Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 06:59 AM Apr 2014

The FCC Is About to Axe-Murder Net Neutrality -- What You Should Know

http://www.alternet.org/fcc-about-axe-murder-net-neutrality-what-you-should-know



In January, a federal appeals court rejected regulations designed to assure some measure of fairness in the way America's internet service providers (ISPs) handle information traveling through their networks. The problem, according to the court, was not so much that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)couldn't insist on what is called "network neutrality" – the idea that customers, rather than ISPs, should decide priorities for information they get online. No, the issue was that the FCC had tried to impose broadband rules under the wrong regulatory framework. And the court all but invited the FCC to fix its own mistake and rewrite its own updated rules.

The FCC's new chairman, the former cable and wireless industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler, said he would comply, rather than appeal. "Preserving the Internet as an open platform for innovation and expression while providing certainty and predictability in the marketplace is an important responsibility of this agency," he said in a February statement.

Now, based on a slew of frightening news reports Wednesday night and a "clarification"from the FCC Thursday, we know how the agency – or at least the former cable and wireless industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler – proposes to respond: it won't exercise its supreme regulatory authority in the manner the court suggested.

No, not at all.

Rather, the FCC will say – loud and proud – that it is fixing the open-web problem while actually letting it get worse, by providing a so-called "fast lane" for carriers to hike fees on sites trying to reach customers like you and me. Which, inevitably, would mean you and me start paying more to use those sites – if we aren't already.
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The FCC Is About to Axe-Murder Net Neutrality -- What You Should Know (Original Post) xchrom Apr 2014 OP
I'm surprised he managed to say marketplace Amak8 Apr 2014 #1
Unless Defeated, New FCC Rules Will Put 'Stake in Internet's Heart' xchrom Apr 2014 #2
Oh, hey, I am sure that by lunchtime we will be lectured that net neutrality does not mean what djean111 Apr 2014 #3
... xchrom Apr 2014 #4
Get your head out of your ass. I don't see why anyone would support a tiered system. randome Apr 2014 #9
+1 Enthusiast Apr 2014 #12
We Must Protect Net Neutrality xchrom Apr 2014 #5
An internet strike successfully brought down SOPA , maybe it would work for this. octoberlib Apr 2014 #6
If we lose the internet we have lost it all.... Demo_Chris Apr 2014 #7
+1 Enthusiast Apr 2014 #13
Let that sink in for awhile... Earth_First Apr 2014 #16
FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler was appointed by Obama November 14th last year. Lasher Apr 2014 #8
Two America's , Two Obama's bahrbearian Apr 2014 #10
+1 Enthusiast Apr 2014 #15
+1 Enthusiast Apr 2014 #14
Now the FCC is soliciting comments. Lasher Apr 2014 #17
It's not quite that clear-cut. jeff47 Apr 2014 #11
We have had net neutrality up until now. Lasher Apr 2014 #18
Because ISPs were not common carriers. jeff47 Apr 2014 #19

Amak8

(142 posts)
1. I'm surprised he managed to say marketplace
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:06 AM
Apr 2014

without laughing out loud. What marketplace? The industry is a few local monopolies.

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
2. Unless Defeated, New FCC Rules Will Put 'Stake in Internet's Heart'
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:19 AM
Apr 2014
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/04/24



Defenders of an open, innovative and fair internet are up in arms Thursday after learning the Federal Communications Commission is about to issue new rule proposals that will kill the online principle known as "net neutrality."

The death of net neutrality—which has governed the equal treatment of content since the internet was created—will create, say critics, a tiered internet that allows major internet service providers like Comcast and Verizon to cut special and lucrative deals with content providers who can afford to pay for special "fast lanes." The result will be an internet that will incentivize slower traffic by ISPs and the creation of privatized, corporate-controlled "toll-roads" that will come to dominate a once fair and free environment.

As reported by various outlets, the new rules have been circulated by FCC chairman Tom Wheeler to the other members of the commission and will be officially announced on Thursday.

"With this proposal, the FCC is aiding and abetting the largest ISPs in their efforts to destroy the open Internet," said Craig Aaron, president of the media advocacy group Free Press. "Giving ISPs the green light to implement pay-for-priority schemes will be a disaster for startups, nonprofits and everyday Internet users who cannot afford these unnecessary tolls. These users will all be pushed onto the Internet dirt road, while deep pocketed Internet companies enjoy the benefits of the newly created fast lanes."

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
3. Oh, hey, I am sure that by lunchtime we will be lectured that net neutrality does not mean what
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:37 AM
Apr 2014

we dummies thought it meant. And that after Obama hand-picked the head of the FCC, his hands were tied. And how dare we criticize anything that happens, anyway! We must love Rand Paul!!!!!!
Problem solved!

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
9. Get your head out of your ass. I don't see why anyone would support a tiered system.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:57 AM
Apr 2014

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.
[/center][/font][hr]

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
5. We Must Protect Net Neutrality
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:21 AM
Apr 2014
http://www.thenation.com/blog/179524/we-must-protect-net-neutrality




The Federal Communications Commission announced this week that it will propose new rules that would allow companies to pay Internet service providers (ISP) for faster lanes to deliver their content to customers. That means that large corporations like Disney or Netflix could pay to have their content delivered more quickly, while small start-ups or anyone without lavish funding would be stuck with slow or low-quality service.

The rule change would be devastating for net neutrality, the principle that ISPs should treat all content on the Internet equally and that users should have equal access to all legal content.

Earlier this year, a federal appeals court struck down rules the FCC implemented in 2010 to protect net neutrality on the grounds that the agency classifies broadband providers as information service providers and not telecommunications service providers, which can be regulated more strictly. As John Nichols points out, it is well within the FCC’s power to reclassify internet access as a telecommunications service and to reassert its authority to protect net neutrality.

TO DO
Don’t stand by while the internet is transformed into a pay-to-play service. Contact FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and tell him that we need a free and open internet. Then, check out the work of Free Press, a national media reform organizations that has been at the forefront of championing net neutrality.

TO READ
FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler was appointed by President Obama late last year. As John Nichols points out, Wheeler should take to heart the words of candidate Obama when he “‘got’ that net neutrality represented an Internet-age equivalent of the First Amendment.”


octoberlib

(14,971 posts)
6. An internet strike successfully brought down SOPA , maybe it would work for this.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:30 AM
Apr 2014

There’s a recent precedent for Internet-based mobilization actually bringing down a corporate giveaway that initially looked inevitable. In 2011, Congress appeared close to sneaking through the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) just before the Christmas holidays. The bill would have empowered the government to compel ISPs to shut down websites based on subjective audio or video copyright claims. It was a giant wet kiss to the movie and music industries, a bill that would have effectively eliminated user-generated content on the Web (could Facebook be expected to police their entire site minute-by-minute for copyright infringement?) and allowed media conglomerates to take over. You won’t be surprised that the staffers in House Judiciary Committee chair Lamar Smith’s office who wrote the bill left right afterward to become entertainment industry lobbyists.

But the Internet, in a coordinated pushback, beat SOPA, amid virtual silence from broadcast media, whose parent companies supported the bill. Web users of all political stripes bombarded Congress. At one point, Tumblr announced they were generating 3.6 calls per second. On January 18, 2012, hundreds of websites, including Wikipedia, participated in the largest Internet strike in history, redacting their content and posting links to help people register constituent complaints. Lawmakers walked away from the bill in droves; in the end, it never even got a vote

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117513/fcc-net-neutrality-rule-why-new-fight-isnt-another-sopa

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
7. If we lose the internet we have lost it all....
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:40 AM
Apr 2014

Like Clinton and NAFTA, Obama will go down in history as the Democrat who brought us corporate MANDATES and who destroyed the net.

Lasher

(27,597 posts)
8. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler was appointed by Obama November 14th last year.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 08:46 AM
Apr 2014

He's a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable & wireless industry who said he was not opposed to prioritization of traffic by service providers. Candidate Obama promised to support net neutrality. The real Obama did no such thing.

Lasher

(27,597 posts)
17. Now the FCC is soliciting comments.
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 11:19 AM
Apr 2014

With this fox guarding the henhouse, I doubt my views would be taken seriously.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
11. It's not quite that clear-cut.
Fri Apr 25, 2014, 10:59 AM
Apr 2014

Yes, common carrier is an option, and that gets us net neutrality. But it does a lot more than net neutrality.

When talking about ISPs, the big loss for us is making it much more difficult for ISPs to create tiers of service. Doesn't sound like much, right? Who cares if they have to offer everyone the same 10Mbps?

It matters because then the ISPs won't do network upgrades. IPSs rolled out upgrades in order to support the higher-speed tiers. Those rollouts make the next set of upgrades cheaper - the hardware becomes "common", and they figure out the best/cheapest way to do the upgrades.

It's kinda like Tesla's model: The insanely-expensive roadster let them figure out how to make the cars cheaper, resulting in the neruotically-expensive sedan. Which will let them figure out how to make a model that is merely "pricey", and so on.

Time Warner cable used to offer 10Mbps as their service. That was all you could get. Then they started tiered service - if you want to spend a shitload of money, you could get 100Mbps, or a host of speeds in between. That required TWC to upgrade their network, but the tiered pricing paid for it. That hardware upgrade also let them change their 10Mbps "normal" service to 15Mbps. Same cost, or at least cost on the same growth that the 10Mbps service was following.

So is net neutrality worth losing tiers, and thus upgrades?

If "normal" goes from 10Mbps to 15Mbps, but Netflix is throttled to 80% then no.
If "normal" goes from 10Mbps to 1000Mbps, but Netflix is throttled to 80% then yes - even the throttled data would be much faster.

What speed would we realistically get? Hell if I know. We'd need some coverage that wasn't "OMG!!! FCC SUX!!!!!" or "OMG!!! ISPs RULE!!!!" to find out what the most realistic result would be. From there we can figure out which route is better for us in the short run.

And in the longer run, we can work on getting a Congress that would pass new law so that the FCC can get us both net neutrality and tiers. And locally, fight for municipal Internet service.....and every other utility since none of those should be private.

Lasher

(27,597 posts)
18. We have had net neutrality up until now.
Sat Apr 26, 2014, 03:28 PM
Apr 2014

And yet there have been network upgrades. Why is it that service providers would stop upgrading in the future if net neutrality is preserved?

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
19. Because ISPs were not common carriers.
Sun Apr 27, 2014, 11:58 PM
Apr 2014

If you go re-read the post, you'll find I'm talking about another effect of becoming common carriers. One effect is net neutrality. There are other effects.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The FCC Is About to Axe-M...