Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

January 27, 2011 -

While conservatives complain that the FCC and the Obama administration have gone too far with net neutrality (with some, like Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), going so far as to sponsor a bill to strip the FCC of any authority to regulate Internet access), Democrats have veered off into another direction. Democrats like Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) think that the FCC has not gone far enough.

This week the Senators introduced a billed called the "Internet Freedom, Broadband Promotion, and Consumer Protection Act of 2011." The bill would extend net neutrality rules to wireless networks. In light of consumer complaints and Verizon and MetroPCS already filing lawsuits, politicians believe that more is needed to combat practices that negatively impact consumers' rights.

"The recent FCC ruling on net neutrality does not do nearly enough to protect consumers, and this bill is designed to maintain a free and open Internet," Franken said in a statement. Last week, during a speech Franken said that net neutrality is the "free speech issue of our time" and that the new FCC rules "will create essentially two Internets."

The new bill bans ISPs from doing a number of things including charging content or application providers access fees, prioritizing content, and "refusing to interconnect on just and reasonable terms and conditions." The bill also makes it clear that all of these rules apply to all forms of Internet access.

The chances of this bill passing in the senate are debatable, and in the House the chances are somewhere between slim and none.

Source: Ars Technica


Comments

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

Forget NN, treat ISPs as commen carriers and force line shareing, that will fix alot of things.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

http://zippydsm.deviantart.com/

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

The problem is, that they were common carriers at one time, but they managed to get that changed. I don't think a simple re-classification will solve the problem if it can be changed back as easily. I think any network access provider that transmits data to any and every peer/node on the network should be held as a common carrier without exception. I also think that ISPs should not be allowed to merge with content companies as it should be considered consipiracy to create an illegal monopoly.

Man, I wish we could go back to the days when it was illegal for corporations to buy, or merge with, other corporations. They claim to be legal persons, but can buy and sell these "persons" despite ownership of another person being illegal. Which is it? Are they persons or a thing that can be bought and sold? You can't have both. Well, apparently they can...

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

Well, if you want to be technical, SOME were common carriers while others were not.  Dial-up and DSL was covered, but Cable was not, which gave the cable providers a huge advantage (which is one of the reasons you see so many more people on cable modems despite it being an inferior technology) and let them pull ahead.... DSL providers complained but did so during republican dominance so rather then leveling the playing field in terms of everyone having to play fair, they deregulated the DSL providers (but dial-up is still covered).

 

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

That was what I was thinking with 'simple solution'.  If people have hundreds of ISPs to choose from (again), competition will sort things out pretty quickly... but this requires decoupling ISPs from the physical lines again and that doesn't even seem to be on the table anymore.

Re: Dems Push For Stronger Net Neutrality Rules

I have a feeling that no matter what outcome we have with NN, it will be the wrong one.

The best solution (IMHO) is a pretty simple framework.... but regulators LOVE complex solutions with lots of wiggle room to embed carrots and sticks to specific groups... so whatever we end up with will probably be a convoluted mess...

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will an M rating hurt Batman: Arkham Knight's sales?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Craig R.Net Neutrality: let the lawsuits begin! (Which were going to be filed if the FCC moved to even so much as corrected a typo in their previous rulemakings)02/26/2015 - 6:59pm
Matthew WilsonThis is a interesting long form article about xbox live since halo 2. http://www.polygon.com/a/the-second-generation-of-xbox-live/page-102/26/2015 - 6:01pm
ConsterJust take pride in joining the group of net neutrality nations, even if it's only temporarily.02/26/2015 - 1:24pm
Matthew Wilsonfcc passed net neutrality. now lets hope they dont screw up the details. ps I am not holding my breath on that one.02/26/2015 - 1:03pm
ZippyDSMleeIf I could stand blizz I would do what I do in Facebook and use zippy, they can screw off if they do not like it.02/26/2015 - 9:31am
Michael ChandraAh. Now THIS is a good reason to not want to enable RealID: Anyone with your email can try adding you as a friend, leading to complications if they find out you're using it but declining their request.02/26/2015 - 5:15am
Michael Chandra(Also, why the hell would you not announce this?? Now people think they got a bug.)02/26/2015 - 5:11am
Michael ChandraThe only argument against the second that I've read so far is 'I'm afraid I'd accidentally RealID instead of BattleTag someone'. How secure are the RealID databases anyway?02/26/2015 - 5:10am
Michael ChandraIt's a silly argument detracting from the two main issues: Is this safe (so RealID only enabled but not given out through twitter in any way) and is it problematic to force people to 'use' RealID without actually sharing it with others?02/26/2015 - 5:10am
Michael ChandraGot to love how people immediately bring up 'yeah I don't see a problem with using my real name, it's not as if people can find me with it'. Maybe not you, but that doesn't mean others cannot be found.02/26/2015 - 5:08am
Michael ChandraSo apparently it's because they wanted to tie it to Parental Controls and didn't want to make a separate parental control for it due to that taking effort.02/26/2015 - 5:03am
ZippyDSMleeWhy do they have billing account name and user name confused? Never understood that....02/26/2015 - 3:29am
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-25/google-s-computers-learn-to-play-video-games-by-themselves that is fairly impressive.02/25/2015 - 9:21pm
MechaCrashA universal ID among all of your characters across all games is a good idea. Making it use your real name instead of a screen name of your choosing is a horrible idea.02/25/2015 - 5:45pm
Michael ChandraThey also said posting on the forums was optional. To be honest, I really do NOT get why you'd introduce a new feature, brag about it and then secretly put a lock on it.02/25/2015 - 4:52pm
InfophileTwitter integration is a lot more optional than the forums (which was the last place they tried to enforce real names). So I don't see the backlash being as strong this time, especially since they aren't adding the requirement to an existing service02/25/2015 - 12:59pm
Michael ChandraIn the Real ID info, it's an optional thing for friends. Enforcing its usage for tweeting seems rather unnecessary.02/25/2015 - 12:14pm
ZippyDSMleenothing like a a few crashes inbetween moveing 400gb of data....02/25/2015 - 12:09pm
Michael ChandraOkay, so Blizzard's memory officially only goes back four years, as they cannot remember the backlash last time they tried forcing people to use their real names.02/25/2015 - 12:09pm
IvresseOnly context I can provide at the moment is the response from Blizz customer service: https://twitter.com/BlizzardCSEU_EN/status/57060293549676544402/25/2015 - 11:31am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician