Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

January 27, 2011 -

While conservatives complain that the FCC and the Obama administration have gone too far with net neutrality (with some, like Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), going so far as to sponsor a bill to strip the FCC of any authority to regulate Internet access), Democrats have veered off into another direction. Democrats like Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) think that the FCC has not gone far enough.

This week the Senators introduced a billed called the "Internet Freedom, Broadband Promotion, and Consumer Protection Act of 2011." The bill would extend net neutrality rules to wireless networks. In light of consumer complaints and Verizon and MetroPCS already filing lawsuits, politicians believe that more is needed to combat practices that negatively impact consumers' rights.

"The recent FCC ruling on net neutrality does not do nearly enough to protect consumers, and this bill is designed to maintain a free and open Internet," Franken said in a statement. Last week, during a speech Franken said that net neutrality is the "free speech issue of our time" and that the new FCC rules "will create essentially two Internets."

The new bill bans ISPs from doing a number of things including charging content or application providers access fees, prioritizing content, and "refusing to interconnect on just and reasonable terms and conditions." The bill also makes it clear that all of these rules apply to all forms of Internet access.

The chances of this bill passing in the senate are debatable, and in the House the chances are somewhere between slim and none.

Source: Ars Technica


Comments

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

Forget NN, treat ISPs as commen carriers and force line shareing, that will fix alot of things.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

The problem is, that they were common carriers at one time, but they managed to get that changed. I don't think a simple re-classification will solve the problem if it can be changed back as easily. I think any network access provider that transmits data to any and every peer/node on the network should be held as a common carrier without exception. I also think that ISPs should not be allowed to merge with content companies as it should be considered consipiracy to create an illegal monopoly.

Man, I wish we could go back to the days when it was illegal for corporations to buy, or merge with, other corporations. They claim to be legal persons, but can buy and sell these "persons" despite ownership of another person being illegal. Which is it? Are they persons or a thing that can be bought and sold? You can't have both. Well, apparently they can...

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

Well, if you want to be technical, SOME were common carriers while others were not.  Dial-up and DSL was covered, but Cable was not, which gave the cable providers a huge advantage (which is one of the reasons you see so many more people on cable modems despite it being an inferior technology) and let them pull ahead.... DSL providers complained but did so during republican dominance so rather then leveling the playing field in terms of everyone having to play fair, they deregulated the DSL providers (but dial-up is still covered).

 

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

That was what I was thinking with 'simple solution'.  If people have hundreds of ISPs to choose from (again), competition will sort things out pretty quickly... but this requires decoupling ISPs from the physical lines again and that doesn't even seem to be on the table anymore.

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

I have a feeling that no matter what outcome we have with NN, it will be the wrong one.

The best solution (IMHO) is a pretty simple framework.... but regulators LOVE complex solutions with lots of wiggle room to embed carrots and sticks to specific groups... so whatever we end up with will probably be a convoluted mess...

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
prh99Personally, I just clicked the three vertical dots the first YouTube recommended one, haven't seen one since. Too bad I can't get rid of Pewdiepie video recommendations that easily.02/01/2015 - 3:19am
prh99Just don't watch the videos, who cares what she does or doesn't do. If her audience likes it so be, if they think she's doing something she shouldn't they'll stop watching.02/01/2015 - 3:14am
WonderkarpAndrew Yoon Died http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/rip-andrew-yoon-3096901/31/2015 - 10:26pm
Matthew Wilson@ea so much happened this week its not funny. fcc broadband, Nintendo, sega, and sevral other big stories. was not a slow week lol01/31/2015 - 8:50pm
Andrew EisenWasn't on the list but we can certainly talk about it.01/31/2015 - 8:45pm
Matthew WilsonI know its not directly related to games, but are you going to tak about the fcc raising the definition of broadband to 25/3?01/31/2015 - 8:33pm
Wonderkarpwell we had to christen it some way01/31/2015 - 7:13pm
Andrew EisenThank goodness the Shout box now goes back 100 shouts, eh folks?01/31/2015 - 7:10pm
Wonderkarpyouve said youre stuff. I gave you a point on one thing.01/31/2015 - 7:04pm
Andrew EisenNo, they're facts. Not beliefs. Not opinions. Facts. Do I need to list them all for you again? I'm happy to oblige.01/31/2015 - 7:02pm
Andrew EisenAnd I have seen no evidence (and would find it very hard to believe) that her fans and funders, even the most radical, would be the ones perpetuating that nonsense.01/31/2015 - 7:01pm
Wonderkarpabout as right as Glenn Beck is about the gays, man. Its all your beliefs and opinions.01/31/2015 - 7:01pm
Andrew EisenI didn't say you did. And this talking head is still right about everything he's said so far.01/31/2015 - 6:58pm
Andrew EisenAlso, considering the number of non profits that merchandise, I'm going to guess you're wrong on that one too but I don't really know as it's not my area of expertise.01/31/2015 - 6:58pm
WonderkarpYou can keep saying that all you want. Its just a talking head, man. there's all the proof in the pudding. I never said she was trying to take away games, or get rid of male protagonists, or any of the BS thats perpetraited by her more radicalfans/funders01/31/2015 - 6:56pm
Andrew EisenNo, as I've spelled out throughout this discussion, you're wrong.01/31/2015 - 6:53pm
Wonderkarpok. that one I am wrong. I'll give you that one. That was one I didnt research properly. BUT I'm right on the others.01/31/2015 - 6:53pm
Andrew EisenFact: It makes no difference whether she recorded the footage or not. Fact: yes she does have a Section 107 'fair use' disclaimer at the end of every video and in the video description.01/31/2015 - 6:47pm
Wonderkarpsaying otherwise. I've presented a video with cited sources combined with opinion. Youre presenting just your opinion. 01/31/2015 - 6:43pm
Wonderkarpits still important information brought up on the original video. and by not saying anything, the casual observer thinks its her footage. there's no "section 107 Fair use" disclaimer. Its as if she's showing star wars and saying "look what I made" without01/31/2015 - 6:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician