FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

September 22, 2011 -

The Federal Communications Commission has filed its finalized the open Internet (net neutrality) rules it voted on late last year. The rules now go to the Federal Register, who will publish them tomorrow and make them official. The rules go into effect on November 20, but chances are they will be put on hold as two lawsuits by prominent service providers will be relaunched. Both Verizon and MetroPCS had taken their lawsuits to the federal courts earlier this year but both were tossed out because the rules hadn't been finalized.

Now that they have been officially ratified, expect both companies to rush back to federal court. But even if those lawsuits don't go forward (trust me, they will), the rules adopted by the FCC lack any real teeth and gave many concessions to ISP's like giving them the blessing to engage in usage-based pricing, bandwidth caps and more.

The rules remain the same as they were when the FCC passed them back in December of 2010; they include provisions that force ISP's to disclose their network management practices, and provisions from keeping them from blocking lawful content and services. Mobile networks can still throttle connections and block certain apps if they so choose.

Ultimately advocates for net neutrality probably shouldn't be cheering for these rules because they don't go far enough. You can read the finalized guidelines in this PDF.

Source: Ars Technica


Comments

Re: FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

So it's Net Neutrality in name only. Why am I not surprised.

Re: FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

maybe its because genachowski's like all other politician/beurocrat, willing to change his motivations when he he's offered a one followed by enough zeros?

Re: FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

Ultimately advocates for net neutrality probably should be cheering for these rules because they don't go far enough

So we should or should not be cheering?  Sounds like if they don't go far enough, then we should not be cheering.

And the opening sentence doesn't make sense either.  I think there is an extra "the" after "finalized".

The Federal Communications Commission has filed its finalized the open Internet (net neutrality) rules it voted on late last year.

Re: FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

​no it's just missing some quotes. should read

....has finalized it's "The Open Internet" (net neutrality)....

or something like that. (EDIT: I may be wrong, the 'the' may be extra afterall, either way it needs some caps)

Re: FCC Finalizes Net Neutrality Rules, in effect Nov. 20

Scary.......


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

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenHey, the second to last link is the relevant one!10/20/2014 - 12:29pm
Neo_DrKefkahttps://archive.today/F14zZ https://archive.today/SxFas https://archive.today/1upoI https://archive.today/0hu7i https://archive.today/NsPUC https://archive.today/fLTQv https://archive.today/Wpz8S10/20/2014 - 11:21am
Andrew EisenNeo_DrKefka - "Attacking"? Interesting choice of words. Also interesting that you quoted something that wasn't actually said. Leaving out a relevant link, are you?10/20/2014 - 11:04am
quiknkoldugh. I want to know why the hell Mozerella Sticks are 4 dollars at my works cafeteria...are they cooked in Truffle Oil?10/20/2014 - 10:41am
Neo_DrKefkaAnti-Gamergate supporter Robert Caruso attacks female GamerGate supporter by also attacking another cause she support which is the situation happening in Syia “LET SYRIANS SUFFER” https://archive.today/F14zZ https://archive.today/Wpz8S10/20/2014 - 10:18am
Neo_DrKefkaThat is correct in an At-Will state you or the employer can part ways at any time. However Florida also has laws on the books about "Wrongful combinations against workers" http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/448.04510/20/2014 - 10:07am
james_fudgehe'd die if he couldn't talk about Wii U :)10/20/2014 - 9:16am
Michael ChandraBy the way, I am not saying Andrew should stop talking about Wii-U. I find it quite nice. :)10/20/2014 - 8:53am
Michael Chandra'How dare he ignore my wishes and my advice! I am his boss! I could have ordered him but I should be able to say it's advice rather than ordering him directly!'10/20/2014 - 8:52am
Michael ChandraIf GP goes "EZK, do not talk about X publicly for a week, we're preparing a big article on it" and he still tweets about X, they'd have a legitimate reason to be pissed.10/20/2014 - 8:52am
Michael ChandraIf GP tells Andrew "we'd kinda prefer it if you stopped talking about Wii-U for 1 week" and he'd tweet about it anyway, firing him for it would be idiotic.10/20/2014 - 8:51am
Michael ChandraLegal right, sure. But that doesn't make it any less pathetic of an excuse.10/20/2014 - 8:50am
ZippyDSMleeYou mean right to fire states.10/20/2014 - 8:50am
james_fudgesome states have "at will" employee laws10/20/2014 - 7:50am
quiknkoldIt says in the article that being in florida, you can get fired regardless if its a fireable offence10/20/2014 - 7:19am
Michael ChandraIf your employee respectfully disagrees with your advice, that's not a fireable offense. If they ignore your order, THEN you have the right to be pissed.10/20/2014 - 6:49am
Michael ChandraI... Don't get one thing. If you do not want your employee to do X, why do you tell them it's advice or a wish? Give them a damn order.10/20/2014 - 6:48am
james_fudgeA leak that had me worried about being swatted by Lizard Squad.10/20/2014 - 6:03am
james_fudgeIt should be noted that the author leaked the GJP group names online10/20/2014 - 6:03am
MechaTama31I mean, of the groups being bullied here, which of the two would you refer to collectively as "nerds"?10/19/2014 - 11:30pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician