TOMapleLaughs Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 With a bang of the gavel, the internet in the U.S. now has ground rules and a "referee on the field" to enforce them. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission voted today in Washington to regulate internet service like a public good, the way it has been treated in Canada for years. "The internet must remain open. We will protect the values of an open internet, both in the last mile as well as at the point of interconnection," FCC chairman Tom Wheeler said at the long-awaited hearing on net neutrality the concept that all online traffic must be equally accessible. "The internet is the most powerful and pervasive platform on the planet," Wheeler said. "It's simply too important to be left without rules and without a referee on the field." The ruling delivers a blow to senior Republicans and large U.S. cable providers such as Comcast and Verizon, which poured $44.2 million US into lobbying efforts to allow some internet users to pay for zippier connectivity. Grassroots activists had mobilized online to oppose such preferential treatment for "fast lane" access, with more than four million people filing public grievances to the FCC. Thursday's long-awaited vote, which passed 3-2 in favour of net neutrality, ended the debate. However, the broadband industry has hinted that it may challenge the decision in court. In a statement following the vote, Verizon's senior vice president of public policy Michael Glover slammed the ruling as "badly antiquated," characterizing it as a regulatory overreach that would restrict internet service providers from offering the best access. Reclassifying as public utility Stricter regulations, Glover warned, "will have unintended negative consequences for consumers and various parts of the Internet ecosystem for years to come." The FCC session was cause for celebration for Josh Tabish, a Vancouver-based campaign manager with the nonprofit public internet advocacy group OpenMedia.org. "We did it! It's over," he said, crediting an outpouring of public reaction against preferential treatment for today's FCC outcome. "When rules are proposed that favour a small handful of powerful telecom conglomerates at the expense of everyone else, we can coalesce to fight that," he said. Abolishing net neutrality would have meant some websites hosting their own material could slow to a crawl. If Netflix experienced stuttering video playback, for example, the internet company would have had to shell out for fast-lane access. The FCC vote means it will reclassify the internet as a public utility rather than as an "information service," which is subject to less regulation. 'The internet freaked out' The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission adopted that approach to net neutrality in 2009, and Canada has strong net neutrality rules governed by Internet Traffic Management Practices. The rules prevent throttling, establishment of paid priority fast lanes or slow lanes, and website blocking. When the big U.S. cable providers succeeded last year in having a D.C. appeals court strike down open internet rules, "the internet freaked out collectively," Tabish said. Many users had adopted an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mindset on internet policy, he said. A wrinkle in the previous rules came down to an 81-year-old piece of legislation from the Roosevelt era. "The rules weren't founded on Title II of the Communications Act," Tabish explained, referring to the 1934 regulations covering common carriage rules "going all the way back to the telegraph and telephone networks." By now reclassifying internet broadband as a Title II service effectively making the internet a public utility web access should be "bulletproof" against meddling by internet service providers, Tabish said. Momentum swing FCC commissioners opposing net neutrality reiterated arguments at Thursday's session that stricter regulation would put a chokehold on free enterprise and lead to higher taxation. While momentum appeared at first to be on their side of the debate, the tide turned in recent months. "The carriers really thought they had this issue won," said Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa and the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law. So how did things begin to tip in favour of net neutrality? Geist credits "a strong public voice" online, as well as HBO host John Oliver's comedy segment explaining the issue. "The public spoke very loudly, and it's been well chronicled that many of the smaller internet companies began to speak out aggressively as well," he said. In the FCC hearing, Wheeler himself closed with a "shout-out" to the four million Americans who urged the commission to stand up for net neutrality, and acknowledged a level internet landscape could be an incubator for the next big idea. "One thing we can all agree on up here is we cannot possibly know what's going to come up next on the internet," the chairman said. "We want to encourage innovation by making sure there's ground rules. Those ground rules are now in place." http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/net-neutrality-passes-in-landmark-fcc-decision-1.2971126 This is a good day for pretty much everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 26, 2015 Author Share Posted February 26, 2015 The U.S. Federal Communications Commission just adopted strict net-neutrality rules that will treat the Internet like a public utility. Whats in the new regulations? There are three major principles that Internet-service providerslike Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Verizonhave to follow when sending data from their networks to your computer: No Blocking Internet providers cant prevent you from accessing legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices when youre on the Internet. This is intended to prevent censorship and discrimination of specific sites or services. Some open-Internet advocates worry the phrase legal content will create a loophole that might let Internet providers block stuff they see as questionable on copyright grounds without a fair hearing. No Throttling Internet providers cant deliberately slow down data from applications or sites on the Internet. That means, for instance, that a broadband company has to let all traffic flow equally, regardless of whether its coming from a competitor or a streaming video service like Netflix that uses a lot of data. No Paid Prioritization Internet providers cant charge content providers extra to bring their data to you faster. That means no Internet fast lanes, because regulators fear they will lead to degraded service for anyone not willing to pay more. If content providers or the networks that underly the Internet complain about Internet providers acting as gatekeepers for their users, the FCC says it will have the authority to hear complaints and take appropriate enforcement action if necessary, if it determines the interconnection activities of ISPs are not just and reasonable. Its not clear yet what that will mean in practice. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/02/the-new-net-neutrality-policy-in-three-simple-phrases/386294/?utm_campaign=socnet_tw_MISC_20150226_bo_net-neutrality_victory_3&utm_medium=socnet&utm_content=20150226_bo_net-neutrality_victory_3&awesm=ofa.bo_j3Az&source=socnet_tw_MISC_20150226_bo_net-neutrality_victory_3&utm_source=tw There are some concerns about the language it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Best presidency ever! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLindenIsGod Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Does this have any implications for Canada? Kind of seemed like we were going in the other direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offensive Threat Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Best presidency ever! lol He isnt just about change. Hes also about hope. Change and hope, or chope as we like to call it. Hes chopeing the hell out of everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Thanks Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I'm surprised there isn't more outrage. Had this been done under Dubya's term, people would be flipping off the charts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocivus Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 You mean to tell me that a board of appointed (not elected) officials voted on and passed a 300+ page bill without releasing the bill to the public first? I guess they have to pass it to see what's in it... That sounds eerily familiar. Just another day in this encroaching dictatorship here in the states. I'm sure it was just a coincidence that the quislings in the media have been pushing the "the most dangerous weapon ISIS has is social media" story while this bill was in the spotlight. ISIS uses social media to recruit. Media runs with it and gets people scared. Net Neutrality (government takeover of the internet) is passed. 2 + 2 = 4. Classic case of fear mongering to gain support for a governments objective. One of the oldest tricks in the book. "The medium is the message" ~ Marshall McLuhan. Those who control the medium (internet) control the message. This is legalized censorship in the works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/net-neutrality-passes-in-landmark-fcc-decision-1.2971126 This is a good day for pretty much everyone. Really? So how long before the US starts seeing public service announcements demanding people to use less bandwidth due to shortages as has happened with other public utilities like electricity and water? I'd give it 5 years...10 at the most... Thanks Obama. Yes, thanks for higher cost for lower Quality of Service...statist logic indeed *shakes head* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 people actually have an issue with net neutrality? ahhh, it's the regular old conspiracy/anti-government nutcases. net neutrality means the internet can no longer be throttled (they restrict you speeds unless you pay more for faster access) and it can no longer be censored (ISP "preferred"/sponsored pages don't get speed preference or straight up redirects, and non-preferred pages can not be blocked for not paying an ISP to be included in "their internet" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockout Casualty Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I'm surprised there isn't more outrage. Had this been done under Dubya's term, people would be flipping off the charts. WTF are you talking about? The left has been championing net neutrality for years now. Like avelanch, I'm taken aback that there are people who are against net neutrality. I would hope there's a logical explanation, but I expect the same empty right wing rhetoric, "thanks Obama". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 people actually have an issue with net neutrality? Yes, because it means it's alright to take up bandwidth and pollute on the Internet and externalize that cost on to everyone else who doesn't. net neutrality means the internet can no longer be throttled (they restrict you speeds unless you pay more for faster access) Quality of Service (QoS), ever heard of it? Perhaps someone would prefer to pay more for faster service, either on the content provider end or consumer end? and it can no longer be censored (ISP "preferred"/sponsored pages don't get speed preference or straight up redirects, and non-preferred pages can not be blocked for not paying an ISP to be included in "their internet" Because search engines died when Google did the same on their search results? ahhh, it's the regular old conspiracy/anti-government nutcases. If it wasn't for the FCC and it's regulations, perhaps there would be many more choices of service providers to choose from? And how do you like the NSA being able to compromise your online privacy? The left has been championing net neutrality for years now. You can always rely on that mob to support a tax hike which is what reclassifying internet access as a public utility will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 27, 2015 Author Share Posted February 27, 2015 people actually have an issue with net neutrality? ahhh, it's the regular old conspiracy/anti-government nutcases. These nutcases would be certainly crying bigger foul of the fcc went the other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, because it means it's alright to take up bandwidth and pollute on the Internet and externalize that cost on to everyone else who doesn't. Quality of Service (QoS), ever heard of it? Perhaps someone would prefer to pay more for faster service, either on the content provider end or consumer end? Because search engines died when Google did the same on their search results? If it wasn't for the FCC and it's regulations, perhaps there would be many more choices of service providers to choose from? And how do you like the NSA being able to compromise your online privacy? You can always rely on that mob to support a tax hike which is what reclassifying internet access as a public utility will do. Someone found a shiny new tinfoil hat in their wheaties today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Someone found a shiny new tinfoil hat in their wheaties today. Interesting, because I see some having a daily sense of entitlement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Interesting, because I see some having a daily sense of entitlement... Daily? Brevity is not your strong suit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Amazed that corporate lobbyists didn't get their way How long has it been since the US government actually did something positive for it's people over the interests of corporate lobby groups? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Daily? Well, they're alive for another day so somebody somewhere owes them something for nothing. Amazed that corporate lobbyists didn't get their way How long has it been since the US government actually did something positive for it's people over the interests of corporate lobby groups? You sure Netflix, Amazon, or Google were't lobbying against this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, thanks for higher cost for lower Quality of Service...statist logic indeed *shakes head* You clearly have not heard about the "Thanks Obama" meme. *shakes head* “Thanks, Obama!” is a sarcastic expression used by critics of President Barack Obama to blame personal troubles and inconveniences on public policies supported or enacted by the administration. The phrase is often used to caption animated GIFs in which the subject appears to be struggling with a rather simple task, satirizing those who scapegoat Obama as the cause of problems for which he has little or no influence. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/thanks-obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 You clearly have not heard about the "Thanks Obama" meme. *shakes head* http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/thanks-obama No, absolutely not. *scratches head* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.