a designated Internet service provider to engage in unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, the purpose or effect of which are to hinder significantly or to prevent an online video distributor from providing video programming to a consumer,' the bill states. A little more specifically, it would be illegal to 'block, degrade, or otherwise impair any content provided by an online video distributor' or 'provide benefits in the transmission of the video content of any company affiliated with the Internet service provider through specialized services or other means.' Those provisions overlap a bit with the FCC's authority under its own net neutrality law, the Open Internet Order, which already prevents the blockage of websites and services. However, Verizon is in court attempting to kill that law, and there is a real possibility that it could be limited in some way. The Consumer Choice in Online Video Act could provide a hedge against that possible outcome."
Too many Dems are in bed with Hollywood and too many Repubs will scream about socialism because it places limitations on big business.
The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
In addition, many of these networks were built thanks to an infusion of taxpayer dollars to the companies in question in exchange for some promises that the ISPs then "forgot" about when it came time to deliver (and used their lobbying muscle to prevent anyone holding them to their promises).
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
His profile doesn't seem to have Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon listed as major contributors, so I'd guess this man is honestly trying to do something for his constituents. It's also worth noting that he is doing this in spite of Verizon being a major source of funding. Also related and notable, he is retiring at the end of the current Congress -- he came out in favor of gay marriage this year too, and in West Virginia that probably means something. I get the impression he's trying to leave a good legacy, and it's nice to see that.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Here's one result from a quick Google search: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131012/02124724852/decades-failed-promises-verizon-it-promises-fiber-to-get-tax-breaks-then-never-delivers.shtml
Basically, Verizon asked for massive tax breaks ($2.1 billion) in 1994. In exchange, they said they would wire all homes up with fiber by 2015. By 2004, they were supposed to have 50% of homes wired, but didn't have any. Now they have halted all FIOS expansion and are basically reneging on the promise entirely. Of course, they're claiming that wording in the contract allows them to do some of this. (Stuff like lines "passing" homes which they claim means they can run a line near a home and that home counts even if that home isn't hooked up to the fiber.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.