Does anyone here actually oppose Network Neutrality?

[Myron Proudfoot]

Do any other countries have Net Neutrality rules? How are they working?

 

[Francesca R]

[word salad]

Get back to the thread when you understand this. You don't.

 

[Francesca R]

In any case I believe this is a very good and necessary distinction because if we ever get ISP choices on the lines they will be exempt from the regulation and only the line owner will have to be neutral.

That means the requirement for ISPs to be neutral with respect to content source will self-destruct if there was competition. Which is an acknowledgement that with competing ISPs NN is not required. The implication is also that ISP competition is a superior/dominating arrangement.

Wow, who'd have thunk it!

I suspect this aspect will make even Francesca happier about the new rules.

Could be. Actually in the European union there is a danger that NN gets applied even though there is decent ISP competition already. The European Parliament (not many people's favourite rulemaking body, left, right or centre) has already voted this in, but individual heads of government have to agree it as well and that is where much EU parliament legislation swerves into the ditch. We will see.

(Incidentally in Finland, fast net access is a basic human right)

 

[Nihilianth]

That means the requirement for ISPs to be neutral with respect to content source will self-destruct if there was competition. Which is an acknowledgement that with competing ISPs NN is not required. The implication is also that ISP competition is a superior/dominating arrangement.

Wow, who'd have thunk it!

And again, this is a strawman. This is the US. Not the UK. Totally different political environment exists. This is also the year 2015, not 1995. Now all you have to do, is to tell us how, exactly, we get corporate monsters such as Comcast to give up huge chunks of their property over the course of the rest of this year. Not. Going. To. Happen. PERIOD!

The only way for UK-style unbundling to work, is by first bringing an anti-trust suit against Comcast like what happened in the 90s against ATT. Even if the lawsuit ultimately succeeds, you still need to pass legislation for unbundling. And even if THAT succeed, it could literally take YEARS.

Meanwhile, Comcast is going along its merry way, and introducing more and larger fees against their online competitors for a service that their CUSTOMERS ALREADY PAID FOR!

Again. A gallon of milk is a gallon of milk. Why should it be legal to do with internet service what is illegal in virtually every single other industry, in the vast majority of countries, empires, and states for the past 2000 years or more?

Interesting how I keep asking this question, and it continues to get ignored.

 

[bignickel]

Now the FCC has put the internet in their purview, the "slow internet" forces have graciously conceded.

Nah! Just kidding, they've gotten language put in to the spending bills to defund all attempts at keeping net neutrality; spending bills that, if not passed, shut down the government.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/th...et-neutrality-with-a-budget-bill-sneak-attack
(yeah, this particular article goes back to 6/10...)

 

[paulhutch]

It will be interesting to see if the Senate goes along with this or if it will be removed during reconciliation.

From a practical standpoint it doesn't really matter whether the FCC can enforce the rules right now or if they have to wait until after the Court cases resolve since currently all broadband providers have been voluntarily following the neutrality rule. (and most have been saying for years they'll always follow the rule which is why they so vocally opposed formalizing the rule )

 

[Babbylonian]

(and most have been saying for years they'll always follow the rule which is why they so vocally opposed formalizing the rule )

Obvious lie is obvious. If they truly wanted to be "net neutral" into the future, they'd want formal rules in place so that the playing field would remain level when new competitors...

Nope, can't finish that thought. It's too laughable. "Competition!" HA!

 

[paulhutch]

Divided D.C. Circuit upholds FCC ‘net neutrality’ rule

This morning, a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected challenges to the Federal Communications Commission’s so-called “net neutrality” rules.

Next step is SCOTUS.

 

[fuelair]

Net Neutrality Forever!!!!!

 

[Upchurch]

Divided D.C. Circuit upholds FCC ‘net neutrality’ rule


Next step is SCOTUS.

I saw that. Yay!

 

[Upchurch]

Re-reading the thread a bit, I saw this comment I made on the first page:

For a use case, imagine that one day Facebook takes 3 or 4 times as long to load than it used to. Meanwhile, MySpace is moving along at top speed. MySpace has essentially paid to restrict your access based on its criteria.

Now, consider that the Next New Thing in social media can hardly be used because it can't afford to compete with the deep pockets of those big boys. Innovations are artificially inhibited without network neutrality.

Oddly enough, I currently work at the "Next New Thing in social media" (or one of many Next New Things). I guess it goes to show that it is important to stand up for the little guy, 'cause you never know when you will be the little guy.

 

[Upchurch]

Not surprisingly, Trump not only opposes Network Neutrality, he doesn't understand it as well.

Donald Trump does not support net neutrality. Actually, he thinks it will lead to the censorship of conservative media. “Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media,” he tweeted in 2014.

(source)

 

[quadraginta]

One of T-Mobile's perks is not charging against your 4G LTE data limits for many streaming services. All their data plans include this for several dozen different music services, and the 6GB or above plans have a similar offer for several dozen video streaming services.

I wonder how these will be affected since they don't include every streaming service in the deals.

Note: They are not throttling the speed of any site's service, just letting some of them provide content without it being charged against your overall 4G LTE high speed data cap.

​

 

[Upchurch]

One of T-Mobile's perks is not charging against your 4G LTE data limits for many streaming services. All their data plans include this for several dozen different music services, and the 6GB or above plans have a similar offer for several dozen video streaming services.

I wonder how these will be affected since they don't include every streaming service in the deals.

Note: They are not throttling the speed of any site's service, just letting some of them provide content without it being charged against your overall 4G LTE high speed data cap.

Ugh, I seem to remember there was already some sort of exemption for cellular networks because of ...reasons. I don't remember the details off the top of my head.

 

[AdamSK]

I oppose the FCC setting NN policy. All I feel is needed is disclosure rules - if my ISP throttles my data, they have to report it to me on my bill.

 

[Upchurch]

I oppose the FCC setting NN policy. All I feel is needed is disclosure rules - if my ISP throttles my data, they have to report it to me on my bill.

Without FCC setting policy, why do they have to report it?


eta: And even if they report it, what are you going to do about it?

 

[GodMark2]

I oppose the FCC setting NN policy. All I feel is needed is disclosure rules - if my ISP throttles my data, they have to report it to me on my bill.

And if that's the only ISP in town, how does this information help in any way?

 

[AdamSK]

Without FCC setting policy, why do they have to report it?

Don't know if they do or not. Just saying it's transparency, not government regulation, that I think can best fix the potential abuse.

eta: And even if they report it, what are you going to do about it?

Cost them a whole lot of money until they stop.

 

[dudalb]

Don't know if they do or not. Just saying it's transparency, not government regulation, that I think can best fix the potential abuse.


Cost them a whole lot of money until they stop.

Usual Libertarian solution:get rid of Government and the problem will solve itself.
One of the many reasons I am not a Libertarian.

 

[paulhutch]

One of T-Mobile's perks is not charging against your 4G LTE data limits for many streaming services. All their data plans include this for several dozen different music services, and the 6GB or above plans have a similar offer for several dozen video streaming services.

I wonder how these will be affected since they don't include every streaming service in the deals.

Note: They are not throttling the speed of any site's service, just letting some of them provide content without it being charged against your overall 4G LTE high speed data cap.

The FCC has not yet ruled on the T-Mobile Binge On service. However, they most likely will rule it's OK for two reasons. First, T-Mobile allows any video/music service to take part simply by meeting the technical requirements (the service has to make it possible for T-Mobile to lower the delivered quality). Second, customers can opt out of Binge On and receive the video/audio with no reduction in quality.