Another day, another push by Democrats to control something
In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.
The decision, by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, is likely to trigger a vigorous lobbying battle, arraying big phone and cable companies and their allies on Capitol Hill against Silicon Valley giants and consumer advocates.
Breaking a deadlock within his agency, Mr. Genachowski is expected Thursday to outline his plan for regulating broadband lines. He wants to adopt “net neutrality” rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.
The decision has been eagerly awaited since a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC’s authority over broadband lines, throwing into question Mr. Genachowski’s proposal to set new rules for how Internet traffic is managed. The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers’ Internet traffic.
What do they intend to do?
In a nod to such concerns, the FCC said in a statement that Mr. Genachowski wouldn’t apply the full brunt of existing phone regulations to Internet lines and that he would set “meaningful boundaries to guard against regulatory overreach.”
Uh huh. And that is how it all starts. A few regulations here, a bit of restriction there, and soon Los Federales are controlling everything. And along the way, the companies who pay billions upon billions to develop and maintain the structure decide to scale back and not spend as much money on extending their lines.
UBS analyst John Hodulik said the cable companies and carriers were likely to fight this in court “for years” and could accelerate their plans to wind down investment in their broadband networks.
“You could have regulators involved in every facet of providing Internet over time. How wholesale and prices are set, how networks are interconnected and requirements that they lease out portions of their network,” he said.
That could never happen, could it?
While I don’t favor big gov there is something more to this than just how internet traffic is managed. Comcast, AT&T and other broadband companies have a large control over what you have access too and at which speeds. So as much as I enjoy coming to your site each day to read what’s posted, Comcast currently has the ability to prevent me from getting to your site.
I can see where in the future broadband companies are paided to either prevent or allow access to certain sites. It’s already being done somewhat when you access Google…you can pay to have your site come up in the first 100 links etc. How many people go to the 10th page looking for things?
Also, Comcast offers phone services, do they have to right to limit my phone traffic if it’s not purchased from them but say Vonage? Since I’m paying Comcast for the right to use the broadband connectivity shouldn’t all my traffic be treated the same as others?
This isn’t as simple as people make it out to be and I’d prefer big gov stayed out of it but that would require Internet providers to be self regulating and fair.
Of course we don’t need “regulation by the government” I mean every day proves that corporations always act in the best interests of the public
I mean every day proves that corporations always act in the best interests of the public
Corporations and companies act with the best interests of their owners and shareholders at heart. In the case of shareholders, it is required by law that the companies act that way.
In essence, you have a regulation (which you seem to love on basis that it is a regulation) which is contrary to your own perception of what a company should be.
Dang, it sucks to be you.
It sucks that we have to even have the mischance to have Encountered ‘lil lying Bastard johnnie.