Skip to main content

View Diary: DC Circuit guts net neutrality rules (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Judges can only rule on the basis of the law. (25+ / 0-)

    If the law passed by Congress explicitly forbids the FCC from imposing common-carrier rules on "information services," then I'm not sure on what basis the judges would be able to keep those rules in place.

    This is an issue where either the law needs to change (yeah right) or the FCC needs to change their classification of ISPs.

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

    by JamesGG on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 10:12:22 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Much of the traffic is (14+ / 0-)

      face-to-face, or voice communication, and could be labelled as such.

      Separating out voip, skype, and direct chat would be very difficult, so the FCC is quite reasonably suggesting that network traffic should be carried all on the same basis.

      I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
      but I fear we will remain Democrats.

      Who is twigg?

      by twigg on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 10:19:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  then reclassify the service as telecommunications (5+ / 0-)

        btw, it's actually not that hard to separate voip/skype traffic. cheap devices already exist to do that almost instantaneously at the hardware layer.

        •  If they did that then they'd open a new can (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          twigg, IreGyre

          of worms with the crimes of the NSA.

          The employees whom tape, tap or copy all the information could be held for wiretapping crimes.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:34:18 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Internet needs to be common carrier (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Simplify, misterwade

          So many people rely on it for basic communication, such as e-mail and instant messaging.

          Skepticism of all the elite institutions, not trust, is what required for successful leadership in this era. Digby

          by coral on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:49:46 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  What would happen if we went back to face to face (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            athenap, PsychoSavannah

            communication. Perhaps we are too dependent on the net. We should get out in the streets more. Much of the rest of the world relies on cell phones and hit the streets by the thousands when they get mad. We sit and type til we're tired and do nothing.

            •  Rec for the sentiment, but (0+ / 0-)

              we have to be able to access the information. What are the ways to get around this when the throttling/pushing begins?

              How does the Republican Congress sit down with all the butthurt over taxing the wealthy?

              by athenap on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 12:21:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  net throttling (0+ / 0-)

                you can bet that the deep pocketed corporations will start bribing the carriers to slow down or block their smaller competitors.  Big Pharma will want to shut down vitamin information and sales (Google already limits its search results)  The government will try to shut down all dissent.

                Either the FCC straightens this mess out or we are totally screwed.

                •  As Strawbale has Indicated, This is Ripe for Abuse (0+ / 0-)

                  This comment was previously posted elsewhere, but it's fitting that I share it here so here it goes.

                  ----------------------------------------------------------

                  It is right that this move against net neutrality generally has the populace up at arms.  Unfortunately people who (a) haven’t been subjected to wrongful stifling, (b) haven’t learned the dangers of limitations on free speech by studying history, and/or (c) aren’t critical thinkers might not see the potential dangers in this type of move until it is too late.  This should be ended posthaste…and I don’t state that on a whim.  History is full of bad acting influential entities that have abused power that they should have never had in the first place.  Think about these couple of scenarios:

                  1)  A startup launches and its success is highly dependent on its ability to deliver various web content to the masses.  However, a direct competitor owns and/or operates one or more metaphorical “internet pipelines” (or is an associate of an entity that owns and/or operates one or more metaphorical “internet pipelines”).  No problem…just have the delivery of the startup’s web content degraded and/or charge the startup an exorbitant dollar amount.  Ours is a fast-paced society full of people who are accustomed to instant gratification.  That being the case it is a foregone conclusion that a startup that is subjected to inefficient and/or buggy web content delivery will fail if web content plays a significant role in its business model.

                  2)  A group is fighting against influential wrongdoers and the group is effectively and rightfully utilizing the internet during the course of their warranted and rightful battle.  However, one or more of the wrongdoers owns and/or operates one or more metaphorical “internet pipelines” (or is an associate of an entity that owns and/or operates one or more metaphorical “internet pipelines”).  No problem…just have the delivery of the group’s web content degraded and/or charge the group an exorbitant dollar amount.  Again, ours is a fast-paced society full of people who are accustomed to instant gratification.  That being the case it is a foregone conclusion that a movement against wrongdoers that is subjected to inefficient and/or buggy web content delivery will fail if web content plays a significant role in the movement.  

                  Those who have a problem visualizing the scenario outlined immediately above need do nothing more than look at corruption-plagued countries that are built upon cultures where censorship is par for the course.  Of the many things that this net neutrality move might be, one of the things that it definitely is is a gateway to the implementation of an alternative form of censorship.  I’ll repeat that so that it will sink in…a gateway to the IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ALTERNATIVE FORM OF CENSORSHIP.

                  There are probably multiple other scenarios that could be listed above but the given scenarios are sufficient to make my point.  Again, this is not the right move and IT SHOULD END POSTHASTE.  Even if there are conceivably some significant benefits (not that we’re necessarily of the mindset that there are) the very real risks far outweigh any potential rewards.  And just in case anyone is saying “if you’re in one of the two groups listed above then sue”, you are naïve.  The victims—and make no mistake about it, in the scenarios outlined above they are VICTIMS—indicated in the above two scenarios are already fighting against nearly insurmountable odds and they don’t need any other problems piled on.  In other words, in a manner of speaking they are already “down” and don’t need anymore “kicks” such as having their web content interfered with and/or being faced with exorbitant costs.  Although some things are right about America, some things are definitely going in the wrong direction.  People such as Hitler, those who conducted the Tuskegee Experiment, and those whom were responsible for disseminating smallpox infested blankets to Native American Indians (just to name a few) would have a heyday with this move if they were alive and engaging in their bad acts today.  Reason being, it goes without saying that as it stands the internet is the average joe’s most efficient form of a mouthpiece.  And let us not forget that in America (as well as in the rest of the world) some of the greatest achievements have been accomplished by determined average joes who spoke out to the masses as efficiently as was possible.  Rest assured that this move will make influential bad actors everywhere rejoice…they are likely already planning ways to exploit it (assuming that they haven’t already planned a plethora ways).

                  In case anyone somehow thinks that I have no idea what I’m talking about.  I will state that I most certainly do.  I am personally involved in a long-running, massive, warranted, and rightful fight against epic public corruption.  I can tell you that it is an undeniable fact that that warranted and rightful fight has been plagued by civil liberties infringements carried out via wrongful attempts by bad actors to stifle our free speech.  For the record the fight is called GATORGAIT and those who are unaware of it can find out more information at the damning, truthful, and lawful website www.gatorgait.com .  Also for the record, the complete website and all of the website’s extensive content works perfectly and efficiently as of the time of this post (i.e. 01/16/2014).  Additionally, there has been various other truthful and lawful Gatorgait-related content that has been posted online by us justice seekers and which has remained not interfered with…that content also works perfectly and efficiently as of the time of this post.

                  Generally speaking I have lost faith in man’s ability to consistently do what’s right.  Over hundreds of years of bad practices and policies promulgated largely by those who have wrongfully and shortsightedly used their gift of intelligence to increase their power and “line their pockets” at the long term expense of mankind and the world we have, as a whole, lost our way.  Let’s see where this recent net neutrality move takes us.  Just as we opposed the most recent attempt to pass the far too intrusive CISPA we strongly oppose this net neutrality move.  Pay attention…close attention.  As indicated above I’m jaded; therefore, I have no confidence that if there isn’t an abrupt about face that bad acting men and women won’t ensure that action becomes warranted.  It may be soon or it may be later, but rest assured that serious action will become necessary.

                  Best wishes to all,
                  SB

                  “Some people see a problem and do something about it.  Others do nothing but sit on their a$$e$ and complain.  Be a doer.”

            •  Bravo! (0+ / 0-)

              The smartest thing I've heard today. People need to put down their computers, cell phones, TV, and text messaging and start communicating face-to-face again.

              It takes eye contact, body language, facial expressions, heart, and empathy to communicate well. We have reached a dangerous zone where people are isolated from one another and don't even know how to break the cycle. Yet, this is an "emotional health" NECESSITY for humans to interact with humans.

              You can start by getting to know your neighbors. Try the FREE website, nextdoor.com which is all over the country for people to interact with their "nearby" neighbors. When there is enough connection among Americans, the corporations will lose their power and once again The People will restore America to its former glory.

              NOTE:  We also need to protect the internet as a form of information which we certainly aren't getting from the corrupted media who have turned the news into an entertainment show of celebrities, sports, and other small talk.

              What about what's going on all over the world and in America that the corporate-owned media is NOT talking about due to their bribing to our politicians? If we are going to get our country back, it will be by demanding "Public Funding" for ALL our political candidates. Today, even those with previously impeccable integrity are deceptively being sucked in order to get elected and then the paybacks are expected.

              "Equal" Public Funding to every "qualified" candidate would cost a fraction of the billions being spent on elections. The worst part is that this dog-eat-dog balancing act has caused many of the most dishonest candidates to be elected and We the People are paying the price.

    •  Gets more complex in cases of technology (0+ / 0-)

      Courts almost always have to analogize the technical issues to something else with which they are more familar.

      In this case, the internet has been improperly pigeonholed into the "information services" category by a court that seems to be living in the 1980s.

      In an era when television programs are transmitted through the air with a specialized version of the protocols used on the internet and in a format used for for DVDs, you've got to start asking if "quacks like a duck" is good enough any more, or whether you've got to add  "hoots like an owl" and "soars like an eagle".

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:31:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site