FCC Boss Not So Impressed With Comcast News > why?

why?

Considering that most of the population has very limited choices for broadband internet:
- Massive Telephone Company
- Massive Cable Company
- Massive Wireless Company (perhaps owned by Massive Telephone Company)
The argument goes that the FCC should regulate practices because otherwise, there'd be nothing stopping every provider from doing the same- indeed, if said practices made the company money, there'd likely be little reason not to, as most people won't bother switching providers unless the violation is utterly massive.
The FCC's authority over cable companies comes I believe from the Cable Act and use of regulated frequencies over coaxial cable.

reply to Somnambul33t
self regulation would help to a certain extent. the thing is that they would sign agreements saying you want come in this area and i want go in this area. And believe it or not that stays true even now. The only places where you would see two cable companies competing in the same city would be big city's. So either way you cut it, were still going to only have one ISP provider. sorry DSL just isn't an option especially when they sell you out to the NSA or FBI with no warrants

I never understood all this criticism of DSL- I used it for years and never had a single problem with it... And the warrantless NSA thing is completely irrelevant, since that was about phone records- you really think that if the feds started asking for internet records, the big cable companies wouldn't fold just as fast as the telcos? Please...

Not to mention that now that cable is a telco, that they'd waste no time delivering the goods to NSA if asked on that front, too.

The whole NSA fiasco needs to be reflected back onto the source...the NSA. I'm really sure all of the yappers would resist a covert government official knocking on their door.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.