House of Reps Puts the Kibosh on FCC Net Neutrality Push
Feb 18, 2011, 8:43 AM by Eric M. Zeman
The House of Representatives has voted to overturn regulations proposed by the Federal Communication Commission that would impact how broadband providers manage their networks. The bill was killed by House Republicans. Republican Representative Steve Scalise said, "We think the FCC overstepped their boundaries. This is something that should be done and solved in the halls of Congress." Verizon sued the FCC in January, making the same claim. The FCC provisions impacting mobile operators state that wireless providers would not be able to block users from accessing any web site. Wireless providers also wouldn't be allowed to block internet calling services that make use of wireless broadband data connections. The providers would also have to publicly disclose their network management practices. Without approval of the House of Representatives, the FCC's proposed rules have an uncertain future.
iOS 17 Brings Comprehensive Protection Against Unwanted Nude Images
Comments
Here you go sir...
10 gb/month for $10.
1 week later...
"Hi, yes. I'm calling because I'm trying to use slacker radio on my phone and I can't get it to work, only over WiFi."
"I'm sorry sir, but we do not support accessing Slacker radio. Have you tried Raphsody instead? It's only $10/month for unlimited music."
"Umm, also I can't get to YouTube."
"VCast is only $10/month for unlimited VCast videos."
"And, also. Every time I try to go to (Social Networking Site), I can't do so."
"Well sir. We only support Facebook and Twitter. Have you made an account with them yet? It's only $5/month for access to both of those sites!"
"Forget it. I'll just use Google RealTime search to flip through twitter."
"I'm sorry sir, but we have partnered up ...
(continues)
1 week later...
"Hi, yes. I'm calling because I'm trying to use slacker radio on my phone and I can't get it to work, only over WiFi."
"I'm sorry sir, but we do not support accessing Slacker radio. Have you tried Raphsody instead? It's only $10/month for unlimited music."
"Umm, also I can't get to YouTube."
"VCast is only $10/month for unlimited VCast videos."
"And, also. Every time I try to go to (Social Networking Site), I can't do so."
"Well sir. We only support Facebook and Twitter. Have you made an account with them yet? It's only $5/month for access to both of those sites!"
"Forget it. I'll just use Google RealTime search to flip through twitter."
"I'm sorry sir, but we have partnered up ...
(continues)
Nice exaggeration. I love when people make businesses out to be the bad guys. Not that there will be some businesses that try that, but on the same coin you can't really blame them. You definitely can't blame a wireless carrier for wanting to protect ...
(continues)
(continues)
...
mycool said:...
10 gb/month for $10.
1 week later...
"Hi, yes. I'm calling because I'm trying to use slacker radio on my phone and I can't get it to work, only over WiFi."
"I'm sorry sir, but we do not support accessing Slack
(continues)
...
Damn, it is scary how accurate this is. This was Verizon before they teamed up with Google. That is why it was such a HUGE surprise when the two companies mated.
NOW....
I'm not saying i agree with the house but all these assumptions about how all the carriers are going to start blocking alot of stuff now is stupid.but that is not the issue the issue is that the FCC overstepped their boundaries plain and simple trenen after all the crap he got from everybody about this was correct once again PLAIN AND SIMPLE and thats all.
XMegadeathX said:...
I'm not saying i agree with the house but all these assumptions about how all the carriers are going to start blocking alot of stuff now is stupid.but that is not the issue the issue is that the FCC overstepped th
(continues)
...
XMegadeathX said:...
I'm not saying i agree with the house but all these assumptions about how all the carriers are going to start blocking alot of stuff now is stupid.but that is not the issue the issue is that the FCC overstepped th
(continues)
Anyone else notice
That trenen always disappears from these posts after he gets smacked down a few times?
lol, unless you're just attacking his grammar. I think those are the only attacks he knows how to defend himself from. I can just picture him in front of his computer going "well, my work here is done!" he thinks since the "gubment is on his side" he ...
(continues)
(continues)
Seems like it. And I'm sure you remember what happened in 1996.
...
A brief history of the internet...
There have been some on these threads speculating that because isp's have as of yet charged by the website they will not now begin to do so. Their argument is essentially if they have not been motivated to do it as of yet they will continue to not be motivated. This begs the question, if there is additional money to be made from per website charging, then why hasnt it been done yet? A brief history of the internet is perhaps in order.
The internet was not something that was designed by any one company or entity. It was originally set up by the pentagon and then several universities connected to each other. Until 1994 the internet backbone was government controlled.
Access to the internet was originally granted by phone companies o...
(continues)
The internet was not something that was designed by any one company or entity. It was originally set up by the pentagon and then several universities connected to each other. Until 1994 the internet backbone was government controlled.
Access to the internet was originally granted by phone companies o...
(continues)
They Need to Go Furher
And just abolish the FCC altogether.....
The argument they are making that if some form of net neutrality is needed this can be passed by Congress directly rather than handed off to some regulatory agency is completely correct, and it applies to pretty much every regulation that the FCC has ever passed.
The only reason Congress and the White House like creating regulatory agencies to do stuff is to pass the buck and to make sure that the real authors of bad legislation are completely unaccountable.
If a particular regulation is so bloody important Congress can pass the law directly, no more passing the buck to unaccountable bureaucrats.
The argument they are making that if some form of net neutrality is needed this can be passed by Congress directly rather than handed off to some regulatory agency is completely correct, and it applies to pretty much every regulation that the FCC has ever passed.
The only reason Congress and the White House like creating regulatory agencies to do stuff is to pass the buck and to make sure that the real authors of bad legislation are completely unaccountable.
If a particular regulation is so bloody important Congress can pass the law directly, no more passing the buck to unaccountable bureaucrats.
Totally agree. But hey, this is a starting point. Love how I was bashed for saying the FCC was acting outside their jurisdictions. Now I have the government backing my argument. So stfu whoever you were! 🙂
...
First of all, best typo/freudian slip combo I've seen in a while. 😁
Second - you want the rules for the development of technology left up to legislators? Granted, most Congress critters are more knowledgeable than Ted "A Series of Tubes" Steven...
(continues)
Second - you want the rules for the development of technology left up to legislators? Granted, most Congress critters are more knowledgeable than Ted "A Series of Tubes" Steven...
(continues)
...
