Slashdot Mirror
Federal Court Kills Net Neutrality, Says FCC Lacks Authority.
An anonymous reader writes "According to a report from Gizmodo, a U.S. Appeals Court has invalidated the FCC's Net Neutrality rules. From the decision: 'Given that the Commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the Communications Act expressly prohibits the Commission from nonetheless regulating them as such. Because the Commission has failed to establish that the anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules do not impose per se common carrier obligations, we vacate those portions of the Open Internet Order.' Could this be the final nail in the coffin for Net Neutrality? Or will the FCC fight back? This submitter really, really hopes they fight back..."
The FCC won't fight back, in fact this result was probably the intention along.
Prior to joining the FCC, Chairman Wheeler was Managing Director at Core Capital Partners, a venture capital firm investing in early stage Internet Protocol (IP)-based companies. He served as President and CEO of Shiloh Group, LLC, a strategy development and private investment company specializing in telecommunications services and co-founded SmartBrief, the internet’s largest electronic information service for vertical markets. From 1976 to 1984, Chairman Wheeler was associated with the National Cable Television Association (NCTA), where he was President and CEO from 1979 to 1984. Following NCTA, Chairman Wheeler was CEO of several high tech companies, including the first company to offer high speed delivery of data to home computers and the first digital video satellite service. From 1992 to 2004, Chairman Wheeler served as President and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA).
http://www.fcc.gov/leadership/tom-wheeler
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Sigh... if only the 'lefty" judges assigned to this case hadn't AGREED WITH VERIZON...
Seriously, apparently the only dissenting opinion is from the Reagan appointee
uh isp's were already throttling competing video services while not counting their own service against the throttle allowances.
that is quite simply the whole reason for the whole debate.
imagine if google as an isp would throttle netflix unusable and just allowing google video - or throttling bing search unusable. that's the scenario.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
No, that's a franchise monopoly.
A natural monopoly isn't granted, it's simply the situation that occurs when economic factors hand such an advantage to incumbents that no other may effectively compete.
Franchise monopoly: City government goes to Big Cable Co and says 'you, and only you, are permitted to run cables in this city.'
Natural monopoly: Big Cable Co invests in a load of cable-laying. As they are the only choice, they secure every subscriber. When others wish to enter the market, they realize that they'd also have to spend just as much in cable-laying, but that everyone who wants internet service is already a Big Cable Co customer, and switching is a lot of trouble - there's no way they could make back the cost of digging up the roads and laying cable as a newcomer to the market.
The legislation required was passed decades ago. The FCC has the authority to designate a communications service either a common carrier or an information service.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
In this case, Obama's FCC is fighting against Verizon and other telecom companies and defending net neutrality. But don't let basic facts right in front of your face influence your pre-prepared bullshit.
The FCC has the authority to designate a communications service either a common carrier or an information service. Reply to This Share
In the GENERAL case, yes. But Congress specifically exempted Internet businesses from Title II. It was one of the stupidest things Congress has ever done, and the decision was (of course) prompted by lobbyist money.