ISPs Claim Title II Regulations Don't Apply To the Internet Because "Computers"

New submitter Gryle writes: ArsTechnica is reporting on an interesting legal tactic by ISPs in the net neutrality fight. In a 95-page brief the United States Telecom Association claims Internet access qualifies as information service, not a telecommunication service, because it involves computer processing. The brief further claims "The FCC's reclassification of mobile broadband internet access as a common-carrier service is doubly unlawful." (page 56)

Comments

Interesting argument

[gcnaddict]

...except it all falls on its face because ultimately, the networks of computers are being used to communicate data between humans and other computers. hence telecommunication.

Re:Interesting argument

[khasim]

Even if that wasn't the case, they're arguing AGAINST being a "common carrier".

Won't this make them responsible for any of the crap (death threats, libel, etc) that they distribute as part of them being an "information service"?

Re:Interesting argument

[rtb61]

The communication is between humans and humans. A human at one end craft content and store in on a computer in a accessible format. The end user then crafts a request for that information and sends it via the internet and the stored communication from the content creator is then delivered to the end user.

The ISP claim is a stupid as is possibly imaginable, easy proof, their claim basically is that an answer machine hooked into a phone service means that it is no longer a telecommunications service, or that a phone text message in not communications or that email is not communications or that forum posting in not communications or that chat is not communications or that instant messaging is not communications or a live video stream is not communications or that video chat is not communications. Their claim is so laughably stupid that the court should penalise them for making it.

Re:Interesting argument

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, are computers not involved in routing service for POTS service? PSTN isn't run anymore by manual operators and hasn't for some decades now.

Re:Interesting argument

[Anna Merikin]

This argument looks like a copyright infringer claiming copyright doesn't exist because the music, photo, whatever passed through a computer where it was deconstructed into ones and zeros, making it data, which is not able to be copyrighted.

Like the parents-murdered who threw himself on the mercy of the court as an orphan.

IANAL, etc.

Re:Interesting argument

[VernonNemitz]

Modern high-definition TV, whether broadcast or supplied by cable, involves lots of computer processing. The concept of "communications" is about data getting moved, not how it gets moved.

The issue is not title 2

[Karmashock]

The issue is the franchise licenses that give cable companies last mile monopolies on internet service.

Open up last mile delivery of service to more providers... or you're handing ISPs a government backed monopoly contract.

Fiber optic cable is CHEAP. I could run cable from where I live to the trunk line for at most a couple grand... And that would service about 10 gigabit internet connections.

This whole issue is like the stupid debates we always have about entrenched government backed monopolies versus just "anyone"...

Look at what is happening with cellphones versus the land line providers. Land line prices are collapsing and that is because people are ditching them for cellphones which is a "less" monopolistic market.

Look, anyone that knows anything will tell you... give one company the ability to dictate prices and they're going to exploit it.

Period.

And the government really isn't any better here. You give the government the ability to dictate prices or control the service and they're going to do the same thing where they'll either slack off because you're not going to fire them if they're lazy... or they'll just bill you more through your taxes... and you can't even fire the fucks.

So look... if you want service that isn't shitty... you need some competition. You need people to be able to vote with their feet and their wallets. They have to be able to say "this service is shitty so I shall give it ZERO dollars and this service is superior so I shall give it whatever seems reasonable to me."

And that controls prices.

In any market or industry or situation where that is not happening market forces cannot control prices. Consumers have to have choices. And the choice between DSL and Cable is bullshit.

We shouldn't even be maintaining the copper lines anymore. Its fucking dumb. Fiber or choke on yak semen.

Re:The issue is not title 2

[Karmashock]

The cell towers buy internet bandwidth from wired networks and thus the cost of a cell tower is the cost of their share of land line bandwidth PLUS the cost of the tower.

Keep in mind further that the links that connect cities together either are not or REALLY should not be anything but fiber. If you're replacing cobber lines with more cobber lines... then you're dumb. Fiber is just cheaper. It should be what is run everywhere.

And while people will say "but we can't afford it"... I think they'd find the money damn quickly if competitors could run fiber along the same towers or in the same conduits to compete against them for customers.

They lethargy we see from the ISPs comes from the fact that people are legally forbidden on pain of getting their brains blown out from competing with them.

You cannot run competing cable. And that is why they fuck us.

As to cell phones being more expensive... this is a false comparison because you're not comparing the cost of JUST the cellphone telephone service. You're including the cost of text messaging and mostly the cellphone data services which are the bulk of those fees.

You can easily buy unlimited cellphone and texting plans for 25 USD. That's UNLIMITED. And if you want a metered plan then you can pay as little as 6 dollars a month if you're not using the system very much.

I'm personally paying about 18 dollars a month for my cell phone and I have a smartphone. I have a moto X second generation.

Now here people will say "but don't you miss anywhere wireless data"... about as much as you miss that on your laptop. Which is to say you care if you care but I think most people use wireless data because they basically get forced into it, dont' know how to turn it off, and then just get lazy about doing certain things.

A big one I hear all the time is "what about google maps, you need that right"... I have a lot of storage space on my phone and I use about 2 gigs of it for stored maps which gives me a comprehensive map of my own state and the four adjoining states. No data connection required. I turn on my GPS... that associates the GPS with the stored maps... and I can navigate just fine.

Here someone will say "what about email! Surely you need access to email at all times don't you!?"... no. Anyone that needs to get ahold of me right fucking now will call or text. I also have an email client set up on my home system that forwards alerts based on some message rules to my text message. Aka... I have some systems that will send me an email when something goes wrong with a system. That email is then forwarded to the text messaging gateway. I have a few of those set up for when some people email me. It doesn't send the whole email. It sends the name of the person and the subject line. Enough information for me to know whether I should turn on my data radio in my phone or not. I generally don't. I also find that wifi networks are pretty much ubiquitous at this point and all free. So what the fuck is the point? I spend 80 percent of my time inside one wifi hotspot or another. And in the remaining 20 percent... if you actually need me right MEOW... then fucking call or text you filthy barbarian.

So what.

[drew_92123]

EVERY call made in the US today is processed by "computers", long gone are the days when you had old style analog switches and rotary phones.

Since every call made is already processed in one way or another by a computer this has set a precedent over the past several decades that gives the FCC the legal power they need to enforce these rules.

Long distance since the 80's, anyone?

[BronsCon]

So, AT&T long distance service hasn't been a telecommunications service but, instead, an information service since the 1980's because computers? Go ahead, AT&T, back this argument, retroactively lose common carrier status for your long distance network from the moment you computerized it, and for your POTS network from the moment you merged with the mini-Bells. I wonder how many of the felonies that were committed while utilizing your network are still within their statute of limitations...

Sure!

[Lumpy]

Honestly, force internet to be like a utility. dont let them be for profit and force them to spend at last 50% of all profits on infrastructure build out.

These asshole CEO's don't want to do the right thing, then it needs to be done at gunpoint with regulations and laws. Let the SWAT teams raid a CEO office for once instead of a poor persons house.