backtop


Print 45 comment(s) - last by theslug.. on Nov 20 at 2:51 PM


The FCC complains that Google and Verizon's net neutrality proposal doesn't give it enough authority.  (Source: South Park Studios/Comedy Central)
FCC says that the only way net neutrality will be had is by handing it more power

After a long history of debate, Google and Verizon finally came to a basic framework of proposed net neutrality policy.  The policy would look to regulate wired traffic, ensuring that "legal" traffic was not slowed and that ISPs would not be able to charge premiums for "speed lanes".

The Federal Communications Commission, which is currently in the process of crafting net neutrality legislation to bring before Congress, was surprisingly dismissive of the proposal in a brief public comment.

FCC Chairman Michael Copps remarks [PDF], "Some will claim this announcement moves the discussion forward.  That's one of its many problems. It is time to move a decision forward—a decision to reassert FCC authority over broadband telecommunications, to guarantee an open Internet now and forever, and to put the interests of consumers in front of the interests of giant corporations."

The comment raises questions about exactly what kind of net neutrality "authority" the FCC is seeking over the nation's ISPs and internet wires.  After all, the Google/Verizon proposal called for mild FCC regulation and a fine architecture for those who don't comply, with fines of up to $2M USD.

It should be interesting to see exactly what the FCC has in mind instead.

The FCC taking input from Google, Verizon, AT&T, Microsoft, and others in the process of crafting its net neutrality legislation.  It is unclear when it will finish the draft of its legislation for Congress.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: What a Shock!
By KnickKnack on 8/10/2010 5:28:02 PM , Rating: 0
I'd rather have a government agency which is accountable to the people (we can vote them in or out) than corporations who are only accountable to their shareholders and whose main agenda is to make large profits.


RE: What a Shock!
By Reclaimer77 on 8/10/2010 5:43:05 PM , Rating: 3
You can vote out politicians, but the bureaucracies they leave behind rarely if ever get removed or changed for the better. Please show me where all these "accountable" government agencies are and how they are being taken to task when they fail their mandates.

You people and your blind faith in government are killing us. Please wake up!


RE: What a Shock!
By KnickKnack on 8/10/2010 6:48:30 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have 'blind faith'; I distrust governments as much as I distrust large corporations; when the expenses scandal hit the headlines in the UK everyone was shocked but not surprised with the abuses that were running through the system and how many MP's were complicit in the corruption.

However, given a choice between the two to manage something like Net Neutrality, I'd say a body like the FCC whose only agenda is (supposedly) for the good of the people is preferable to some of the worlds biggest corporations whose business interests may very well be in conflict with some of the principles of net-neutrality.


RE: What a Shock!
By Reclaimer77 on 8/10/2010 8:01:28 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'd say a body like the FCC whose only agenda is (supposedly) for the good of the people is preferable to some of the worlds biggest corporations whose business interests may very well be in conflict with some of the principles of net-neutrality.


Are we talking about the same FCC here?? The FCC that's been bleeping, banning, censoring and silencing artists since the 1930's? The FCC that drove Howard Stern off radio? The FCC who tried to ban "drug music" like Puff the Magic Dragon??

THAT FCC?? Suddenly they are out of the censorship business and into the "good of the people's free speech" business? Suddenly they are all about your Net's Neutrality?


RE: What a Shock!
By FITCamaro on 8/11/2010 8:36:48 AM , Rating: 2
Drones don't see and can't hear what they disagree with.


RE: What a Shock!
By snyper256 on 8/11/2010 10:09:16 AM , Rating: 2
It's better than the whiny, greedy telcos, who are too cheap to expand their infrastructure to meet demand so they want to cut bandwidth and rake in money from specialized traffic.

If they get their way, we'll see metered and packaged internet services, just like wireless and cable TV. Just sickening.

They need to be put in line.


RE: What a Shock!
By NullSubroutine on 8/10/2010 5:46:32 PM , Rating: 3
I would agree, even as conservative as I am, there is too much past history of monopolies (AT&T) and media (cable/telephone/internet) running monopolies on customers in certain geographic areas.

I don't want the internet regulated (and I'm talking original constitution definition of regulation which is to make regular), I want the companies that provide the internet to be regulated so they don't screw customers for profit while never upgrading the infrastructure (or doing so at snails pace).

I would actually like to see ISP's...shock...COMPETE for the business of customers.


RE: What a Shock!
By AEvangel on 8/10/10, Rating: 0
RE: What a Shock!
By FITCamaro on 8/11/2010 8:35:08 AM , Rating: 2
Did I miss when we started being able to vote out FCC employees?

And no just because a new party takes over the majority, that doesn't mean those in charge of the FCC change. They typically aren't fired unless they commit a crime or re involved in some scandal. Otherwise they can sue the government.

Yes businesses exist to make a profit. Do you work for free? Do you invest thousands of man hours in something just for the notoriety? Or to say that you're a good person? No. You do it to make money.


"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki