General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumssteve2470
(37,457 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)Thanks Obama...like for real and to the millions who supplied some heat to the kitchen it sounds like the FCC was impacted by it.
Kudos to Wheeler for taking this seriously and going against his industry as well.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)1. Clear, Bright-Line Rules
14. Because the record overwhelmingly supports adopting rules and demonstrates that three
specific practices invariably harm the open InternetBlocking, Throttling, and Paid Prioritizationthis
Order bans each of them, applying the same rules to both fixed and mobile broadband Internet access
service.
No Blocking. Consumers who subscribe to a retail broadband Internet access service
must get what they have paid foraccess to all (lawful) destinations on the Internet. This essential and
well-accepted principle has long been a tenet of Commission policy, stretching back to its landmark
decision in Carterfone, which protected a customers right to connect a telephone to the monopoly
telephone network.
Thus, this Order adopts a straightforward ban:
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such
person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful
devices, subject to reasonable network management.
No Throttling. The 2010 open Internet rule against blocking contained an ancillary
prohibition against the degradation of lawful content, applications, services, and devices, on the ground
that such degradation would be tantamount to blocking. This Order creates a separate rule to guard
against degradation targeted at specific uses of a customers broadband connection:
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is
so engaged, shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content,
application, or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network
management.
The ban on throttling is necessary both to fulfill the reasonable expectations of a
customer who signs up for a broadband service that promises access to all of the lawful Internet, and to
avoid gamesmanship designed to avoid the no-blocking rule by, for example, rendering an application
effectively, but not technically, unusable. It prohibits the degrading of Internet traffic based on source,
destination, or content.17 It also specifically prohibits conduct that singles out content competing with a
broadband providers business model.
No Paid Prioritization. Paid prioritization occurs when a broadband provider accepts
payment (monetary or otherwise) to manage its network in a way that benefits particular content,
applications, services, or devices. To protect against fast lanes, this Order adopts a rule that establishes
that:
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such
person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization.
elias49
(4,259 posts)My bad.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with matters as complicated and pervasive as telecommunications.
Unless you would prefer Reagan-style deregulation.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)The whole reason that "lawyer" exists as a profession is that it is not possible for a system of laws to be simultaneously just and comprehensible to the layperson, and obviously the former is the correct side to err on.
Trekologer
(997 posts)The rest is background on the issues and the FCC's justification, plus 40 (!!!) pages of objections by the two Republican commissioners.
sendero
(28,552 posts).... pretty good. There was certainly a lot of angst on both sides. This looks like net neutrality to me, whatever else that might be in the order notwithstanding.
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)Takket
(21,592 posts)The government was going to control the internet and regulate what content we can see? Anything like that in there?