FCC Approves ‘Net Neutrality’ Plan to Control Internet Access

We're going Title II

[tangor]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Internet service providers like Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile now must act in the “public interest” when providing a mobile connection to your home or phone, under rules approved Thursday by a divided Federal Communications Commission.

[breitbart.com...]

[tangor]

We still haven't seen the 332 page rules yet.

Not my version of net neutrality, but this is the one the POTUS and the MSM media has been pushing.

[graeme_p]

They have a choice of title two and government regulation, or giving up altogether on net neutrality and allowing the ISPs to make whatever deals they like with content providers to exclude competition. What do you prefer?

The only alternative is to pass new legislation specifically covering net neutrality, which is being blocked by the telecoms industry lobby.

[tangor]

One is government regulation, with all that entails, including new TAXES (just like a phone bill), or letting marketplace capitalism and consumers make their own choices. I tend toward the latter. Regulation of any kind is ... well.. regulation. :)

[graeme_p]

So you are opposed to competition (anti-trust) law? That is also regulation. The choice here is between cartel capitalism and free market capitalism.

The whole point of the regulation is to give consumers the chance to make their own choices, without the regulation ISPs will make choices for consumers. Regulation can be bad, but I do not think all regulation is bad and I think regulation that promotes a competitive market is good.

What is most striking about this to me is the hypocrisy of the telecoms industry and their political representatives, who complain that title two regulation is too heavy (although the FCC has stated it will not enforce much of it) after they used the courts to reverse previous light tough regulation AND have opposed any legislation that would allow light regulation.

[tangor]

I can tell we have no meeting place as regards the perils of Title II and some ethereal concept of "neutrality" and competition...

Title II is regulation to insure the lowest common access to the general population. (Currently classed by FCC as 4mb to 25mb). There is no plus side to that nor any incentive for ANY provider to do better than the REGULATION demands. That's Title II and near 70 years of telcom (Bell) is illustrative of that fact. I grew up having to rent the dang phone...

The secondary unhappiness of Title II puts government in the middle of the marketplace (ostensibly for good reasons that have always failed!) and the fees (new costs) permits (new cost) and taxes (new cost) that ensue... all of which is passed to the consumer, ie. You and Me. :) or would that be :(

Look at your phone bill. In a few months look at your internet bill and see the same dang extras applied. For the Government!

And in Worst Case of Title II there will be that absurd "Fair Time" atrocity applied which will require folks who like blue have to post about folks who like yellow. Or be fined, sued, or shut down. Yeah, that's a reach, but not by much...

Regulation of anything is Not Desired. And Net Neutrality is a Strawman boogey man that never existed, has been co-opted by politicians, that was nothing more than a cat fight between Content Providers for a better deal to deliver their Content... and those with the pipes who wanted a cut of profits... (before that facedown the pipe holders were actually net neutral!).

In searching for Utopia there would be no need for Title II necessary... Title II is contra Utopia...

Fortunately there are election cycles where the public can attempt to change things. Unfortunately there are politicians and a DC mind set to overcome.

It's not over yet, the FCC will surely be sued and, if history remains true, each grab by the FCC for this government grab of the internet will be over-ruled. One can only hope.

[graeme_p]

Net neutrality is not an "ethereal concept", but how the networked always worked. Competition is even less ethereal and it is how free markets work.

The telcos clearly intend to make anti-competitive deals, or they would not have used the courts to end the FCCs light touch regulation in court. They forced the FCC to choose between Title 2 and no regulation at all.

before that facedown the pipe holders were actually net neutral!

Not entirely true. There have already been several isntances of VOIP services being blocked. Comcast and Cox Cable have blocked VPN use at once time. AT & T some years ago, did not allow users to connect its service to a home network, and more recently blocked FaceTime for some users.

All your serious objections are things that might happen and quite a lot of its consists of thing the FCC is not proposing to impose - in fact it is a lot lighter than European regulation that has worked quite well.

[graeme_p]

This is an excellent article on the issue (it is linked to from Matt Mullenweg's blog so I guess a good many people have already read it): [feld.com ]

[Mike_Feury]

Look at your phone bill. In a few months look at your internet bill and see the same dang extras applied. For the Government!

Are you complaining that your tax bill isn't similarly broken down? Such as:
Military: $5,000
Keeping Corporations honest: $2,000
Keeping financial sector honest: $0
Safe food: $1,500

If so, I agree it would also be useful info for citizens.

Let's hope whatever transpires out of this telecoms mess moves USA off the lower reaches of advanced country broadband service rankings.

[lawman]

Nothing wrong with a little transparency Mike Feury