As might be expected, reactions to today’s speech from Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski are appearing, with feedback varying wildly depending on which side of the fence the comments come from.
Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA), co-author of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, praised Genachowski’s announcement, stating:
This is a significant step towards preserving the free and open nature that has enabled the Internet to become a platform for innovation, job-creation and economic growth. I hope the full Commission follows Chairman Genachowski’s lead in this vital effort.
PCMag has reaction from Senator Kay Bailey (R-TX), who, it was noted, added an amendment to an Interior Appropriations bill that seeks to ban the FCC from spending funds to formulate and apply regulatory changes:
I am deeply concerned by the direction the FCC appears to be heading. These new regulatory mandates and restrictions could stifle investment incentives.
Comcast Executive Vice President David Cohen, whose company has battled with the FCC over network management policies in the past, took to his company’s blog to comment on today’s action:
We welcome the dialogue suggested by the Chairman in his comments, and we completely agree that any consideration of new “rules of the road” begin with notice and an open, public rulemaking proceeding – this is both fair and appropriate.
An article on CNET further details the initial reactions and stance of the wireless industry in regards to Genachowski’s comments. In a nutshell, some carriers, along with CTIA, the wireless industry’s trade association, do not want net neutrality laws extended to wireless service providers.
Comments
"could stifle investment incentives."
Or
protect the consumers by offering more varied plans to them.
Until lobbying is a hanging offense I choose anarchy! Stop supporting big media and furthering the criminalization of consumers!! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/
"could stifle investment incentives"
That what you get for trying to f over the consumer.
http://www.magicinkgaming.com/
How dare they look out for the consumer!
---
I once had a dream about God. In it, he was looking down upon the planet and the havoc we recked and he said unto us, "Damn Kids get off my lawn!"
Kay Bailey: Yes, how dare the FCC do exactly what they were originally formed to do instead of just hading out fines for showing boobies on TV.
FCC: Fucking up TV and coming soon, fucking up the Internet for everyone.
When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?
Why don't you learn a little bit about a subject before you speak on it. You want to know how TV got fucked up? NOT ENOUGH REGULATION. Guess what, cable services and Internet service providers consistently get ranked lowest in customer satisfaction in America. Guess what else? In most places both services are monopolies or duopolies.
We've been getting shafter for a while now and I am 110% behind this initiative. I want all you people who toe the party line no matter what the issue or who is getting screwed to get the fuck out of here.
Capitalism only works when there is COMPETITION. In most places in America you can get cable or an inferior DSL service. That is it as far as "broadband" goes, and I put broadband in quotes because except for cable's highest tiers I would hardly call America's internet services broadband.
The internet is even worse in Canada. We barely have competition here. Where I live, there is only one DSL provider (Bell) and one cable provider (Rogers). They both do the same thing. They have a bandwidth cap (for me, I could only download 60GB/month. Big problem when you download uncompressed HD videos). Speeds are pretty slow here too. Even though they claim you could have 700kb/sec, you really only download 150kb/s most of the time.
Canada needs more competitors.
It's not our fault that TV shows of today suck ass. That's why more people are online. And this cap is a pain in the ass.
When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?
I got Cogeco and the 60 GB bandwidth cap sucks, I was think of going with Rogers but i see they are no better. Don't even mention to me about Bell DSL. It's the worst HS internet i ever had. Half the day it wouldn't even work and when it did, no better then 150 Mbits/s.
"No law means no law" - Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black on the First Amendment
I don't think you know what 150 Mbps means...Seeing as how that is screaming fast (18 MB/s). I think you may have meant 150 KB/s.
But yeah, the internet situation in Canada is terrible. You have to pay out the ass to even get a 20 Mbps connection.
Regardless on that if the FCC only fines a cable comapny once for corruption and dosen't continue to find them until they recitfy what got them fined in the first place then you'll have to pardon me if I find the FCC to be the most inept organization out there unless its all about the indencicy.
Then again if they make net neutrality a done deal then I guess thats more important.
You know whats sad people might actually elect her Governor of Texas. She would be worse than Rick Perry. For crying out loud shes not even Republican in her voting record if that says anything about her.
OF course a senator would speak out against it. She's just saying what telecoms paid her to say. Hell, if she goes to get elected they could offer to hamper access to her opponent's website if this debate goes away.
And Comcast's words are pretty ironic, since at one debate they hired ringers to keep it from happening.