sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Good but only if it applies to everyone
said by TKJunkMail  :[Martin is just going after Comcast because it has fought his favorite cause as commissioner - huge amounts of lobbying dollars, hookers and vacations. Fixed. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | reply to nasadude
When it comes to Martin and the cable industry, period, its simply hard to take anything he says serious. It so incredibly clear that he's MORE than biased that he makes Fox news truly look fair and balanced in their reporting. |
|
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ | reply to nasadude
Entirely plausible, all things considered. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Martin is just going after Comcast because it has fought his favorite cause as commissioner - a la carte. ... I have a new theory about why Martin seems to carry water for the telcos:
before I begin, please note that Martin's wife worked in the office of the VP for Cheney.
Martin was told to make sure the telcos get whatever they want in the way of regulatory forbearance to make sure they would continue to implement the administration's warrantless wiretapping program.
a little "tin foil hat", but isn't it fun to speculate? |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to funchords
said by funchords :said by TKJunkMail :Martin is just going after Comcast because it has fought his favorite cause as commissioner - a la carte. If the FCC is stupid enough to fine Comcast, they will lose in court as they have before when targeting cable without any legal authority to do so. I'm just a tech guy, but I wondered the same thing as you until one of the lawyer's at Free Press listed more than half-a-dozen precedents that indicate the FCC already has the authority, enabled via that very Policy Statement. Have you looked at those arguments? They're quite strong and together they are unassailable. They've been listed in a recent FCC filing and can be read here: » www.freepress.net/node/41653 I'd be more impressed with their legal arguments if I thought Federal Circuit & Appeals Courts and the USSC actually based their decisions purely on the law. What they apparently do is decide what they think is right(based on their own personal & political views and on current popular political theory) and then DIG UP precedent to back their decision. They don't appear to work as most people believe - that is base the decision on the law alone. I had a sitting Federal judge as a teacher in graduate school and, off the record & after class, admit that is how many cases are decided. They make a decision and THEN research the law to back the way they want to rule on a case.
So, no matter what the LAW is, the D.C. circuit may very well rule as they have in the past where cable is concerned- against the FCC.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Martin is just going after Comcast because it has fought his favorite cause as commissioner - a la carte. If the FCC is stupid enough to fine Comcast, they will lose in court as they have before when targeting cable without any legal authority to do so. I'm just a tech guy, but I wondered the same thing as you until one of the lawyer's at Free Press listed more than half-a-dozen precedents that indicate the FCC already has the authority, enabled via that very Policy Statement.
Have you looked at those arguments? They're quite strong and together they are unassailable. They've been listed in a recent FCC filing and can be read here: »www.freepress.net/node/41653
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
HTTP is the new Bandwidth Hog...
|
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather :Don't single out Comcast. Both Cox and Time Warner traffic shape. If the FCC is going to go after Comcast, they should have to go after everyone else too. And if they're going after traffic shaping, why not port blocking? It could certainly be argued that port 25 blocking for example is anticompetitive against other mail providers in violation of FCC item 4 below. Before going after people...they need to make VERY CLEAR rules as to what they expect instead of this sort of "we know it when we see it" crap the FCC usually adheres to. That's about as vague as you can get. They need to clearly state the rules. And who gets to decide what network management is reasonable. We've seen what Comcast sees as reasonable and evidentially the FCC didn't agree. Martin is just going after Comcast because it has fought his favorite cause as commissioner - a la carte. If the FCC is stupid enough to fine Comcast, they will lose in court as they have before when targeting cable without any legal authority to do so.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
