Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC Says It Will Vote On Net Neutrality In February

Posted by Soulskill on from the when-all-the-astroturfing-is-accounted-for dept.

schwit1 sends this report from the Washington Post: Federal regulators looking to place restrictions on Internet providers will introduce and vote on new proposed net neutrality rules in February, Federal Communications Commission officials said Friday. President Obama's top telecom regulator, Tom Wheeler, told fellow FCC commissioners before the Christmas holiday that he intends to circulate a draft proposal internally next month with an eye toward approving the measure weeks later, said one official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the agency's deliberations are ongoing. The rules are meant to keep broadband providers such as Verizon and Comcast from speeding up or slowing down some Web sites compared to others.

8 of 81 comments (clear)

  1. Congressional Vote? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just curious when America's elected representatives will vote to make Net Neurtrality the law of the land, not that I think they should. Just wanted to draw attention to the fact we're now living in Bureacrastan.

    1. Re:Congressional Vote? by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What Congress doesn't get involved in, Congress can't damage.

      Instead we have unelected bureaucrats doing the damaging. Such an improvement.

  2. when-all-the-astroturfing-is-accounted-for dept by Shuh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's interesting how this top-down regulatory move without the input of America's elected lawmakers is being characterized as the true Will Of The People. There's serious Newspeak going on here.

  3. Fox/henhouse by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The FCC is the last organization that should be "voting" on Net Neutrality.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Fox/henhouse by LaissezFaire · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Put it on the ballot as a national referendum in 2016, you wanna see Big Pipes shit themselves.

      Since there is no such thing in the U.S. as a national referendum on laws or regulations, do you have any other suggestions?

      The thing that net neutrality advocates fail to do is to describe the regulatory system they want to put in place. Take the comic from The Oatmeal, for example (http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality). "And I'm going to do that by being a super terrific A+ dude and explaining to you exactly how Net Neutrality works." There are lots of panels describing the goal, and none showing the way it would work. How is it run? How are complaints logged? How are ISPs monitored? What reporting mechanisms to ISPs have? What features will be mandated or forbidden in network devices? How is good versus bad traffic shaping to be defined? What are the penalties? What are the exceptions?

      Ah, the exceptions. Once VOIP 911 calls are mandated to be prioritized over other data, then you'll get medical data prioritized, which makes sense, because we don't want to kill people, and then ... the same big bad companies will lobby for their data, and net neutrality becomes the opposite of net neutrality. Whoops.

    2. Re:Fox/henhouse by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since there is no such thing in the U.S. as a national referendum on laws or regulations, do you have any other suggestions?

      Since you asked, yes. A constitutional amendment ending corporate personhood and establishing that money is not speech.

      The thing that net neutrality advocates fail to do is to describe the regulatory system they want to put in place.

      That's horseshit. We have a very nice regulatory model to put in place. It's called, "common carrier".

      Ah, the exceptions. Once VOIP 911 calls are mandated to be prioritized over other data, then you'll get medical data prioritized, which makes sense, because we don't want to kill people, and then ... the same big bad companies will lobby for their data, and net neutrality becomes the opposite of net neutrality. Whoops.

      Good job inventing red herrings. "Net Neutrality is bad because bad people might do bad things in the future."

      Free markets have utterly failed when it comes to infrastructure. Why should we trust it with something as important as communications?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    3. Re:Fox/henhouse by mc6809e · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Free markets have utterly failed when it comes to infrastructure. Why should we trust it with something as important as communications?

      "Utterly failed"? Stop exaggerating.

      The right answer (whatever it might be) begins by being honest.

  4. Re:Just reclassify them by Shuh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is easier to reclassify the broadband companies than to get them to play nice with the Internet. If there is REAL competition, they will get in line, because some new start-up can quickly state they have 'true' Net Neutrality.

    Ironically you may have have hit on the real reason for passing Net Neutrality. The feelgood parts of the regulation touted on /. will be toothless. Meanwhile the fine print of the regulation will outlaw new start-ups and anything else approaching "REAL competition."