Court of Appeals rules FCC cannot impose net neutrality

By on Apr 6, 2010 at 1:58 PM
Breaking April 6, 2010

fcc-logo

The net neutrality movement received a huge blow today when the US Court of Appeals sided with Comcast in its claim that the Federal Communications Commission lacks legal authority to demand ISPs shape internet traffic. Over the past few years, the FCC has grown increasingly concerned that ISPs would throttle connection speeds for things such as peer-to-peer file sharing and streaming media in order to dedicate more bandwidth to services it can better capitalize on. Comcast first challenged the FCC on net neutrality in 2008 when the FCC reprimanded Comcast for throttling the connections of clients who used a large amount of bandwidth through P2P networking.

As a rule of thumb, we at BGR are not in favor of government agencies (whether independent or not) imposing rules upon industries, although in this instance we’re actually finding ourselves disappointed if only for the fact we believe net neutrality must become a reality.

Read

Tags:
, , , , , , ,
75 Comments

Related Articles

  • Steven L. Jobs

    @ Jon

    Exactly what I was going to say. Thanks for saving me a bit of writing. :)

    To all socialists, marxists, communists, fascists and Obama supporters:

    Be very afraid of net “neutrality” because its anything but neutral. You’re all focused on the ISPs when you need to be looking out for #1. Once Pandora’s box is opened, you can kiss the first amendment goodbye and start praying the brownshirts don’t end up on your doorstep because of some comment you left on a stupid tech blog.

  • BKS

    Correct me if i’m wrong but didn’t the FCC issue the policy statment for the Broadband Network Management in Sept. of 2005. If so this march to Socialism that I hear so much about started alot earlier!!!

  • kevsauce

    Seems to me that if throttling becomes a real problem, somebody will write a program (perhaps into the bt client itself) that changes the headers in a packet to make it look like web browsing traffic vs. File transfers.

  • Steven L. Jobs

    @bks

    You’re so right about the march to socialism starting much earlier than today. It’s just that the “march” has become a full on sprint as of late which is why its become a hot topic recently. You’re only noticing it now due to the plurality of voices that didn’t exist before.

  • Petnard

    You say: ” we at BGR are not in favor of government agencies (whether independent or not) imposing rules upon industries” – so you are not in favor of workplace protections (OSHA, workman’s compensation); control of pollution by industries; seat belt requirements, air bags, and other safety rules imposed on the car industry; safety standards for pharmaceutical companies; consumer protection against credit card fraud; I could go on. Next you’ll be against our taxes being used for the fire and police department.

    • s

      THANK YOU @petnard just what i was going to say. non-government regulated industries bring us close and closer to those tasty lead-based toys rolling out of china. BGR needs to stick to cell phones, stay out of political analyses. for-profit industry without government regulation= chaos, exploitation, etc.

    • s

      and @steven tell me HOW ON EARTH net neutrality is an example of socialism. or do you have any other oogly-boogly scare tactic words you’d like to include that glenn bleck taught you this year?

  • asfd

    bgr are social conservatives. goodbye, forever, bgr.

1 2
blog comments powered by Disqus