Slashdot Mirror
Senate Republicans Introduce Anti-Net Neutrality Legislation (thehill.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced a bill Monday to nullify the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules. "Few areas of our economy have been as dynamic and innovative as the internet," Lee said in a statement. "But now this engine of growth is threatened by the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 Open Internet Order, which would put federal bureaucrats in charge of engineering the Internet's infrastructure." Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) co-sponsored Lee's bill. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai introduced his own plan last week to curb significant portions of the 2015 net neutrality rules that Lee's bill aims to abolish. Pai's more specific tack is focused on moving the regulatory jurisdiction of broadband providers back to the Federal Trade Commission, instead of the FCC, which currently regulates them.
I have no idea what party the one belongs to that issued this letter here. But it was the first time I saw a senator actually write something sensible about "this computer stuff".
Clean up your own act before you try to mess with the rest of the internet, will ya?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Up is down! Left is Right! Freedom is servitude!
Again, this is another case where these people are being paid to misunderstand the situation because it profits someone else much more if they do. The sad part is that they've been put in a position of power. Hopefully this bill never makes it out of committee, let alone gets scheduled for a vote.
Sounds like Ajit wasn't invited to the latest meeting at Mt. Doom.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) [says] "...now this engine of growth is threatened by the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 Open Internet Order, which would put federal bureaucrats in charge of engineering the Internet's infrastructure."
What a heaping pile of horseshit, afloat in a vat of raw sewage. Did the good senator's staff come up with this on their own... or did they perform a ritual sacrifice to enlist assistance from the Demon? Show me their hands... this statement was written in blood and one of Lee's staffers is missing a finger.
Let's try and fix this, shall we? Now this engine of growth is threatened by would-be monopolists and their crony politicians who would put marketers and profiteers in charge of monetizing the Internet's infrastructure to squeeze the highest prices from users of the Internet in return least possible investment .
Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
It's gotta be a troll. Not even the most clueless lawyer would write "GPL = Gnu Protective License".
No sig today...
Because the US already leads the world in broadband, right? Have to make it better!
Tee hee.
The ISPs are messing with the Internet. Net neutrality is about regulating the ISPs and Carriers to not "shape" traffic. There is no regulations on the Internet, until they enter this legislation.
Tell everyone, keep congress out of the internet.
The bill is unlikely to receive support from Democrats in the Senate.
[...]
A full repeal of the rules would be a worst case scenario for Democrats.
The whole point is that a full repeal would be the worst case scenario for everyone except extortionist ISPs.
I find it disappointing that the actually matter at hand isn't being addressed in anything but vague quotes.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Not so fast. AFAIK, jurisdiction over the Internet has been removed from the FTC, and it would take an act of Congress to put it back... and that sure as shit don't look likely. Any talk of the FTC, for now, is a head-fake excuse for gutting the FCC and letting Comcast and its ilk get drunk and party at your expense.
Face it, ladies. The Internet is the new telephone system - the FCC should regulate it as a common-carrier. Period. That makes it boring to the carriers, gutting a lot of "opportunities" to squeeze extra money out (like selling your browsing histories), but too fucking bad. The Internet ain't no luxury anymore - shit, your grandma needs it just to get her goddamn meds.
Besides, the FTC is not invulnerable to politics. Maybe they don't have a politically ambitious loud-mouth tool as Chairman who wants nothing more than to see himself on TV, but a GOP-controlled everything can muzzle the FTC, and they will, if the price is right.
Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
For centuries the intellectual basis for conservatism has been set, not by Jesus, or Adam Smith, but by Edmund Burke, whose philosophy could be summed up this way: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Burke was the kind of man who could defend the monarchy while despising monarchists: he thought the notion that monarchy was an ideal form of government was fatuous twaddle. But he thought all grand, all-encompassing theories were foolish, so he wasn't any more enthusiastic about pure democracy. Burke preferred a monarchy restrained by a democratically elected parliament not because it was the best system, but because it worked, experience showed that men could be tolerably free and prosperous under such a system.
So the notion that we need to "fix" an innovative segment of the economy to be more like what our theory of what an innovative industry should look like is about as un-conservative as you can get. It is, in fact, radicalism of the sort Burke detested.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I think the difference is that local cable companies began acquiring monopolies across wide areas, and then began trying to leverage those monopolies to extort money from large content providers.
Either the issue of regional consolidation must be addressed, or net neutrality. If I can switch to a different ISP, I'll switch to one that doesn't put a choke on my choice to access Netflix. But, if my only choice is between the latest iteration of Time-Warner or that 28k modem....well, the regional monopoly has me across a barrel, doesn't it?
I do agree, though. If the FTC is keeping the monopolies in check, there is no need for the FCC.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
There is an additional issue. Not only are cable companies operating as state sponsored monopolies but since the deregulation of the late 90's they also tend to own both the means of production and the means of distribution. This gives them an increasingly powerful incentive to use internet services as a weapon against their competitors. That is what's driving the relatively new need for something like NN. I'm not sure if NN is the answer but I would whole heartedly support another Ma Bell'esq forced breakup of cabled companies from their ISP's and possibly from the media creation portions of the companies. You should be paying to lease a line from your cable company (or phone company, or fiber company, or local service district) and getting ISP service from a separate unaffiliated company of your choice.
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
I was young when the breakup happened but I certainly remember it's fall out. I have no idea why you think the government would need to set rates just because it forced the separation of the various corporate divisions. In most civilized areas that's known as a straw man argument.
If internet services and cable access services where separate there's no reason to believe a new monopoly would form. Much like dial up before you would be able to pick any ISP you wanted for your internet needs. Local monopolies for cable providers would likely continue because of the nature of the municipal agreements in place but internet service would have no such restrictions. In fact it would be nearly impossible to impose such a restriction. It would be like your town telling you what VPN provider you must use.
Beyond that not everyone is lucky enough to live somewhere like you. In my area (We would consider 20,000 a largish city) we have exactly one cable company (spectrum formerly TWC) and a phone company that couldn't offer reliable DSL if their lives depended on it. We have no competition, we have no choices. We pay top dollar for bottom of the barrel service. If I cancel my cable service and keep my internet it would actually make my bill higher.
What we do have is a local company trying to roll out fiber to home one town over (An ex dialup turned business provider). Because of the anti competitive nature of the cable industry they are being blocked, bullied, and sued at every turn. How dare they offer people a service they want!
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary