FCC moving forward on net neutrality rulemaking process (govt control of Internet)

The Hill ^ | 10/22/2009 | Kim Hart

[markomalley]

The Federal Communications Commission today opened a proceeding to consider net neutrality rules, the culmination of contentious lobbying by the telecom industry and an intense exchange of letters from members of Congress.

With a 3-2 vote along party lines, the five-member panel began the process to move forward with open-Internet regulations announced last month by the agency's chairman, Juilus Genachowski. His proposal would formally codify the FCC's current four principles intended to prevent Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to certain content and services and therefore deciding which applications consumers have access to. He also proposed two additional principles, one to ensure providers do not discriminate between applications and another to require Internet companies to disclose their network management practices to consumers.

[markomalley]

The Internet version of the "fairness doctrine"

[Biggirl]

Something that will not survived a court challenge.

[Buckeye McFrog]

WWWLD?

[dalebert]

there goes the last of our freedom

[Biggirl]

Please translate “WWWLD”,THANKS!

[maine-iac7]

ping

[wastedyears]

I know this will pass.

[newfreep]

Just like ahmanutjob’s Iran

[SlowBoat407]

This post under review by the Net Neutrality Board to ensure appropriateness of content.

[Scythian]

there goes the last of our freedom

Your statement above is in conflict with FCC 2309.1.3 please restate or be fined ...

[CodeToad]

The Internet is a private communication medium. What authority does the federal government have in its content? If they try to apply interstate trade, hell, they could say that about anything and everything.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Democrats are the opposite of freedom.

[east1234]

They are communists. They need to be permanently removed from power.

[Gritty]

Something that will not survived a court challenge.

Wishful thinking.

We said the same thing about the McCain/Feingold Censorship, er, Campaign Finance Law.

[Blogger]

now you’re catching on

[NonValueAdded]

intended to prevent Internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to certain content and services and therefore deciding which applications consumers have access to.

Seems counter-intuitive. Some traffic is time-sensitive (critical?) such as streaming video while other traffic is low priority and small delays degrades the service not one whit (spam comes to mind). By denying ISP's the ability to optimize for time-critical app traffic, the one-size-fits-all treatment would in fact "deny" via poor quality access to any packet delivery sensitive app.

So much for video teleconferencing helping to "green the planet" saving all those business travel carbon credits. Ah! The gubermint is in the business of selling those credits.

[Biggirl]

That is why I have said it will not survive a court challenge.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

If they try to apply interstate trade, hell, they could say that about anything and everything.

They do. And will.

[P-Marlowe]

Something that will not survived a court challenge.

Like campaign finance laws.

[Jeff Head]

OBAMA IS A MARXIST IDEOLOGUE