Net Neutrality

[SHRED]

President Obama and Genachowski have campaigned "convincingly" for "Net Neutrality," yet now appear poised to deal its death blow.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/the-internet-cease-exist-fccs-proposed-rules-sen-franken-argues/



WTF...more "compromise"?

:shrug:

[TBF]

1. The Huffington Post calls it "caving" - I call it Mr. Obama doing business as usual -

Obama FCC Caves on Net Neutrality -- Tuesday Betrayal Assured
Campaign Director, Free Press and SavetheInternet.com
Posted: December 20, 2010 06:53 PM
Timothy Karr

Late Monday, a majority of the FCC's commissioners indicated that they're going to vote with Chairman Julius Genachowski for a toothless Net Neutrality rule.

According to all reports, the rule, which will be voted on during tomorrow's FCC meeting, falls drastically short of earlier pledges by President Obama and the FCC Chairman to protect the free and open Internet.

The rule is so riddled with loopholes that it's become clear that this FCC chairman crafted it with the sole purpose of winning the endorsement of AT&T and cable lobbyists, and not defending the interests of the tens of millions of Internet users.

Welcome to AT&T's Internet

For the first time in history of telecommunications law the FCC has given its stamp of approval to online discrimination.

Instead of a rule to protect Internet users' freedom to choose, the Commission has opened the door for broadband payola - letting phone and cable companies charge steep tolls to favor the content and services of a select group of corporate partners, relegating everyone else to the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road.

Instead of protecting openness on wireless Internet devices like the iPhone and Droid, the Commission has exempted the mobile Internet from Net Neutrality protections. This move enshrines Verizon and AT&T as gatekeepers to the expanding world of mobile Internet access, allowing them to favor their own applications while blocking, degrading or de-prioritizing others.

Instead of re-establishing the FCC's authority to act as a consumer watchdog over the Internet, it places the agency's authority on a shaky and indefensible legal footing -- giving ultimate control over the Internet to a small handful of carriers...

Much more at the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/timothy-karr/obama-fcc-caves-on-net-ne_b_799435.html

[endless october]

2. exempting the mobile web makes the whole effort useless.

[Jester Messiah]

4. Truly.

Restricting previous-gen tech is just theater, as if to throw us a bone.

[Hawkeye-X]

6. Can EFF sue FCC for this bad version of net neturality?

ACLU should be preparing to sue the FCC...

This is one bad idea, and needs to be dumped and Michael Copps resign for letting this horrible idea through and replaced with true-blue progressive FCC chairman.

[onenote]

8. FCC reality

Commissioner Copps isn't the Chairman and he isn't going to resign nor, one would hope, is Chairman Genachowski. Why? Because the repubs will block the naming of a replacement and the FCC will be split 2-2 and unable to anything, which is what the repubs want. As it is, that almost certain is going to be the case starting in January 2012, since Commissioner Copps' term expired in June 2010 and while he can continue to serve after the expiration of his term, the period of post-expiration service ends with the adjourment of the first session of the 112th Congress at the end of 2011.

[onenote]

7. do you understand the concept of an independent regulatory agency?

The President doesn't control the FCC. Unlike Cabinet Officers, FCC Commissioners (and the CHairman) do not serve at the pleasure of the President -- he can't fire them or demand their resignation. FCC Chairmen are as, if not moreso, beholden to Congress, which may be why the proposed Net Neutrality order tracks closely a legislative proposal put forward earlier in the year by Henry Waxman and supported by Democrats in Congress.

Its worth remembering that the FCC's previous effort to regulate net neutrality was pushed by a repub FCC Chairman who was able to adopt an order only because he had the support of the two Democrats on the Commission and thus could overcome the dissents of the two republicans. And even then the decision was tossed out by the DC Circuit.

Its a complex, multilayered issue that involves Congress and an independent agency more than the White House and pinning the outcome on Obama is absurd.

[TBF]

9. More multi-layered chess. Yes, we know, Obama is president and not responsible

for anything. I wonder where you folks were when Bush was president, because at that time he was responsible for his bad actions.

[onenote]

10. I don't recall a lot of folks giving Bush credit for the net neutrality order

that "his" Chairman adopted with Democratic support.

[TBF]

11. That is exactly my point -

we questioned Bush and did not support him when he did inane things, but we give Mr. Obama a pass on the same issues.

[deacon]

3. It's such a critical issue I don't understand the public apathy. Tragic. n/t

[Jester Messiah]

5. It's because people don't understand what's at stake.

A lot of people don't "get" technology. They use it, but they don't understand the underpinnings, how the data gets from point A to point B. It's hard to get worked up about an issue you don't understand (unless it's a teabagger, and then they only -think- they understand.)

[mdmc]

12. ..