StaggerLee
Scrapple
   
  
      
 
 
Since: 3.10.02
From: ST Louis
Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 6 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | | Y!: |  |
|
|  #1 Posted on 6.4.10 1656.58 | Instant Rating: 2.59 | http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20001825-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
Okay, this just came down today, so can somebody please explain it to me in laymen terms if this is good or bad? I've not really paid attention to the net neutrality debate.| Promote this thread! |           | lotjx
Knackwurst
Since: 5.9.08
Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
|  #2 Posted on 6.4.10 1702.34 | Instant Rating: 1.44 | | Its bad in the sense that the big companies like Comcast can pretty much run wild. I am not sure if it means they can censor stuff or not. Its a win for big business then it is for regular users. | Leroy
Andouille
Since: 7.2.02
From: Queens, NY
Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 7 hours
| #3 Posted on 6.4.10 1726.56 | Instant Rating: 6.06 | Wired has a pretty good article on the impacts of the decision.
Court Drives FCC Towards Nuclear Option to Regulate Broadband (wired.com)
Who likes the little little duckies in the pond? I do, I do, I do, a chicka-quack quack. | Toolpox
Weisswurst
Since: 13.6.08
From: Kohler, WI
Since last post: 867 days
Last activity: 812 days
| #4 Posted on 6.4.10 1847.39 | Instant Rating: 7.03 | What reason does the FCC give for its claim of sovereignty over the internets? I understand why they can regulate over-the-air TV and radio, because those are on public airwaves, but none of that applies for the net. I don't have a problem with the ruling, regardless of what it would allow providers to do, because I don't want to see gov't agencies claiming jurisdiction just because they want it.
If congress wants to say that it is an interstate commerce issue and legislate from there, I'd say that would be closer to how it should be handled. | Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator
Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.
Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 3 min.
| #5 Posted on 6.4.10 1935.43 | Instant Rating: 4.51 | Originally posted by StaggerLee
Okay, this just came down today, so can somebody please explain it to me in laymen terms if this is good or bad? I've not really paid attention to the net neutrality debate.
Originally posted by lotjx
Its bad in the sense that the big companies like Comcast can pretty much run wild. I am not sure if it means they can censor stuff or not. Its a win for big business then it is for regular users.
From the wired article
A broadband company could, for instance, ink a deal with Microsoft to transfer all attempts to reach Google.com to Bing.com. The only recourse a user would have, under the ruling, would be to switch to a different provider — assuming, of course, they had an alternative to switch to.
My fear is something similar. I have Comcast and as people know, they're trying to buy NBC. With this ruling, they are now within their right to block me from going to SouthParkStudios.com to watch a South Park episode I have missed. Or make the video stream come in really slow. Or, like in the wired article, trying to get to SouthParkStudios.com, ABC.com, Fox.com, or CBS.com will result in redirects to NBC.com unless you pay a "fee" like premium broadband service to resolve the issue.
-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --
-- July 2009 Ordained Reverend -- | lotjx
Knackwurst
Since: 5.9.08
Since last post: 6 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
| #6 Posted on 9.4.10 1850.38 | Instant Rating: 1.44 | | So instead of the government regulating it, the providers will regulate it. Pick your poison. | MoeGates
Andouille
Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 13 hours
| #7 Posted on 12.4.10 1546.11 | Instant Rating: 3.17 | Umm, one is poison and one is a tasty ice cream sundae. The internet has been pretty darn awesome so far under government and not business regulation.
(edited by MoeGates on 12.4.10 1647)
www.allcitynewyork.com |
| | | | | | | |
