Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

3 Lies of Net Neutrality
Charting Course ^ | 12/31/14 | Steve Berman

Posted on 12/31/2014 6:25:01 AM PST by lifeofgrace

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 12/31/2014 6:25:01 AM PST by lifeofgrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace; rdb3; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; JosephW; Only1choice____Freedom; amigatec; ...

2 posted on 12/31/2014 7:01:26 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace
Yet you will have people on this very board that are supporting this takeover.

Common sense should dictate we should not even debate this issue with the FCC or any government agency. Our position should be we will simply not allow government manipulation of the internet no matter what laws they create. The internet represents free speech and is thus hands off for all of government. The position should be there is no debate, we will not comply.

3 posted on 12/31/2014 7:06:23 AM PST by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist
The internet represents free speech and is thus hands off for all of government.

Your comment makes me think that the entire idea of net neutrality is patently unconstitutional.

If government takes over the internet then that is clearly an abridgement of free speech...of the press...as well as the right of the people peaceably to assemble.
Who is to say that 'peaceably assemble' means to physically assemble? What could be more peaceable or non-violent than a discussion of an issue or issues in an online forum? No chance of physical violence there.

Additionally, it would infringe our Constitutionally protected right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If the internet is NOT the premier means of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances, then why does the government maintain such a huge inventory of websites on this same internet?

I'm thinking that this angle could very well be used by a team of shrewd Constitutional lawyers to defeat net neutrality. It could take years but it might actually be possible.

4 posted on 12/31/2014 7:20:42 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Life and death are but temporary states. But Freedom endures forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
If government wants Internet neutrality, they MUST put down in writing that First Amendment rights of free speech must be respected and enforced online. Otherwise, we could end up with government controlled censorship, a direct violation of this Amendment.
5 posted on 12/31/2014 7:25:39 AM PST by RayChuang88 (Ferguson: put your hands down and go to work!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

Net Neutrality = Obamacare for the Web.


6 posted on 12/31/2014 7:46:32 AM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult (Liberals make unrealistic demands on reality and reality doesn't oblige them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist
Yet you will have people on this very board that are supporting this takeover.

You're right. Makes one wonder if these types are really conservatives.

7 posted on 12/31/2014 7:51:02 AM PST by rdb3 (Meh! A hole-in-one is just an eagle. Sink an albatross!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

“””You’re right. Makes one wonder if these types are really conservatives.””””

Our, they do not fully understand what “net neutrality” in the context of this proposed law means.


8 posted on 12/31/2014 7:56:16 AM PST by raybbr (Obamacare needs a death panel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist

Net neutrality is anything but neutral. It’s a hat tip to ISPs and big Internet presences like Verizon and Google. They’ve already won court battles that state they have the right to offer tiered Internet connectivity where people can pay a premium for better throughput to providers like NetFlix. Google is already throttling connectivity to sites like YouTube for people who are not subscribers and/or are not using one of their preferred ISPs such as Verizon. It’s disgusting.

Further, let’s all understanding that the government’s goal is to treat Internet connectivity as a utility like the Bells. They want to regulate their existence to dictate cost and connectivity and get their money-grubbing hands into the business of taxing connectivity to make more money. You see the results every month in your telephony bills whether they’re landline or cellular, and they want to do the same to your ISP. With more and more providers going to cloud-based resources (i.e. Amazon’s AWS, Microsoft’s Azure, etc.), and with the explosion of growth and use of video providers such as Hulu, YouTube, and NetFlix, the government sees a target-rich environment for a tax windfall that would make everyone in DC very, very rich.


9 posted on 12/31/2014 7:56:52 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

“Before your eyes glaze over...”

To the author: if eyes are glazing over it is because you are a boring and bad writer.

I learned little from this and nothing technical was even touched on.


10 posted on 12/31/2014 8:17:10 AM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Bfl


11 posted on 12/31/2014 9:12:14 AM PST by rlmorel (The Media's Principles: Conflict must exist. Doesn't exist? Create it. Exists? Exacerbate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan
To the author: if eyes are glazing over it is because you are a boring and bad writer.

Wow. I bet you sure are fun at parties.

I have a much longer, more technical version of this post, which was edited down to "what a 50 year old woman with kids in college needs to know". But I might infer you wouldn't agree with it even if I got technical. And you're likely a crashing bore to debate with.

But thanks for the feedback, at least I know who my audience isn't.
12 posted on 12/31/2014 9:46:00 AM PST by lifeofgrace (Follow me on Twitter @lifeofgrace224)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace
The second lie is that bandwidth is a finite quantity.

It's not the government that is promulgating this lie.

It's the wireless bandwidth providers, who are pricing bandwidth as if it's an irreplaceable physical resource, like helium or 1966 Shelby Mustangs. A resource that has to be measured and sold using the electronic equivalent of an eye dropper.

When I see a 100GB/month plan for under $50, like many other countries have, I'll believe otherwise.

13 posted on 12/31/2014 9:49:03 AM PST by Eric Pode of Croydon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

Some want more bandwith at no added costs...like the ‘free’ healthcare they get in Cuba.

Time for another Algore USF on our phone bills!


14 posted on 12/31/2014 12:14:42 PM PST by TurboZamboni (Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.-JFK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric Pode of Croydon

I guarantee that the ISPs who want government regulation want it because they can make WAY more money off you in a regulated environment where they can play grease-the-pig than dealing with consumers in an open market. A lie is a lie and we have the power...don’t bring government into this.


15 posted on 12/31/2014 2:11:52 PM PST by lifeofgrace (Follow me on Twitter @lifeofgrace224)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

I’m hard pressed to think of anything that the U.S. government regulates in the commercial market that is substantially improved. I’m sure there must be a rare example or two, but none that I can think of right now.

Sow “Govt” on most anything in the private arena and you will likely reap a bitter harvest.


16 posted on 12/31/2014 3:50:03 PM PST by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

Interesting tack you take.

Did you write the article?


17 posted on 12/31/2014 4:15:54 PM PST by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: lifeofgrace

Excellent explanation, but the lefties here are determined to take all away from the people that really did invent and build the internet.


18 posted on 12/31/2014 4:35:28 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist

>> “Yet you will have people on this very board that are supporting this takeover.” <<

.
Baffling, isn’t it!

.
And they call this leftist gripe hole FREE republic?

.


19 posted on 12/31/2014 4:39:11 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Hillarys Gate Cult
.

>> "Net Neutrality = Obamacare for the Web" <<

.

B I N G O !

20 posted on 12/31/2014 4:43:04 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson