Law Upcoming vote on Net Neutrality laws - How many times do we need to strike this shit down?

FCC plans to vote to overturn U.S. net neutrality rules in December

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of the Federal Communications Commission is set to unveil plans next week for a final vote to reverse a landmark 2015 net neutrality order barring the blocking or slowing of web content, two people briefed on the plans said.

In May, the FCC voted 2-1 to advance Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to withdraw the former Obama administration’s order reclassifying internet service providers as if they were utilities. Pai now plans to hold a final vote on the proposal at the FCC’s Dec. 14 meeting, the people said, and roll out details of the plans next week.

Pai asked in May for public comment on whether the FCC has authority or should keep any regulations limiting internet providers’ ability to block, throttle or offer “fast lanes” to some websites, known as “paid prioritization.” Several industry officials told Reuters they expect Pai to drop those specific legal requirements but retain some transparency requirements under the order.

An FCC spokesman declined to comment.

Internet providers including AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc say ending the rules could spark billions in additional broadband investment and eliminate the possibility a future administration could regulate internet pricing.

Critics say the move could harm consumers, small businesses and access to the internet.

In July, a group representing major technology firms including Alphabet Inc and Facebook Inc urged Pai to drop plans to rescind the rules.

Advocacy group Free Press said Wednesday “we’ll learn the gory details in the next few days, but we know that Pai intends to dismantle the basic protections that have fueled the internet’s growth.”

Pai, who argues the Obama order was unnecessary and harms jobs and investment, has not committed to retaining any rules, but said he favors an “open internet.” The proposal to reverse the Obama rules reclassifying internet service has drawn more than 22 million comments.

Pai is mounting an aggressive deregulatory agenda since being named by President Donald Trump to head the FCC.

On Thursday the FCC will vote on Pai’s proposal to eliminate the 42-year-old ban on cross-ownership of a newspaper and TV station in a major market. The proposal would make it easier for media companies to buy additional TV stations in the same market.

Pai is also expected to call for an initial vote in December to rescind rules that say one company may not own stations serving more than 39 percent of U.S. television households, two people briefed on the matter said.

Oh, and Comcast is already lobbying.

I'm so sick of this shit, seriously. The FCC is whoring out for Comcast and AT&T instead of ensuring that American citizens have equal access to the internet.

 

[Robotron]

"your not a real POC if you don't agree with us"

"Trump is literally forcing those POC's to shit out on the streets when he chose to remove the White House toilet seat".

 

[DICKPICSRUS]

"Trump is literally forcing those POC's to shit out on the streets when he chose to remove the White House toilet seat".

"white people are forcing POCs to become republican"

 

[Mrs Paul]

We can only hope all the people bitching will actually email or call their Congressmen and Senators. Between a review on the Hill and the many lawsuits to come that should restore the status quo. That's only if lawmakers think they'll miss out on votes in the next election.

From what I just heard, PA joined in the lawsuit.

 

[Marvin]

That argument makes sense to me. I concede that point.

I mean, because of the last mile problem, making an ISP profitable is extremely difficult. It's like making a private subway line profitable.

You're substantially restricted by geography and your customer base. You can't just pick up your equipment and move elsewhere.

Deciding that some network traffic simply isn't profitable enough is a very logical, reasonable action on the part of ISPs. It's shitty, but it's what the market should dictate. I don't blame them for making that decision. I blame the FCC for letting it happen.

But if we're insisting on network neutrality (which is good for the public, bad for ISPs) what's the alternative? Government run ISPs?

Fuck that. Anyone on here live in a rent controlled apartment? They suck dick. The service is terrible. You can report your furnace as being broken, and they'll get back to you in like a month. Maybe. And it's because they have no financial incentive to provide good service.

I don't want that option for internet access. But network neutrality is also an absolute requirement as well.

I don't know if there's a "great" solution out there. Maybe just the least shitty of several shitty solutions.

I guess I would start by separating the business into its constituent components. An ISP really is made up of several layers of businesses owned under one umbrella. ISPs own or lease large trunk lines into a given region, then they also own and operate networking switches and equipment (eg on a neighborhood level), and then finally they have a bunch of technicians who run cables to/from people's houses, and install modems and stuff like that.

It might be helpful to split the ISP business up into smaller layers, and address the problems of competition and network neutrality separately for each layer.

I don't understand how this can be "Trump's FCC" when Pajit was Obama's pick.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics...he-first-legal-challenges-are-already-coming/

Trump promoted him into his current position.

Just like, imagine Trump and Obama are eiffel towering the American people. That's more or less what's happening.

And Pajeet is in the corner beating off or some shit, idk.

 

[Jack Awful]

Is it just me, or has there been a lot of people using "shit" to insult Ajit Pai?
I'm not saying it's intentional, it's just funny cuz he's of Indian decent (poo in the loo)

 

[Chiang Kai-shek]

New York is one of the states. They routinely sue everyone from the federal government to other states, and quite often win.

Fair enough, really still feeling super shitty about this vote. I'm hoping something fucks up this plan hard. But I'm thinking it's not gonna happen.

 

[The Great Citracett]

Because Pajeet and Verizon are totally attempting this to trigger liberals and empower kekistan...

Again with that "we".

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

"Trump is literally forcing those POC's to shit out on the streets when he chose to remove the White House toilet seat".

"We'd rather have POC's shit on our internet rights than our streets!"

 

[DICKPICSRUS]

 

[BubbleButt]

But what will BatWu do about this travesty?

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

It's cute how he thinks an end to net neutrality is a loss ONLY for Liberals and not, you know. Everyone.

 

[Loxiozzz]

Because Pajeet and Verizon are totally attempting this to trigger liberals and empower kekistan...
View attachment 334945
Again with that "we".

...won't their internet be taken too...? I really don't get the joke, prolly flew over my head. Do they really believe this won't hit them?

Are they still that upset about Alabama that they think taking away NN is a victory for their side?

 

[DICKPICSRUS]

...won't their internet be taken too...? I really don't get the joke, prolly flew over my head. Do they really believe this won't hit them?

Are they still that upset about Alabama that they think taking away NN is a victory for their side?

never underestimate the power of :autism:​

 

[The Great Citracett]

...won't their internet be taken too...? I really don't get the joke, prolly flew over my head. Do they really believe this won't hit them?

Are they still that upset about Alabama that they think taking away NN is a victory for their side?

Yeah lots of these guys seem to think this is Trump booting liberals, minorities, gays, etc off the internet and letting it be an alt-right paradise. No clue why they think it would benefit Verizon to do that.

 

[Piga Dgrifm]

Is it just me, or has there been a lot of people using "shit" to insult Ajit Pai?
I'm not saying it's intentional, it's just funny cuz he's of Indian decent (poo in the loo)

 

[Jaimas]

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

Perhaps it won't happen, perhaps the optimists are right, but man oh man I can't wait for the salt from these fucking dolts when the first ISP blocks Stormfront or 4Chan or where ever these troglodytes congregate.

 

[Loxiozzz]

Yeah lots of these guys seem to think this is Trump booting liberals, minorities, gays, etc off the internet and letting it be an alt-right paradise. No clue why they think it would benefit Verizon to do that.

But that's the thing. They've taken notes on how many times they've been shat on by these people including big companies. Why other than tism would you believe this is a victory?

It's just annoying because they laughed at sjws who reeed about Trump getting sworn in, but now they're doing the same with the pedo guy but acting like they had any part in this decision and aren't going to be touched. 2017 had a lot of stupid, hypocritical moments, huh?

 

[One Man Bland]

...won't their internet be taken too...? I really don't get the joke, prolly flew over my head. Do they really believe this won't hit them?

Are they still that upset about Alabama that they think taking away NN is a victory for their side?

Keep in mind these are the people who think that net neutrality was "invented" in 2015 despite the fact that you can find articles from 2007 talking about NN when Verizon blocking private texts was an issue, and would probably start chugging Clorax by the gallon if Trump said he liked the smell of bleach.

 

[AnOminous]

Deciding that some network traffic simply isn't profitable enough is a very logical, reasonable action on the part of ISPs. It's shitty, but it's what the market should dictate. I don't blame them for making that decision. I blame the FCC for letting it happen.

Doing that to improve reliability and availability by restricting or throttling certain general types of traffic, like video or that type of thing, has never really violated what relatively recently started being called "net neutrality" even though it was just a foundational principle of the Internet itself. In fact, that kind of prioritization has been built into the protocols for quite some time.

It's filtering by the specific source that is an issue.

If ISPs start doing that, they're effectively breaking the Internet and should be treated like networks that host spammers, DDoSers, and so on, and they should be blackholed off the Internet entirely.