Slashdot Mirror
Telcos Move Net Neutrality Fight To Congress
Presto Vivace writes: "Public Knowledge is rallying its supporters after learning that some House members plan to try and add an amendment to H.R. 5016, the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act to block funding of FCC network neutrality rules. H.R. 5016 is the bill that keeps funding the government and whose failure to pass can shut it down. The White House has already said it opposed the existing FCC budget cuts and threatened a veto of a bill it says politicized the budget process." Public Knowledge is asking citizens to tell Congress to stop meddling with net neutrality. In a way this is a good sign. It is an indication that the telcos think that they will lose the current FCC debate.
Meanwhile, the FCC's deadline for comments about net neutrality has arrived, and the agency's servers buckled after recording over 670,000 of them. The deadline has been extended until midnight on Friday.
on the House of Reppresentatives website.
Net Neutrality seems to have went from everything open and no restrictions to no fast lanes or some shit. You can pick any side you want without too much confusion because while this is called net neutrality, I do not think it actually is any more. It might be part of it, a part I would not agree with, but it is more likely something else.
To note, I find there is nothing wrong with a fast lane as long as no customers are getting less than what they purchased in order to have it. (No slowing me down to deliver NetFlix at 30megs).
point to point connectivity with no bias based on origin or destination. Just like our phone calls go thru no matter who we call or we is calling us, that is how our internet should work. It is very clear. Unless someone takes it upon themselves to muddy the waters.
| Imagine the consequences if we DIDN'T extend individual rights to corporations.The government could just read all the data on Google's servers after taking them.
As opposed to now? They read all the data on Google's servers without taking them.
The problem is that powerful corporations appear to have even more rights than individual people.
People managing powerful corporations do illegal acts, and other people (the shareholders who had no knowledge or control) are punished.
Personally, I'd love to re-incorporate my soul in a zero-tax offshore jurisdiction and subcontract out my physical body to earn income another country but not have to pay tax.
Since a corporation is not a natural person, but a particular structure created by legislative activity, there is no legal or moral reason that rights of such constructed entities cannot be legally constrained in ways impermissible for natural humans.
Let's face it - money always wins.
clearly the money is nervous, or they would not have gone running to congress.
Freedom lost even before the battle begun.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
until the the ISP's began to deliberately throttle services it worked very well.
A corporation is a legal entity, not a "collection of people". Your entire argument (flawed though amusing) is based upon an incorrect assumption.
Meanwhile, the FCC's deadline for comments about net neutrality has arrived, and the agency's servers buckled after recording over 670,000 of them.
That's because they didn't pay extra for the bandwidth. What did they expect?
Whoever complained that this is "politicizing the federal budget" loses. I didn't pay attention to which side said that, but if that's the best argument you have, clearly you have nothing. Yes, deciding how to spend OUR money is a political process, and always has been. If you're position requires pretending that isn't the case, you're obviously living in fairy tale land.