|
Who's Going to be in with them?Which former ISP lawyer turned lobbyist is going to be sitting at the head of the table? | |
|
Packeteers Premium Member join:2005-06-18 Forest Hills, NY Asus RT-AC3100 (Software) Asuswrt-Merlin
|
congress needs to stengthen fcc powersif isp's can't be reclassified as common carriers, then the fcc will need broader powers to regulate them as such. whether the fcc is bought and paid for by industry lobbyists is not at issue here - even if the fcc wanted to take a hard line against isp's, they would be tied up by them for years in court given their current legal classification. | |
|
| |
Re: congress needs to stengthen fcc powersThe problem is that getting those powers would require action by Congress, and they are even deeper in the Telco/Cableco pockets than the boys at the FCC. | |
|
| n2jtx join:2001-01-13 Glen Head, NY |
to Packeteers
The FCC needs no more power. They already have to power to reclassify ISP's back to Common Carriers subject to enhanced regulation. Anything else is just a punt inviting even more court cases. | |
|
| | |
Re: congress needs to stengthen fcc powerssaid by n2jtx:The FCC needs no more power. They already have to power to reclassify ISP's back to Common Carriers subject to enhanced regulation. "Back to?" They never had common carrier status in the first place, so there's no reclassifying them "back to" it. Secondly, and more importantly: Be careful what you wish for. Right now ISPs have fairly free reign to establish Terms Of Service (TOS') and Acceptable Use Policies (AUPs) with which they can, for example, fairly easily boot spammers, scammers and other network abusers off their networks. They also have fairly free reign to block traffic from persistently abusive network partners. Common Carrier status will change all that. Jim | |
|
| | | |
Re: congress needs to stengthen fcc powersISPs who were given free easements to install their fiber, copper, whatever deserve to be regulated utilities. Forever.
I sure don't give an unregulated company easement on my property for free. AT&T is only there because of their common carrier status running the PSTN.
If they want to be deregulated, to be able to do what they want, charge what they want, deny service when they want (which AT&T did to me) then I want to charge them $6000 a month for the easements they have on my property.
I have two AT&T vaults on my property and I am not that cheap. I have an interest in charging the entire cost to them, which they want to do to me. They charge me what they want, take it or leave it. They gave me a Uverse DSL line that wouldn't even sustain 2.5 MBPS and they wouldn't fix it. Then they kept raising the prices month after month until I threw them out. They were worthless.
And I still have two AT&T vaults. $3000 a month each, if they want to be deregulated or sell any unregulated services through those easements. | |
|
IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman join:2000-09-20 Washington, DC |
Wheeler finally fed up with Netflix quality?Maybe Wheeler has finally had it with his Netflix quality. » gigaom.com/2014/01/28/th ··· revails/"The chairman of the FCC struggles with his Netflix stream too. In a conversation with me at the State of the Net conference in Washington DC, Chairman Tom Wheeler expressed the same frustrations with his Netflix streams that consumers have in forums around the internet. And because hes the chairman of the agency in charge of ensuring that the companies providing broadband remain competitive and consumer-friendly, hes in a position to do something about it. When asked about what the FCCs stance is on the ongoing peering fights between ISPs and application providers like Netflix or Google, the Chairman said that the agency would look into the practice with the eye to ensuring that parties are not hurting the consumer nor engaging in anti-competitive practices." | |
|
SunnyD join:2009-03-20 Madison, AL |
SunnyD
Member
2014-Feb-19 12:03 pm
Oh well. We all lose.The headline will read:
New Net Neutrality rules to be Neutered by New Lawsuit
Only the lawyers and ISP's will get rich. | |
|
| Onemore Premium Member join:2006-05-12 Louisville, KY |
Onemore
Premium Member
2014-Feb-19 12:09 pm
Re: Oh well. We all lose.True....Only the lawyers and ISP's will get rich and only the Poor will fight our wars....without the Draft, the rich kids get to stay at home and become lawyers and ISP owners. | |
|
pawpaw join:2004-05-05 Asheville, NC |
pawpaw
Member
2014-Feb-19 1:13 pm
You might get your wish"Seeking public input..." = Waiting for the lobbyists to write the legislation for us. | |
|
| axus join:2001-06-18 Washington, DC |
axus
Member
2014-Feb-19 4:10 pm
Re: You might get your wishExactly what I was thinking. This is really a complete surrender, giving up consumer protection for years at least, at which point something to lock out new competitors will appear. | |
|
|
Show of Hands?Raise your hand if you were naive enough to believe the FCC would ever regulate the ISP's with common carrier status. Not in my lifetime. Regulations are for us - the plebs - not corporations and the elite class. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re ··· _capture | |
|
| CamaroQuestion everything Premium Member join:2008-04-05 Westfield, MA |
Camaro
Premium Member
2014-Feb-20 11:09 am
Re: Show of Hands?You got it sir. This is what people need to wake the hell up, people set their sights on going after the big corporations all the while happening our government sneaks in these new laws at the traditional midnight votes. And for the against regulation crowd saying the providers will find another way to get that money back, well the government sets the rules, no matter how much lobby money is passed you piss them off enough aka screwing with the Senates and congresses sports games seem to get them off there asses. Good luck getting those dollars back when they start closing loopholes. I know it's a pipe dream but when the guard starts to change in Washington maybe just maybe someone from my generation will break from the norm.
On a separate note my political status makes me very valuable to the party's so I have politicians calling me all the time, but the other day I received a call from a Representative running for my district, he actually called me from his personal cellphone, we talked for over a hour about the basic crap, happy with government bla bla. But he asked me what i feel most passionate about and I started flooding him with our current situation with cable company's and the constant rake prices. I explained to him what a duopoly was and the strongish arguments we tech guys have because we see it every minute of every day. He gave me his email so I have been battering him with articles on net neutrality, carrier fees, Etc. He actually told me this is the first time a voter has brought it to attention, then I told him the next time he calls a potential voter to bring the issue up of there cable bill and see what they say. I know he isn't that big of a politician but even a little fire started might help out. | |
|
Cheese Premium Member join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL |
Cheese
Premium Member
2014-Feb-19 1:45 pm
FCCNo balls, why do they even exist in the first place? Waste of money if you ask me. | |
|
| |
Re: FCCTo make sure boobs don't get shown on TV, apparently. | |
|
| | Cheese Premium Member join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL |
Cheese
Premium Member
2014-Feb-19 4:29 pm
Re: FCC | |
|
| |
Pugs to Cheese
Anon
2014-Feb-19 7:13 pm
to Cheese
They were created for Clear Channel and the other radio stations shut down pirate radio stations. | |
|
| | Cheese Premium Member join:2003-10-26 Naples, FL |
Cheese
Premium Member
2014-Feb-19 8:38 pm
Re: FCCPretty sure Clear Channel wasn't around in 1934...
Formed June 19, 1934; 79 years ago | |
|
|
shmerl
Member
2014-Feb-19 2:15 pm
Common carriersquote: The FCC today announced that the agency will not reclassify ISPs as common carriers as many consumer advocates and policy wonks hoped for.
In the linked documents I don't see any explanation why they don't want to reclassify ISPs as common carriers. Did they actually explain or not? | |
|
| rit56 join:2000-12-01 New York, NY |
rit56
Member
2014-Feb-19 4:04 pm
Re: Common carriersBecause they are siding with industry and God forbid you interfere with profit. We lose again. They are allowing them wiggle room to keep screwing us. | |
|
| | |
Pugs
Anon
2014-Feb-19 7:14 pm
Re: Common carriersThe FCC screwed up when they decided the Internet was information services instead of communication services back with Brand X and the creation of the last mile of the MSO network being shared. That's when everything become information and the FCC is "communications". | |
|
| | |
your name to rit56
Anon
2014-Feb-20 3:16 pm
to rit56
said by rit56:Because they are siding with industry and God forbid you interfere with profit. We lose again. They are allowing them wiggle room to keep screwing us. No. Because the FCC ultimately knows Congress is calling the shots on Common Carrier status for the internet, and that they don't have the backing there to make that call. | |
|
| | | |
shmerl
Member
2014-Feb-24 12:37 pm
Re: Common carriersAnd why can't Congress approve it? Simple corruption or they have something valid they object to? | |
|
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK |
KrK
Premium Member
2014-Feb-19 11:24 pm
Let the lobbyist feeding frenzy beginNow's the chance for at&t, Verizon, Comcast to craft the rules that really will make them billions over coming years and permanently prevent competition and real regulation.
Release the Hounds! | |
|
|
|