Verizon Posts Message In Morse Code To Mock FCC's Net Neutrality Ruling

HughPickens.com writes: Chris Matyszczyk reports at Cnet that Verizon has posted a message to the FCC titled: FCC's 'Throwback Thursday' Move Imposes 1930s Rules on the Internet" written in Morse code. The first line of the release dated February 26, 1934 in old typewriter font (PDF) reads: "Today (Feb.26) the Federal Communications Commission approved an order urged by President Obama that imposes rules on broadband Internet services that were written in the era of the steam locomotive and the telegraph." The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 along party lines in favor of new Internet service rules that prohibit blocking, slowing or prioritizing traffic. The rules, which have not yet been released, are opposed by cable and telephone companies that fear it will curb Internet growth and stifle payback on network investment. "It isn't a surprise that Verizon is a touch against Thursday's order. In 2012, it insisted that the very idea of Net neutrality squished its First and Fifth Amendment right," writes Matyszczyk. "I wonder, though, who will be attracted by this open mockery. Might this be a sign that Verizon doesn't think the fight is over at all?"

Comments

Verizon's 'Throwback Thursday' move...

[by (1706743)]

...imposes 2000s (1990s?) Internet access speed!

fees

[Anonymous Coward]

first complaint ive seen. they want to leave the average user with turtle slow speeds while charging out the ass for people and companies who can afford it. companies have gone from being reasonable 150yrs ago to outright blatant greed, and youre ridiculed if you speak out against it. fuck capitalism.

Re:fees

[Jane Q. Public]

fuck capitalism.

It has nothing to do with capitalism. It has everything to do with unregulated corporate greed. They are NOT the same things. The same kind of greed was seen very prominently in countries that called themselves Socialist and even Communist. So don't blame "capitalism" for it. It's cronyism, plain and simple.

And this is almost laughably wrong:

The rules, which have not yet been released, are opposed by cable and telephone companies that fear it will curb Internet growth and stifle payback on network investment.

I call BS. They don't "fear" it will do anything of the kind. What they fear is that it will put a stop to their monopolistic control, and monopolistic prices, and end their ability to pocket tax money given them for infrastructure.

I mean this literally: you can hardly believe a word they say anymore.

Re:fees

[Defenestrar]

Wow - a limited monopoly for a service necessary for modern life like telephone, power, water, and sewer? Sounds like a public utility to me.

Re:fees

[Archangel Michael]

No, it isn't a public utility. It is a "franchise agreement" between the Local Municipality and the Corporation. The fact that this is the way things have always been done doesn't mean it has to continue this way.

I propose that instead, we bring FIBER to a COLO, from where the citizens can CHOOSE (market forces) the options and features they desire from the multitude of companies that offer these services.

BY moving the issue of "last mile" ... to a COLO rather than neighborhood corner, it solves all sorts of market issues.

Re:fees

[jythie]

This is not far off how it used to be. Years back Verizon DSL was covered under Title II. They provided the lines, but you could choose any one of dozens of ISPs to actually buy your service from. It was wonderful.

Re:fees

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

Sure, I'd agree IF the telco's hadn't taken BILLIONS of tax-payer money to do "upgrades". Instead they took that money and gave it to their lobbyists to fight against having to use that money for that. If they didn't want the FCC in their business, they shouldn't have accepted taxpayer money and then commit fraud with it.

Re:fees

[jader3rd]

It has nothing to do with capitalism. It has everything to do with unregulated corporate greed. They are NOT the same things. The same kind of greed was seen very prominently in countries that called themselves Socialist and even Communist. So don't blame "capitalism" for it. It's cronyism, plain and simple.

That's actually everything to do with capitalism.

Your ignorance of history and economic systems is ... overwhelming.

If we're going to define capitalism as what was laid out by Adam Smith in On the Wealth of Nations (generally considered to be the founding document of capitalism), it certainly didn't praise corporate greed. Adam Smith takes a lot of time to bash on corporations, and how they need to be regulated. Not just that they need to be regulated, but exactly the manner in which they need to be.

Re:fees

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

I propose that instead, we bring FIBER to a COLO, from where the citizens can CHOOSE (market forces) the options and features they desire from the multitude of companies that offer these services.

That's how we do it in most of "socialist" Sweden. I.e. I have an "open city network" fibre to my house. ISPs are free to sell service on that fibre/network (for a small access fee that pays for the network infrastructure, now less than 10% of my montly fee). So I have a choice of eight different ISPs and pay about $40/month for 100/100Mbps + IP telephony (no subscription fee, but charged calls). I also get cable TV over the same fibre from a different company but that's extra, about $25 for the channels I get.

That's how you'd actually want it organised to enable a free market.

Old rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Old rules just suck. I mean, stuff like "Thou shall not kill"? How are we supposed to deal with terrorists with silly old rules like that?

Corporation != People

[Anonymous Coward]

The very fact that Verizon views themselves as having first and fifth amendment rights shows the ludicrous precedents Citizens United sets.

Re:Stomp Feet

[Defenestrar]

And it's the idiot bully's trick at that; the clever ones don't provoke the playground monitors.

And now, I would like to sincerely and heartily thank Verizon for the initial lawsuit provoking the playground monitor that made net neutrality a reality. I strongly encourage additional attention and noise to the issue for full on public utility regulation. Here's to moving the US into a First World nation with First World utilities like power, water, and real broadband - wired and wireless.

Re:Stomp Feet

[duckintheface]

" imposes rules on broadband Internet services that were written in the era of the steam locomotive and the telegraph."

Oh, you mean back in the days when giant corporations used their monopoly status to squeeze huge amounts of money out of their customers in the absence of competiton? Those days?

Re:Stomp Feet

[amiga3D]

It just drips Irony doesn't it?

Re:Stomp Feet

[SeaFox]

More like they don't expect to win a real argument that the FCC's proposals are in any way bad, so they are trying to win by mocking the FCC.

It's a schoolyard bully's trick.

The FCC should let'er rip and give Verizon their own 0.02 cents on the topic.

Re: Stomp Feet

[Oonushi]

It gets better:

In 2012, it insisted that the very idea of Net neutrality squished its First and Fifth Amendment right,"

Someone should tell Verizon that the Bill of Rights isn't to be taken seriously either since you know they were written just before the time of steam locomotives and the telegraph!

They wouldn't want to be hypocrites after all.

Re:Stomp Feet

[Maxo-Texas]

Of course... that article is dated before the ruling.

Today, the front page reads this way.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...

I case you don't choose to read the ruling.
Let me summarize:

EFF LOVES THE RULING.