Slashdot Mirror
FCC Loses Court Battle To Let Cities Build their Own Broadband (theverge.com)
Jacob Kastrenakes, writing for The Verge: The Federal Communications Commission's plan to let cities build their own broadband networks hit a major roadblock today, as a federal appellate court ruled that the commission was overstepping its authority. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit said today that the FCC is not able to, essentially, remove state laws that prevent the construction of municipal broadband networks, as it attempted to do in Wilson, North Carolina and Chattanooga, Tennessee last year. Both Wilson and Chattanooga had petitioned the FCC for permission to build out their own broadband networks -- a measure some cities are turning to in order to increase competition among internet providers, who often hold regional monopolies and more or less refuse to compete. State laws, however, prevented them from doing so; that's the case in 19 states in total, all of which could have been affected by future FCC orders had the court ruled in its favor.Ars Technica has more details.
...that Providers enjoy a monopoly, they do so because the elected officials provided it.
The proper solution is through electing officials that will revoke the monopolies, not allow the Federal Government to intrude in State Business because once you allow that, you are likely to see i in other things that you decidedly don't want.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
7th circuit, baby!
Give us that high high speed!
I feel the need, the need to slurp up Gigabit plus speeds!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
when the federal government stands in the way of even local governments being able to do what they want in their own cities.
State government, not federal.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
How funny that in a recent thread someone was trying to claim it was a fantasy that government regulation had no effect on ISP choice, when the federal government stands in the way of even local governments being able to do what they want in their own cities.
State laws, however, prevented them from doing so; ...
Are you being sarcastic? It's the Federal government that is trying to create more competition but STATE governments are stopping it.
When the state chooses the winners, it's not capitalism anymore.
If we don't stand up to big government to protect the interests of innovaters like Comcst and AT&T, who will?
How funny that in a recent thread someone was trying to claim it was a fantasy that government regulation had no effect on ISP choice, when the federal government stands in the way of even local governments being able to do what they want in their own cities.
Keep hittin the glass pipe Ken!
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
The State is already choosing the winner though - to protect the incumbent monopolist (Comcast/AT&T/etc as varies by which region). We're also not talking about a lean efficient private company being defended from a government competitor that runs at a loss thanks to tax money, but rather, a bloated monopoly incumbent providing poor service at usurious rates to the point that the citizens of those cities are so fed up that they're ready to vote for anything that might be better.
And in the case of Chattanooga, they already know it is, because EPB (the power company there) has been providing Gigabit internet for years. It's the people just outside Chattanooga that want to get in on that, but thanks to Tennessee state law (and Georgia on the other side of the city) passed at the explicit behest of Comcast/etc, they can't get it.
This is what they want to sell you as "capitalism" - a natural monopoly, reinforced by the State by preventing competition of any sort.
Municipal broadband is something that needs to happen sooner or later, preferably sooner, and ISPs know this, which is why they're fighting against it so hard right now. For good or for ill, Internet access has become a necessity, not a luxury, in the United States; try finding a job in 2016 without the Internet, or try having school-age, or even college-age kids, without Internet access; in both cases, you're at a severe disadvantage, and are likely to be left behind. The sooner the majority of voting-age U.S. citizens get together and demand of Congress that broadband become a public utility and made available to every American at a reasonable price (or free, ala-'Universal Lifeline' telephone service), the better for everyone. Probably the best way to implement it would be wirelessly.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
State's rights are a good thing. If the electorate of those 19 states don't like it, it's their job to change it.
Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
The republicans must be up in arms over this ruling, not to mention these anti-free enterprise laws passed by democratic state legislatures. Right?
"Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
That's what I've been saying for years.
Yes major corporations have more money to buy politicians, but at the end of the day, they can't physically vote. Only people can. I'm sure when the people start firing representatives every time they come up for election. Either the politicians or the companies will see it as a losing game at some point.
Of course then the companies will just attempt to buy the peoples votes instead.....
21st Century Renaissance Man
The republicans must be up in arms over this ruling, not to mention these anti-free enterprise laws passed by democratic state legislatures. Right?
And those Democrats! Why - we've even got a Democratic president, for gosh's sake. What does he say?
I'll bet if the Democrats and Republicans wanted to, they could pass a law that would have bipartisan support, and then the Democratic president could sign it into office.
Hah hah hah! I'm kidding.
Obama (the Democrat in charge) gave the telecoms immunity in return for campaign donations.
There's no reason to believe that he wouldn't veto the bill in return for more campaign donations... to Hillary, for instance.
If Congress doesn't make a stupid law, the President will arrogantly dictate the stupidity.
If the Congress and the President don't do it, the Supreme Court will make up some bullshit.
If the feds don't do it, the states will - corrupt legislatures, tyrannical governors, and crappy state supreme courts.
If the states don't do it, the counties will.
If the counties don't do it, the cities and towns will.
The whole lot of them are a bunch of vile, corrupt pigs.
Hah, hah, hah. Capitalism is ALL ABOUT privilege, arrogance, bribery, and corruption - gee golly, same situation as Communism ends up, isn't it? Because it's all about HUMAN FAILINGS. As long as humans are in charge, you're shit out of luck.
I think you meant free enterprise. True free enterprise is about as rare as true communism.
No, the proper solution is for all of us to take a break and have a sit-down and talk about what form of government we think we might really like to have and work through all the Hobbes/Hamilton brainwashing we're all being put through. To that end, I have created The Pirate-Ninja-Zombie Party Facebook group and I recommend all interested to join.
So, here we go again.
Just like with the establishment of telephone service lines.
Just like with privately held public transit systems.
Just like with privately owned bridges goin into and out of major cities, where monopolies were created.
Just like with the railroads.
Look at history. This will not be a short fight. But, internet service is a UTILITY.
Well, it looks (based on a scan of the ruling) that if the US Congress gave the FCC that power, then they would. However, the Congress has not done so, and so the FCC doesn't have it.
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.