Obama:Government Should Regulate Internet to Keep It Free

Reason ^ | 10 Nov 2014 | Nick Gillespie

[Rummyfan]

So President Obama has announced that the Internet should be regulated as a public utility. He's asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reclassify internet service providers (ISPs) from "information services" under Title I as telecommunications providers under Title II regulatory guidelines. (See here for background on the distinction.)

This is all being done in the name of "Net Neutrality," keeping the Internet free and open, prohibiting "fast lanes" for certain services and sites, making sure no legal content is blocked, and all other horribles that...have failed to materialize in the absence of increased federal regulation.

Reason contributor and Clemson University economic historian Thomas W. Hazlett defines Net Neutrality as "a set of rules…regulating the business model of your local ISP." The definition gets to the heart of the matter. There are specific interests who are doing well by the current system—Netflix, for instance—and they want to maintain the status quo. That's understandable but the idea that the government will do a good job of regulating the Internet (whether by blanket decrees or on a case-by-case basis) is unconvincing, to say the least. The most likely outcome is that regulators will freeze in place today's business models, thereby slowing innovation and change.

[Rummyfan]

"So President Obama has announced that the Internet should be regulated as a public utility. He’s asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reclassify internet service providers (ISPs) from “information services” under Title I as telecommunications providers under Title II regulatory guidelines. This is all being done in the name of ‘Net Neutrality,’ keeping the Internet free and open, prohibiting ‘fast lanes’ for certain services and sites, making sure no legal content is blocked, and all other horribles that…have failed to materialize in the absence of increased federal regulation."

[trisham]

No!

[DainBramage]

Oh you mean like you did with Aaron Swarz..........

[caligatrux]

President Obama urged the US government to adopt tighter regulations on broadband service in an effort to preserve "a free and open Internet."

"Free and open" is the exact opposite of what he wants, and "free and open" is the example opposite of what will result from "tighter regulations" on the Internet.

That's like saying you want to dump sand into a puddle to make it wetter and more liquid.

[pfflier]

Somewhere in all this mess is the UN’s demand to surrender control of the internet to them in there??

[bicyclerepair]

Have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it.

[SpaceBar]

Government Should Regulate Internet to Keep It Free

just like healthcare

[Jonty30]

They want to turn it into a utility so they can tax usage. That’s a good way to limit blogs that oppose the government.

[rawcatslyentist]

>Obama:Government Should Regulate Internet to Keep It Free

George Orwell should sue for plagiarism!

[Red Badger]

Just like coal.............

[exit82]

So, President Obola, why did this rocket to the top of the charts as a priority at this point in time?

[CivilWarBrewing]

This isn’t about making the Internet accessible to everyone. THIS IS ABOUT CENSORING MATT DRUDGE and other links which EXPOSE THE DARK UNDERBELLY OF EVIL IN DC.

[tioga]

It’s about limiting your free speech.

[CivilWarBrewing]

"So, President Obola, why did this rocket to the top of the charts as a priority at this point in time?"

It's called 'losing an election' and stopping the TRUTH from getting to voters via the Internet.

[so_real]

Declare it illegal for non-end-points to prioritize traffic based upon end-points and content. That'll make the Internet as neutral as it ever needs to be. Of course, that is not nearly what this administration (or many republicans, for that matter) would consider 'net neutrality'. They really just want to be "lobbied" for government sanctioned fast lanes and open content -- they feel the need to get their slice of the pie, ya know.

[BenLurkin]

[alloysteel]

Regulation is a LIMITATION on freedom.

The very virtue of the Internet up to now has been its almost complete absence of regulation, at least here in the territory once known as “the United States of America”.

Many government entities have placed various degrees of limitation of either access or on content in relation to Internet exchanges. True, there is a lot of fraud and borderline illegal traffic, but there is already regulation against such flagrant abuse under existing law. Failure of the existing law, and not more new law which is also liable to failure, is the problem. Amend, clarify and enforce the existing law, and new laws should be altogether unnecessary.

[combat_boots]

stopping the TRUTH from getting to voters via the Internet.

Winner winner chicken dinner!

[musicman]

"Obama:
Government Should Regulate Internet
to Keep It Free"



Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help To Keep FR In The Fight !!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[Manic_Episode]

If you like your ISP you can keep your ISP

The average family will save $2500