Slashdot Mirror
FTC Allows ISPs To Block Apps But They Must Disclose It (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The FTC can punish U.S. companies for unfair or deceptive practices. But in regard to net neutrality, this simply means that ISPs must disclose any behavior that would have violated the old net neutrality rules. "Under Section 5 of the FTC Act, we may prosecute unfair or deceptive acts or practices... Simply stated, we have a strong interest in ensuring that companies stand by their promises to consumers," FTC Chairman Joseph Simons said. The FTC would review whether ISPs keep their promises just as it reviews whether other companies keep their promises. "We would review ISPs' activities in the same way," Simons said. "For example, we could take action against ISPs if they block applications without adequately disclosing those practices or mislead consumers about what applications they block or how."
How would the FTC handle throttling of websites or online services? Simons explained: "To determine whether particular instances of throttling are deceptive, we would first evaluate what claims an ISP made to consumers about their services and how those claims are supported. We would look closely at any relevant research and evaluate the study's design, scope, and results and consider how a study relates to a particular claim. To evaluate whether a practice was unfair, we would consider whether the alleged throttling had countervailing benefits and whether there were reasonable steps consumers could have taken to avoid it. We would also consider consumer injury, the number of consumers affected, and the need to prevent future misconduct."
How would the FTC handle throttling of websites or online services? Simons explained: "To determine whether particular instances of throttling are deceptive, we would first evaluate what claims an ISP made to consumers about their services and how those claims are supported. We would look closely at any relevant research and evaluate the study's design, scope, and results and consider how a study relates to a particular claim. To evaluate whether a practice was unfair, we would consider whether the alleged throttling had countervailing benefits and whether there were reasonable steps consumers could have taken to avoid it. We would also consider consumer injury, the number of consumers affected, and the need to prevent future misconduct."
It really should be this simple. If you fuck with my internet connection its fraud. Blocking ports, IP addresses, or similar equates to not actually providing internet access because internet access is not a particular network or set of services but rather it is access to the wider WORLD's network of networks that converge via the major exchanges. To restrict or otherwise hamper access in any way to the rest of the net while advertising it as internet access is fraud. If you don't want to provide internet access then you need to advertise yourself as provide access to a network or set of networks thereof and not the internet. But if you do that you also should not be able to obtain contracts for internet access from the likes of government(s), government schools, and similar, or any party whom is purchasing or believes they are purchasing internet access.
The problem with dropping Net Neutrality isn't just deceptive and sneaky behavior , its the lack of consumer choice.
The FTC has based its current trajectory on a pure ideological "Let the market decide" approach. The problem is, many, perhaps most, consumers don't have access to a free market, because internet access is monopolized in various geographic locations due to interference from corporate lobbyists, and payouts to councils and states to entrench monopolies. For some people their choices are Comcast (OR WHATEVER) or the 1980s. To make it worse, attempts at remedying this by state and local governments trying to anticipate consumer concerns by trying to enforce net neutrality via supply contracts or whatever, are being blocked by courts.
THIS is why net neutrality is so important in the United states. Without it, it becomes impossible for a consumer to purchase a product that at least maps onto what might be considered a "Rational choice" had they been given a choice.Banning net neutrality is effectively enforced irrational behavior in the market.