FCC to Overhaul Regulation of Internet Lines

The Wall Street Journal ^ | May 5, 2010 | Amy Schatz

[abb]

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski has decided to reregulate Internet lines to protect net neutrality, siding with consumer groups and Internet companies worried that Internet providers have too much power.

On Wednesday, Mr. Genachowski's staff began briefing the FCC's commissioners on how they will propose to regulate Internet lines under rules that were written for traditional phone networks. Some of those rules won't be applied to Internet networks, FCC officials say, but others will be used to enforce net neutrality, or regulations that require Internet providers to treat traffic equally and not slow or block websites.

Phone and cable companies opposed the FCC reclassifying regulation of Internet lines under Title 2 of the Communications Act, which was written for traditional phone networks and includes provisions such as rate regulations.

snip

[FourPeas]

It means that companies that used their own capital to build network infrastructure will not be allowed to decide for themselves what is the most effective and profitable use for their investment. The government will tell them what they can do.

Can you say precursor to nationalization?

[Moonman62]

I-have-no-idea-what-this-means-bookmark.

My best guess is it will mean new taxes.

[SoldierDad]

I-have-no-idea-what-this-means-bookmark.

FCC = Federal Communications Commission. That's really all you need to know.

And, just for clarification, FCC really means Federal Control Commission!!!!!

[abb]

http://www.freepress.net/press-release/2010/5/5/free-press-cheers-fcc-decision-take-steps-protect-consumers
Free Press Cheers FCC Decision to Take Steps to Protect Consumers

http://www.freepress.net/about_us/board
Boards of Directors

[RandallFlagg]

Soooo, Government’s (Obama’s) attempting to run yet another group of businesses into bankruptcy.

Got it. Thanks.

[meyer]

It also means that the people that own the wires have no say in who uses them, or how to price them. Meaning, there is no incentive to build infrastructure so they won’t.

[abb]

It is much more than that. It is an attempt to re-establish control of the flow of information that the Marxists lost when the internet came along.

Camel, nose, tent.

[apillar]

Looks like the FCC is cruising for another Supreme Court smackdown...

[dfwgator]

Congratulations, they just destroyed the Internet. Why would any company now invest in developing Internet Lines.

[abb]

I’m hoping the technology of the interweb thingy has surpassed the ability of mere laws to control it.

Sort of like it was back in 1521 when Pope Leo X told Martin Luther, “don’t you dare post that handbill on the church door!”

[TSgt]

It also means that the people that own the wires have no say in who uses them, or how to price them. Meaning, there is no incentive to build infrastructure so they won’t.

Whoo Hoo! Porn at OC-192! (9.6 gigabits per second) for the same price as dial-up!

[Tzimisce]

When we said “Free Speech”, we didn’t mean for you. :)

[ColdOne]

It is much more than that. It is an attempt to re-establish control of the flow of information that the Marxists lost when the internet came along. We have a winner this is exactly what it means!

[1010RD]

Rent seeking behavior.

Government is the problem. Liberty, not force.

[abb]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20004246-38.html
Liberal group worries about FCC on Net neutrality

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-05/fcc-to-regulate-internet-services-using-telephone-style-rules.html
FCC to Regulate Internet Services Using Telephone-Style Rules

[Art in Idaho]

Broadband is not just a technology; it is a platform for social, economic, and educational opportunity.

Man, that woke me up! Especially from Waxman. . .

[BikerJoe]

Whoo Hoo! Porn at OC-192! (9.6 gigabits per second) for the same price as dial-up!

In the interest of fairness, the administration wants the rest of us to have the same capabilities as the senior staff at the SEC. Better in fact...it's on demand...no more piling CDs in the closet...

[1010RD]

The war on property continues.

[abb]

You’ll want to see who’s on the board of directors of Free Press. See post 20. Robert McChesney, a pure Marxist if ever there was one. I’ve read his stuff.

He’s still sore about when radio was able to sell advertising back in the 20’s and was able to stay in private hands. He wanted radio networks to be “owned by the public” for the greater good.

Dangerous man!

[BikerJoe]

Government is the problem. Liberty, not force.

Taking the contrarian pov, fedgov does have a point. If you only have one broadband provider in your area, and they decide to filter some websites, like maybe this one, then what?

What happens when BOTH providers that run to your curb do it?

When the broadband folks went from being a pipe to being a "content provider", they went into competition with other content providers on the web and the trouble started....