Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Verizon Sues Over Neutrality Rules
Claims FCC 'Arbitrary' and 'Capricious'
by Karl Bode 08:34AM Monday Oct 03 2011
Last week consumer group Free Press sued the FCC over their network neutrality rules, the group claiming the rules are too weak and fail to adequately protect consumers on wireless networks. As expected, Verizon then fairly quickly followed up with their own suit, claiming that the FCC was "arbitrary" and "capricious" and acted beyond its statutory authority in imposing the rules. The FCC rules are essentially a mirror of rules crafted by Verizon and Google, so while Verizon likely doesn't really mind the rules as they exist now (since they in reality do very little and Verizon helped make them that way), Verizon's looking for a ruling ensuring the FCC can't seriously enforce them or change them down the road.

view:
topics flat nest 

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Free Press & Verizon suits should be combined

With Free Press & Verizon already suing the FCC over net neutrality rules and more suits probable, all these suits should be combined and heard by 1 judge. That would result in lower cost and less appeals of conflicting opinions going forward.
--
»www.rickperry.org/
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Comcast
·CenturyLink

Right like Verizon cannot change your TOS!

Same old ISP BS. Verizon wants lawmakers to pass laws that prevents the FCC from implementing or changing Neutrality Rules which would benefit consumers.

I am sure that Verizon would oppose lawmakers passing laws that would prevent them from, adding more mouse print to their customers contracts, that would allow Verizon to screw customers over any time they want.

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Freight Train A'Rolling

There is very little that can be done. These corporate giants will always find new ways to generate more money, just like a bank and their endless fees. Close one door, and they will break down walls to get at our money.

These wireless ISPs would probably block the usage of the number 5 on our phones and charge us for the privilege to use it, just because they can. Even more ridiculous, they might impose caps on data usage, and then charge extra to use your phone's inherent ability to act as a hotspot, just because they can.

Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

Ok kids...

Stop fighting back and forth. I swear most of these people are overpaid children running a corporation.

Here comes the tantrum in 3.. 2.. 1..

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus

join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Communications Act of 1934

Basically Verizon is suing their own customers as the government is the people of the United States.
We the people have the right to regulate businesses like verizon. A judge should throw this out without needing to take it to trial.
This verizon reason is a complete lie "acted beyond its statutory authority in imposing the rules."
The Communications Act of 1934 clearly gives the FCC the power to regulate verizon. There is no question or argument to be made.

There is no reason for this to go to trial.

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Re: Communications Act of 1934

It seems like our government is for the conglomerates of the world, and not the people of the United States. Do you have somebody legitimately representing your interests, because there was no real option on my ballot?

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
'Fraid your assumption is faulty. If your assertion were true, there's no reason for VZ to exist; it would be something like "Federal Communications Service" because there'd be no need for a nongovernment entity. Yes, it's clear they're to be regulated, but the dispute is to what extent the government should be sticking its grubby little fingers into a private (well, at the same time, publicly traded) company.

What's stupid about these FCC rules is that they're not applied uniformly (should not be exemptions, e.g. for wireless), and are too vague/ambiguous (what constitutes normal net management practice). Heck, they're very specific on their other regulations, like output power, tolerance of carrier frequency, percent modulation, and such; you'd think if they were doing their jobs they could come up with something technically specific.
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules.

Jeopardy! replies and randomcaps REALLY suck!

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus

join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Re: Communications Act of 1934

said by rchandra:

the dispute is to what extent the government should be sticking its grubby little fingers into a private (well, at the same time, publicly traded) company.

The communications act of 1934 gives the FCC (US citizens) full power to regulate all interstate and international communication.
There is no arguement for how much or how little the government can regulate ISPs. We the people regulate as much as we want. A private company is not a US citizen.

This lawsuit is a waste of money as there is no way for verizon to win unless they can pay off enough elected officials to repeal parts of the communication act.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

Re: Communications Act of 1934

said by Oh_No:

A private company is not a US citizen.

Unfortunately, that is not what the laws of incorporation state. "Incorporation" appears to give a corporate entity many of the rights and privileges of a "natural person"; short of the right to vote.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

Oh_No
Trogglus normalus

join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL

Re: Communications Act of 1934

Sorry, but corporations do not have the same rights as us citizens.
Corporations have gained some rights over the years, but that is from court decisions and passing laws. This is why companies spend so much on lobbying.

As for this case the FCC has full authority to regulate all ISPs as written in law. Verizon is just wasting our tax dollars and time with this frivolous lawsuit.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

Re: Communications Act of 1934

said by Oh_No:

Sorry, but corporations do not have the same rights as us citizens.
Corporations have gained some rights over the years, but that is from court decisions and passing laws. This is why companies spend so much on lobbying.

?????? You appear to be contradicting yourself.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
Verizon wins the luck of the draw and gets the Appeals Court they wanted to hear the lawsuit against the FCC.
»www.politico.com/news/stories/10 ··· 363.html
--
»www.rickperry.org/
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

1 recommendation

It's great to see a large corporation doing the right thing.

By filing suit, Verizon is standing up for consumers (who would be harmed by the Google-authored regulations) and for the rule of law (the FCC isn't authorized by law to regulate the Net). We will all be better off when these harmful regulations are overturned, as they will be.