PDA

View Full Version : FCC in move to regulate internet



Insein
06-20-2010, 10:32 AM
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6231b0b8-7a70-11df-9cd7-00144feabdc0.html


FCC in move to regulate internet
By Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington

Published: June 18 2010 01:35 | Last updated: June 18 2010 01:35

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday took its first formal step towards the adoption of new regulations for the broadband industry, setting the stage for what could become one of the most expensive lobbying campaigns to hit Capitol Hill by major telecommunications and cable providers.

In a 3-2 vote along party lines, Democrats at the FCC on Thursday agreed to begin formal consideration to adopt new rules for high- speed internet companies such as AT&T and Comcast, which have until now operated virtually free of the FCC’s oversight. Technically, the FCC’s majority passed a motion to “open for comment” new broadband rules, the first step to passing the rules.

The move represents a difficult political situation for the White House, which appears to be on a collision course with Democrats in Congress, many of whom support AT&T, Verizon and others and have voiced opposition to the FCC’s plan. It will also test the lobbying prowess of Google and other technology groups that strongly favour greater regulation of broadband companies but have less experience in Washington than the communications industry.

Julius Genachowski, FCC chairman, has said the media regulator would seek only limited enhancement to its regulatory powers. But the legal change Mr Genachowski is pursuing, which would change the classification of broadband providers from Title I information services to Title II telecommunications services, would legally give the FCC far greater authority to enforce rate changes and unbundling.

The FCC and, by extension, the Obama administration, faces a tough adversary which has many friends on Capitol Hill.

AT&T on Thursday slammed the FCC proposal, which it said created “investment uncertainty at a time when certainty is most needed” and could cost jobs. The company said it supported handing the issue to Congress, a prospect “far less risky to jobs and investment than the FCC’s current path”.

Senator Jay Rockefeller, the Democratic chairman of the Senate commerce committee, which oversees the FCC, said he supported the FCC, but added: “In the short term, this is the right course and the right thing to do. In the long term, I believe we need to develop consensus to update the law, further safeguard consumers, and spur universal broadband deployment.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

The begining of the end for Free Speech on the internet. The last bastion of freedom in this country.

avatar4321
06-20-2010, 04:28 PM
Over my dead body. As long as I'm alive, freedom of speech will exist and I will speak my mind.

cat slave
06-21-2010, 01:30 PM
Yep, they will have to kill me to shut me up.:clap:

Binky
06-21-2010, 01:53 PM
Yep, they will have to kill me to shut me up.:clap:

If they want businesses that feed off of consumers to raise cain, then they should go ahead and shut down the internet. No more quick, spur of the moment, emotional spending. No more fast ordering and getting it back in a timely manner.

And if that isn't enough, hello to old medical ways before the creation of the internet. No more speedy meds. Wait, wait and wait.

If the internet is shut down it'll be because the powers that be want to control the flow of info that the people receive.

Hello China.......

SpidermanTUba
06-21-2010, 02:22 PM
Over my dead body. As long as I'm alive, freedom of speech will exist and I will speak my mind.

Freedom of speech for the most part does not presently exist on the internet. Almost all the servers on which exchange of speech is common are privately owned, thus, they may regulate your speech as you see fit.

For example - the only people with real free speech on debatepolicy.com are the ones who own the server.


Additionally - ISP's themselves are generally privately owned. I'd be more afraid of Cox deciding that since Barnes and Nobles hasn't paid them money, I can't use the Barnes & Nobles website, than the government telling them they can't do that.

Insein
06-21-2010, 03:18 PM
Freedom of speech for the most part does not presently exist on the internet. Almost all the servers on which exchange of speech is common are privately owned, thus, they may regulate your speech as you see fit.

For example - the only people with real free speech on debatepolicy.com are the ones who own the server.


Additionally - ISP's themselves are generally privately owned. I'd be more afraid of Cox deciding that since Barnes and Nobles hasn't paid them money, I can't use the Barnes & Nobles website, than the government telling them they can't do that.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. You bad mouth the person thats allowing you to use their service, than you run the risk of them not letting you use the service.

What I speak of is a government beauracracy created to regulate and maintain information that they feel is "unacceptable for society" similar to what China does. So we either won't see content deemed "unhealthy" or those that attempt to create it will face "penalties." Or both.