Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Straight Vermonter

Only problem I have is when I read the actual text (this thread points to it).

It is horrifically open-ended.

As worded, if something down the road is deemed by the FCC, at its sole internal discretion, to be somehow interfering with the “openness” of the internet, they can shut it off.

This particular wording of “net neutrality” is a law that’s cleverly worded to allow the thing it’s purported to be prohibiting.


31 posted on 05/16/2014 1:52:53 PM PDT by PieterCasparzen (We have to fix things ourselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: PieterCasparzen

I worry that ‘openness’ of the internet will be interpreted as anonymous posting on the internet. This is an invitation to net-id like in China.


32 posted on 05/16/2014 1:55:45 PM PDT by Black Agnes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: PieterCasparzen
This particular wording of “net neutrality” is a law that’s cleverly worded to allow the thing it’s purported to be prohibiting.

Citizen !

You have spoken that which must NOT be spoken !

To the gulag with you !

33 posted on 05/16/2014 2:14:01 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: PieterCasparzen

Congress could solve this by getting of their collective asses and writing a law instead of leaving it to be regulated by bureaucrats.


39 posted on 05/16/2014 6:36:45 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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