The FCC has approved Net Neutrality rules and declared Broadband a Utility

by
in internet on (#3Z6G)
As has been reported everywhere, the FCC has approved Net Neutrality rules and declared broadband a Utility.

The text of the document is probably worth scanning, at least.
Reply 6 comments

Good/bad? (Score: 1)

by kwerle@pipedot.org on 2015-02-27 22:37 (#3ZAD)

Anyone think this is a bad thing? I'd love to hear reasoned arguments.

Re: Good/bad? (Score: 1, Insightful)

by Anonymous Coward on 2015-02-28 07:53 (#3ZV0)

Good. An ISP should be a black box. Pay money, get an internet service. The shit will hit the fan in September 2015 when Australian ISPs start giving private information to media cartels.

Re: Good/bad? (Score: 1)

by nightsky30@pipedot.org on 2015-03-01 16:53 (#42BW)

Nope, not bad as far as I know. If cable companies are pissed off, good. That means we scored a point for the consumer, and took a step to protect ourselves from being unfairly charged for crap service.

Re: Good/bad? (Score: 2, Interesting)

by kerrany@pipedot.org on 2015-03-02 16:14 (#44EZ)

I don't personally think it's bad, but I can give you their side. All the "bad" I've heard has boiled down to the following points:
  • This amounts to allowing the FCC (not Congress) to declare a tax. (As phone providers are required to tax/fee their customers to death in order to pay for "last mile" coverage, so people fear broadband providers will be forced to do the same.) The people issuing this objection are staunch anti-tax conservatives and libertarians.
    • Such a tax on Americans with broadband could be anywhere between $48 and $150+ - per year. (Gasp!)
    • Americans won't want to pay the extra $4-$12.50 per month and the broadband companies will lose all their customers. (Hysteria!)
    • Because all the customers will leave, the broadband companies will stop being "able to innovate".
  • Even if that doesn't take out the broadband companies, all the expense of abiding by the new "restrictions" - no data caps, no traffic shaping (not true), Netflix using up all the bandwidth - will bring them down in a tangle of red tape and overloaded, smoking fiber.
  • The broadband companies will have "no incentive" to keep laying fiber.
  • One of the FCC guys on the board alleges that Obama pressured Wheeler into doing this rather than letting him use his good judgement.
So there's the list. The other side has better points, in my opinion. Net Neutrality is going to do more good than it does bad in my opinion. Fingers crossed for the future.

Just a first step (Score: 2, Informative)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-02-27 22:42 (#3ZAE)

We discussed the issue a few months ago:

http://pipedot.org/story/2014-10-20/regulating-the-internet-like-a-utility-wont-yield-an-open-internet

Re: Just a first step (Score: 1)

by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-03-07 21:08 (#4FTB)

Also recall that the FCC passed net neutrality rules in 2010, only to have them overturned by a Verizon legal challenge.

Republicans are also trying to overturn the new rules, though they don't have large enough of a majority to override a presidential veto:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/despite-fcc-vote-republicans-in-congress-not-conceding-on-net-neutrality/

And I think it's important to remember the widespread outcry over Wheeler's appointment as FCC chairman. With his history as a lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, previous President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), a huge number of outspoken voices were SURE he was a cynical choice, which would do the bidding of the industry.