Slashdot Mirror
First Lawsuits Challenging FCC's New Net Neutrality Rules Arrive
An anonymous reader writes: A small ISP based in Texas and an industry trade group have become the first to file lawsuits challenging the FCC's recent net neutrality rules. The trade group, USTelecom, argues that the regulations are not "legally sustainable." Alamo Broadband claims it is facing "onerous requirements" by operating under Title II of the Communications Act. Such legal challenges were expected, and are doubtless the first of many — but few expected them to arrive so soon. While some of the new rules were considered "final" once the FCC released them on March 12, others don't go into effect until they're officially published in the Federal Register, which hasn't happened yet.
The Alamo Broadband complaint reads as follows:
Alamo seeks relief on the grounds that the Order: (1) is in excess of the Commission's authority; (2) is arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act; (3) is contrary to constitutional right; and (4) is otherwise contrary to law.
That's about as generic as it can get. I don't see it going anywhere.
> To all liberals, more government regulation is uniformly good.
Bullcrap. Sane liberalism says that the government puts in only the regulation that is *needed* and put on the people that can do the most harm. I know of NO liberal that wants regulation for the sake of regulation.
Your portrayal of conservatives is wrong as well. Most conservatives seem to be fine with regulation as long it is on people they don't like and want to punish. They seem to want the people who can do the most harm have the least regulation (for money purposes) and tend to NOT care about regulation on individuals and small business, the very people who can do the LEAST harm.
The fact you are parroting these political stereotypes means you listen to a very limited group of people.
To all conservatives...
Ahem, that should read "To all Republicans..." I'm pretty damn conservative, and I think Republicans are some of a stupidest fucks to walk the planet. We're not one and the same, I can still freely admit when and where the Government does a good job without crapping myself.
2. Regulate the behavior of monopolies. Net Neutrality attempts to do #2.
In which market is Alamo Broadband a monopoly?
I know of no government granted monopoly status to ISPs. Comcast/TW/etc are defacto (not dejure) monopolies in cable television delivered internet service. Verizon/whatever are dejure monopolies on telephone-company provided ISPs. There exist many ISPs in the same markets as all of the previously mentioned companies. There are even ISPs that can provide ISP service via DSL over those dejure telco monopoly systems.
Do the FCC net neutrality rules actually limit themselves to places where there are actually defacto or dejure monopolies, or do they apply to every ISP? If they apply to every ISP, then they are not regulating the actions of monopolies, they are regulating many non-monopolies as well.
I'm fascinated by the FCC response to a filing that had to take place within ten days of their action and only happened close to the end of those ten days: "premature". Sorry FCC, you don't get to tell people they filed too early just because they filed within the very short deadline.
And the government created that too. And the government decided eventually that confining the internet to just academia (as the NSFNET was) didn't make sense so they closed down the NSFNET and the main links changed to be commercial instead of government paid.
This period you speak of where the ARPANET was the backbone for a network that was generally used never existed. The NSFNET started out around 1987 and you didn't see any real commercial use of the internet until the early 90s. Even CIX (ANS) came in 1991 with the help of the NSF. After Congress (including Al Gore) passed legislation pushing the NSF to repeal its restrictions on commercial use you saw significant commercial uses take off.
Today's internet is in no way an unintended consequence. It may not have been paid for by the government, but they did design and develop it and were well aware of the possibilities beyond academia.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
That's as asinine as a communist claiming that if you start your own business, it will be a given that you'll dump toxic waste into the river while sexually harassing your secretary. Because other business owners have done that and the communist has an axe to grind.
The government passed regulations on seat belts, lead paint, asbestos, DDT, and of course the FCC which has thus far prevented NBC from trying to edge out ABC with more powerful transmitters. It didn't cause civilization to collapse, capitalism to be banned, or Zombie Stalin to come for your stock options.
Your solution is to let AT&T and Comcast double and triple charge anyone and everyone who connects through their network? GTFO with these Randian clown shoes.
Not the AC. But of course the government created the internet. To argue otherwise because it has grown since the 80's and 90's is to argue that GM didn't create the first commercial electric car because a Tesla has greater power, range, and 3G.
You don't have a point, you have a Randian axe to grind. And that makes you a moron.
Right. If private enterprise had been in charge of the space program, we might have sent a man to the moon by now.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Now I'm confused. If baseball hadn't been invented, how would Hank Aaron have hit home runs again?
Maybe we need to work on your similes.
You are welcome on my lawn.
why is it so hard to accept or comprehend that things build on each other?
the full statement should be "you didn't build that all by yourself, you had help", and it's absolutely true in modern society.
all of our various constructs help and reinforce other constructs.
Gizmo Wonderbrain creates the practical flying car.
-Gizmos car factory is dependent on shipments from suppliers around the country.
--those shipments can be shipped quickly and easily because we have a national highway system
---that highway system is safe and reliable because we have rules and safety requirements
-gizmos factory is also dependent on skilled workers
--workers who are attracted to his company by good wages
---wages paid in currency usable around the world because it's backed by the full faith and credit of the government, rather than just in Gizmos Company Town
-Gizmo himself is a genius
--a genius whose intellect was brought out by his teachers in his schools as he grew up, reinforcing and challenging him
---teachers who taught in public schools because as a society we value education for the benefits it provides society
--a genius who went to college to learn engineering
---with the help of Pell Grants and a GI Bill
----paid for by a portion of everyone's taxes
Really we can go on and on. But the point is this: No one is born without help, raised without help, educated without help, creates a company without help, and all the surrounding and enabling infrastructure. Everything is dependent on everything else. Everything is built on a foundation that consists of everything that came before it. From the computer at your desk, to the clothes on your back, from the education you receives, to the gum in your pocket.
Look around you: the reason we don't exist in a Dickens novel where basic existence is an uncertainty, life is short and miserable for the overwhelming majority, is because we as a society pulled together and have created a slew of enabling infrastructure. The mechanisms vary, some are through government, others through private enterprise, but all in all, the end result is the same: No, you bloody well did NOT build "that" all by yourself and without any help from the surrounding society.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
the same way it mucked up:
-railroads linking the country
-the interstate that provided the backbone for industry, so that suppliers no longer had to be next door to factories (which creates a dynamic where every town is its own industrial enclave), but could supply the entire nation
-the telephone network allowing instantaneous real time voice communication across the country, where before moving from coast to coast typically meant leaving all your family and friends behind essentially forever, other than a couple letters a year
-creating a currency that fuels and backs our economy
-creating the rules and regulations that permit businesses to operate in a predictable and profitable manner, along with legal protections for everyone and everything involved (company, employer, employee, consumer, copyright, trademarks, business practices)
-safe food that doesn't require finding out a supplier is bad by having people die first
-safe cars that don't require finding out a supplier is bad by having people die first
-safe homes and buildings (the building code) that doesn't require finding out a construction company is bad by having people die first
-safe (lots of things) that don't require having people die first
-a military that ensures the nation is secure from outside threats, rather than having every city state or town see to its own defense, or worse have it provided by rival companies ala The Syndicate (also acts as a unifying force, otherwise cities/states essentially act as their own nation states)
-public health, particularly including vaccinations
The list goes on.
But the point is this: to say government always mucks it up is ignorant. No, government isn't perfect. But in our nation, and other free nations like us, if its not perfect we are able to fix it, and more importantly, fix it without resorting to violence and revolution, which is good for stability and long term growth as a society. And it's because we follow the political theory of a government "by the People, for the People, and of the People". Our government is US, we are the government, represented in the abstract by the representatives we send to D.C. And because of that, our government is more successful than not, and more adequately addresses problems that we as society see than other governmental systems that have come before. Our government is not some abstract Other, separate from us, and unaccountable to us, regardless of the hyperbole you may be told by people and groups who WANT YOU to think that you are powerless. They want you to think that government is a failure, that it is out of control....so that they can control it more than you.
Ask yourself, why do people fight so hard to get into office in an entity that they not only claim is not only a failure, but also evil, and the source of all problems?
And further, why do they try so hard to MAKE it fail, to make their claims come true?
The answer is because it's a sham. They want you to think those things, so that you stop caring, or stop trying, and cede control to them.
--
If you ever spend time in the military, you find lots of seemingly braindead warnings and procedures. Things like "caution jet blast", caution tape around bulkheads, particulary the top and bottom, signs near ladders saying "watch step", or "hold handrails". You may think these things are dumb, but going through training you will learn, each of these warning exist because someone, somewhere didn't pay attention, got hurt, screwed up, or hurt others. Someone fell down that ladderwell; someone got sucked into a jet engine; someone cracked his head open going through a hatch, someone knocked someone overboard.
Government action is very similar: Government and a lot of the functions it has taken on, or regulations it has made, like say in areas of food and car safety, or manufacturing pollution, exist specifically because someone, somewhere, took advantage of society before those rules exist. Companies know how m
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
The car couldn't operate without the wheel that came before it.
So yes, the wheel absolutely gets some credit.
No, he doesn't get all of it.
But he does get credit for creating the foundation that enabled further development and invention. That's all the President's statement meant, though folks try to take it out of context, oversimplify it, and ignore the rather obvious meaning behind it.
It's quite simple: no one exists in a vacuum. Everyone in our society has had help from the rest of society, and we shouldn't ignore that interdependence.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Well first off, they aren't fixing it.
They are simply preserving the status quo as a bit of a pre-emptive strike before companies like Comcast can break it.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.