Slashdot Mirror
GOP Congressman Introduces Bill To Reinstate Net Neutrality Rules (theverge.com)
Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO) today announced his support for a bill that would institute the basic outlines of the FCC's 2015 Open Internet order, which banned the throttling and blocking of content as well as harmful paid prioritization practices. He is also the first Republican to sign on to the Democrat-led discharge petition, which aims to force a vote on the House floor to roll back the FCC's December decision to repeal net neutrality. The Verge reports: The 21st Century Internet Act aims to restructure the current framework by which the internet has been governed since the '90s. Coffman's bill moves past this argument by amending the 1934 Telecommunications Act and adding the new Title VIII. This new classification would "permanently codify into law the 'four corners' of net neutrality" by banning providers from controlling traffic quality and speed and forbidding them from participating in paid prioritization programs or charging access fees from edge providers.
On top of providing stable ground for net neutrality rules to be upheld in the future, the legislation also makes it illegal for providers to participate in "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." It directs the FCC to investigate claims of anticompetitive behavior on behalf of consumers after receiving their complaints. Transparency requirements are heightened for providers as well, as companies must publicly disclose information regarding their network practices to allow consumers to "make informed choices regarding use of such services."
On top of providing stable ground for net neutrality rules to be upheld in the future, the legislation also makes it illegal for providers to participate in "unfair or deceptive acts or practices." It directs the FCC to investigate claims of anticompetitive behavior on behalf of consumers after receiving their complaints. Transparency requirements are heightened for providers as well, as companies must publicly disclose information regarding their network practices to allow consumers to "make informed choices regarding use of such services."
The small guys haven't been able to compete in the ISP market since the 90's, back when we were all on dial-up and "the phone lines" didn't have to be provided by the same company as "the Internet service".
Ever since the advent of broadband, this separation has not usefully existed. We now have to get our service from the same companies that run wires to our houses, which tend to be gov't regulated/mandated monopolies.
In 1992, when I first got on the Internet, I accessed it via a dial up modem which got it's feed over a Pacific Bell owned wire. There were, to my knowledge, ZERO alternatives.
Later in the 1990s I began to receive my Internet through a microwave connection offered by Sprint. At that time the cable companies probably had an offering somewhere, someway, but I did not have access.
Eventually I went to a DSL connection which utilized wires then owned by AT&T.
Today, I can get Internet via a satellite dish, cable company wire, DSL over an AT&T owned wire, over cell transmission services offered by AT&T or Verizon, Google fiber, or a WISP.
The options for internet service have only been growing under free markets. More & more & more.
I don't buy your assertion about limited Internet options.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Since the 90s I've seen my options for broadband providers go from dozens to 2. So yeah, far fewer options.
Your own argument is self defeating. The Satellite company (DirecTV) is owned by At&t, as is the DSL and cell services you mention. That's half of your options under one company. Plus, where I live (60 miles from DC) there is no fiber option, and satellite is too inconsistent + doesn't support VPN connections, DSL is too slow to be true Broadband, and cell services have data caps to make it not useful for home use. Guess what, in reality I only have 1 option, Comcast Cable, to get actually Broadband internet.