Third Time the Charm for Net Neutrality?

[Logan Westbrook]

Third Time the Charm for Net Neutrality?

After two failed attempts, Congressman Ed Markey is bringing a bill for net neutrality before a third successive congress.

Ed Markey, Democratic Congressman for Massachusetts, has introduced a bill ensuring net neutrality to the House of Representatives.

The bill [http://markey.house.gov/images/PDFs/netneutralitybill.pdf], entitled the 'Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009', aims to "amend the Communications Act of 1934 to establish a national broadband policy, safeguard consumer rights,spur investment and innovation, and for related purposes."

"The internet has thrived and revolutionized business and the economy precisely because it started as an open technology," said co-sponsor Anna Eshoo, the Democratic Representaive for California. "This bill will ensure that the non-discriminatory framework that allows the internet to thrive and competition on the Web to flourish is preserved at a time when our economy needs it the most."

The bill will essentially prevent ISPs from charging fees to content providers beyond those already incurred by moving data around and would grant the FCC the power to create and enforce rules pertaining to network traffic.

This is the third time that Markey has tried to introduce such legislation, and although he has been unsuccessful in his previous attempts, a new President and a new FCC chairperson, both of whom seem sympathetic to the idea, may mean that it'll be third time lucky for net neutrality.

Source: Ars Technica [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/08/the-war-over-network-neutrality.ars]


Permalink

 

[Krakyn]

I don't know much about net neutrality, but I can tell you right now that I don't like too much power in the hands of private companies. I can also tell you that I don't want the FCC enforcing laws on my internets.

So am I in favor of net neutrality or not?

 

[Amnestic]

I don't know much about net neutrality, but I can tell you right now that I don't like too much power in the hands of private companies. I can also tell you that I don't want the FCC enforcing laws on my internets.

So am I in favor of net neutrality or not?

You are.

As am I. This Ed Markey guy has the right idea and good on him for sticking with it even though it's failed twice now.

 

[Midniqht]

I'm glad they're trying to safeguard net neutrality. If ISPs get the freedom to charge what they want for certain targeted data and the FCC gets to bend our internet over and molest it with restrictive rules & regulations, we all get screwed over and the only ones benefiting from it would be the larger companies (that don't need any more money). I hope this bill passes. Third time's a charm

 

[Arrakiv]

More power to you, Congressman.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

More power to you, Congressman.

Seconded, though I have my doubts as to whether or not this will work as planned.

 

[Beowulf DW]

More power to you, Congressman.

Seconded, though I have my doubts as to whether or not this will work as planned.

Thirds for me, old chap.

It's not often that one finds a politician like this.

 

[cobrausn]

... and would grant the FCC the power to create and enforce rules pertaining to network traffic.

Really? This is somehow neutral?

Seems like regulation in disguise to me. Or at least a way for it to happen.

 

[HobbesMkii]

I'll bet the ISPs bring everything they possibly have to bear on this issue and crush it.

The trouble with this is because politicians are generally old geezers and avoided anything to do with computers in college (if their college even had computers when they went to school), they barely understand this issue, and wouldn't understand it if you gave them a lecture about it designed for a five year old. And if they can't understand an issue, well, they'll vote against it. You can't get blamed for what didn't happen.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

I don't know much about net neutrality, but I can tell you right now that I don't like too much power in the hands of private companies. I can also tell you that I don't want the FCC enforcing laws on my internets.

So am I in favor of net neutrality or not?

ummm you can have it one way or the other, it's either power in the hands of the corps or the fcc enforcing the rules of net neutrality

so you have to pick one

 

[ProfessorLayton]

I really hope this doesn't go through... I enjoy my internet... I don't want it taken over. I just might have to stop using the internet.

 

[KaiRai]

I don't know much about net neutrality, but I can tell you right now that I don't like too much power in the hands of private companies. I can also tell you that I don't want the FCC enforcing laws on my internets.

So am I in favor of net neutrality or not?

Yeah, this is the only place I can come without having the FCC and all that on my case, and the watershed etc...
I think this is just one step closer to the Family guy ep PTV where the FCC censors life....
Call me crazy....

 

[hansari]

The bill will essentially prevent ISPs from charging fees to content providers beyond those already incurred by moving data around and would grant the FCC the power to create and enforce rules pertaining to network traffic.

Look what your statement has produced nilcypher! People on the forum are actually confused and DO NOT WANT this bill to pass!!

Fix your comment on the FCC before it does more damage!!

 

[Logan Westbrook]

The bill will essentially prevent ISPs from charging fees to content providers beyond those already incurred by moving data around and would grant the FCC the power to create and enforce rules pertaining to network traffic.

Look what your statement has produced nilcypher! People on the forum are actually confused and DO NOT WANT this bill to pass!!

Fix your comment on the FCC before it does more damage!!

I'm not sure what you're talking about, the comment is correct.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

The bill will essentially prevent ISPs from charging fees to content providers beyond those already incurred by moving data around and would grant the FCC the power to create and enforce rules pertaining to network traffic.

Look what your statement has produced nilcypher! People on the forum are actually confused and DO NOT WANT this bill to pass!!

Fix your comment on the FCC before it does more damage!!

I'm not sure what you're talking about, the comment is correct.

yeah i'm kinda likening this to people saying "i want a lawful society but i don't want there to be any cops"

the FCC already DOES regulate the internet. they don't have to censor it just make sure that the rules are being followed correctly. if you don't think they already have a piece of regulation in the internet, then pick up your router and look at the bottom of it, it has a nice FCC logo on it with a number. the same thing goes for your network card, it has an FCC number on it

 

[Link Kadeshi]

Ok, ok, ok.... I think we all need to calm down, and not do anything crazy.... Now Breath... Good. Let's talk.
Net Neutrality is a good thing for free peoples. If this bill passes, than your ISP can't stop you from going to a site that has not paid them money. This is a good thing. You don't want them stopping you from going to the Escapist just because the Escapist didn't give every ISP money, right? RIGHT?! The whole FCC enforcing rules thing simply means that if this bill passes, and an ISP blocks or slows down a website that did not pay a fee, that ISP is breaking the law. This Congressman is doing all of us a favor.

 

[dorm41baggins]

the FCC already DOES regulate the internet. they don't have to censor it just make sure that the rules are being followed correctly. if you don't think they already have a piece of regulation in the internet, then pick up your router and look at the bottom of it, it has a nice FCC logo on it with a number. the same thing goes for your network card, it has an FCC number on it

That FCC logo does not mean they "regulate the Internet". All that logo means is that your router doesn't generate harmful *radio* interference. Speaking as a licensed Ham Radio operator that has some experience with both FCC regulations and with home-made electronics that *do* generate harmful RFI, I can attest to the necessity of that particular function of the agency.

As to the prospect of the FCC regulating the Internet itself, I'm somewhat less enthusiastic. I support the concept of net neutrality to a point, but I think it should be approached more as an area for the FTC to prevent consumer's rights abuses rather than the FCC preventing businesses from performing QoS for premium services (such as, perhaps, OnLive) on their own networks.

 

[Sephiwind]

On one hand I don't like the idea of an ISP being able to block a site just because it didn't give the ISP money that's border line extortion. On the other hand I don't like the idea of the FCC having even more power then it all ready has weazled it's way into haveing all ready.