| Let them have their way... No, hear me out.. scrap all net neutrality, let the carriers have their way.
And with that, strip all common carrier status. The partst hat protect the telco's from prosecution for what their users/customers do.
Lets see.. support net neutrality, or get sued by every content company on the planet for what their users/customers do.
Give them the option...
Now yes, I am sure they could chose the loss of common carrier status and then use technical means (I know, because security and policy enforcement is what I do for a living) to really restrict what can be accessed, but then you start to push customers away. If all the telco's and ISPs pull the same tricks, prosecute for collusion...
That is more of a rant then any real serious statement, as I am sure the telco's and ISP's would work with the content providers to find a suitable way to screw the users, but atleast we could then sue the crap out of the ISP's... |
|
| said by jvanbrecht:And with that, strip all common carrier status. The partst hat protect the telco's from prosecution for what their users/customers do. Cable companies don't have common carrier status. |
|
| in the portion quoted.. I do not see cable listed in there.. Telco yes.. cable no  |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to jvanbrecht
Easier thing to do, revoke "license to use public property for the public good", they have 24 hours to remove their property off the ROW or they will get a huge littering ticket. People can switch to cell phone or Cable TV VOIP. |
|
| said by patcat88:Easier thing to do, revoke "license to use public property for the public good", they have 24 hours to remove their property off the ROW or they will get a huge littering ticket. People can switch to cell phone or Cable TV VOIP. Courts would stop that so fast your head would spin. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Cable companies don't have common carrier status. that's because they are not classified as telecom services; FCC says cable is "information service" |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:Courts would stop that so fast your head would spin. Many ways to shoot fish in a barrel. PUC proposes and passes new rules according to delegated powers by state law, then fines the ILEC into bankruptcy, then seizes telco infrastructure to ensure service quality through the bankruptcy trial. |
|
| said by patcat88:said by fAcEtIOUs:Courts would stop that so fast your head would spin. Many ways to shoot fish in a barrel. PUC proposes and passes new rules according to delegated powers by state law, then fines the ILEC into bankruptcy, then seizes telco infrastructure to ensure service quality through the bankruptcy trial. Sorry, but the US isn't Cuba or Venezuela where the gov't can confiscate private property without court hearings and compensation.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
|
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by fAcEtIOUs:Sorry, but the US isn't Cuba or Venezuela where the gov't can confiscate private property without court hearings and compensation. But the wires are sitting on PUBLIC property. There is no right to keep ANYTHING on public property. Lets see how long my abandoned, no plate, with 5 tickets on the windshield car will stay parked on public property. |
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by patcat88:said by fAcEtIOUs:Sorry, but the US isn't Cuba or Venezuela where the gov't can confiscate private property without court hearings and compensation. But the wires are sitting on PUBLIC property. There is no right to keep ANYTHING on public property. Depends on the promises made by the public in return for access to public property.
You're both right. But, I think you're more right. Conservatives tend to overlook all the "socialism" involved in the creation of a private enterprise like cable, telcos and internet carriers. To them, after that initial ugliness is over, it's just a "free market." Any recognition of ongoing social interests is "socialism."
Mark |
|
|
|
