dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
FCC Boss: No Network Neutrality Complaints
May Push for Title II ISP Reclassification if Rules Overturned
by Karl Bode 12:38PM Thursday May 17 2012
Speaking to Congress this week, FCC Boss Julius Genachowski stated that the agency hasn't received a single net neutrality complaint since the FCC's neutrality rules went into effect late last year. Part of that is because the rules don't do very much, failing to cover wireless in any meaningful way, while allowing pretty much any network behavior so long as it can be defended as an action that's necessary to protect network integrity. Another reason because the mere threat of being watched by regulators and the press has kept carriers on their best behavior since Comcast was yelled at for throttling all upstream traffic.

Despite being utterly toothless, the rules are still being assaulted by partisans and Verizon, who prefer their regulators utterly powerless (while fearing the rules could be expanded someday to oh -- actually do something). Genachowski informed the Senate Appropriations subcommittee (which was meeting to approve an FCC budget request) that if the rules are overturned, he may push to codify them into law:
quote:
Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski told a Senate Commerce Committee hearing audience Wednesday that the agency had not received a single complaint in the six months since its Open Internet order went into effect, but also said that if a court overturns it, he would urge Congress to codify it. He would not rule out classifying ISPs as a Title II service if the court overturned, but said he is on the record as saying "that it not the best idea."
Despite being rather empty, data clearly shows that the mere threat of a regulator doing its job has had an impact on heavy-handed throttling and other practices. It seems likely that Genachowski's threat is an empty one, as the agency has long had the opportunity to classify ISPs as Title II service providers, but has avoided the option because of the even more significant legal bloodshed that would be involved. Either direction the FCC heads they face lawsuits as ISPs work tirelelessly to ensure there's nobody other than themselves busily watching the nations over-priced broadband duopoly henhouse.

view:
topics flat nest 

CompNrdCR

@xo.net

Wha...

Not a single net neutrality complaint?

They must not have ever looked at dslreports.com...

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 edit

Re: Wha...

Look at it the other way.
dozens bitch and moan at DSLR, BUT NOT ONE bothered to fill out a simple online complaint form, fill out and mail in a paper form , or call in and have them fill it in for you.

This is not only no VALID complaint (people sometimes OFTEN complain about stuff not covered, in the WRONG place ), this is NONE, NOT ONE complaint even filed.

You LAZY fuckin' whiners!
Gremlinlord

join:2010-07-25
Oxford, ME

Re: Wha...

Formal complaints require a filing fee...

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5

Re: Wha...

can you point out where it says that?
Because I've filed multiple FCC complaints online (primarily wireline phone) and never seen or been charged a cent.
thedragonmas

join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
kudos:1
said by Gremlinlord:

Formal complaints require a filing fee...

»esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/form2···pe=2000F

where exactly is that fee stated? (thats the form you get when telling the system you want to file a net neutrality complaint)

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Yup, always too lazy to file a complaint
But never too busy to attempt to add disinformation to any thread.
The straw men of DLSR

Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
said by CompNrdCR :

Not a single net neutrality complaint?

They must not have ever looked at dslreports.com...

Is that really what you get out of this article?

Or other articles here?

Wow....talk about flying over your head