Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
In a ruling that has significant implications for the future of the internet, an appeals court has ruled that the FCC cannot impose so-called “net neutrality rules.”
An appeals court in Washington on Tuesday ruled that the FCC’s “net neutrality” rules, which forbid prevent companies like Verizon from favoring some type of internet traffic over others, are invalid. The 81-page ruling, which was 2-1 with one judge dissenting in part, has big implications for content providers, consumers and the future of the internet.U.S. Court Rules FCC Cannot Impose Net Neutrality Rules [gigaom.com]
Does anyone here want the government telling you how to serve the users on your server, or telling you how to use your server's bandwidth?
By the same token, how would you like to have the website that Acme ISP restricts it's 1,000,000 customers from seeing? Customers who are paying for the bandwidth to be used to view your site.
The court’s opinion states:
Given that the Commission has chosen to classify broadband providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as common carriers, the (1996) Communications Act expressly prohibits the Commission from nonetheless regulating them as such.
And this is how you know the lawyers had a sense of humor: They used a cat video to explain the whole idea, simply.
To pull the whole picture together with a slightly oversimplified example: when an edge provider such as YouTube transmits some sort of content—say, a video of a cat—to an end user, that content is broken down into packets of information, which are carried by the edge provider’s local access provider to the backbone network, which transmits these packets to the end user’s local access provider, which, in turn, transmits the information to the end user, who then views and hopefully enjoys the cat.
US internet access speeds are slower than much of the rest of the world, while at the same time being more expensive. In many cases dramatically, a quick search can confirm this.
I'm not sure how 50Mbps can be seen as a "slow" connection and if I'm willing to pay more
The most interesting to me has been the obfuscation of the facts from both sides.
No way that ISP's should have to carry Youtube and example.com website text traffic the same way.
joined:Mar 15, 2013