FCC adopts preliminary net neutrality rules

By on Dec 21, 2010 at 3:50 PM
Internet December 21, 2010

The Federal Communications Commission put in place a limited set of net neutrality rules today, and early reports suggest people are not overly pleased. The “Open Internet” order was approved 3-2 in a vote that took place on Tuesday, with FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and two more Democrats voting in support of the new rules. While the full details of the order are not yet available, the intended purpose of these rules is theoretically to ensure consumers are protected while not imposing too much control over ISPs and content providers. Preliminary reports suggest the rules are more stringent for wired Internet service providers, with wireless ISPs granted more space to work the system.

Read

Tags:
, , , , , , , ,
24 Comments

Related Articles

  • Anonymous

    Like they needed another excuse to raise our rates.

  • lurch

    Well, that’s scary. Kinda reminds me of healthcare reform all over again: nobody really knows what this thing’s all about, the general public seems to be opposed to it, and politicians are, once again, not interested in the public’s best interest.

  • stefan

    Demon-rats can never leave well enough alone they try to find any way possible to censor and tax the hell out of citizens.

    • Anonymous

      All you folks who recommended this brilliant play on words? Try reading this … it’s a plan which was presented and discussed by Allot Communications and Openet–who provide tech services for Verizon and AT&T: wired.com/images_blogs/epicenter/2010/12/final_slide_deck.pdf

      Find out where the “demon-rats” are in this pdf. Hint: they’re nowhere to be found. It’s a brave, new, corporate world, son.

      • lurch

        Well, if you read the article, you’ll notice it says this:

        “… FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and two more Democrats voting in support of the new rules.”

        In other words, you’re a moron who, apparently, can’t read.

        Pull your head out of your ass.

  • jason6g

    not sure if this is the same discussion, but doesnt this mean that torrents wont go the wayside just yet?

    if so, screw these idiots trying to censor everything. slap a warning on it, and call it a day. make people start using their brains and judgement again. the government cant protect everyone from everything and it needs to stop spreading itself so thin, especially when there are more important things to worry about.

  • Petas

    If this continues you will see isps start charging for data consumption. This is not going the way everyone thought it would.

    • Anonymous

      they already do… Comcast, Time warner, Cox, and most other isp’s already have a bandwidth cap. They charge as it is because if u go over that you ither get throttled cut off or something of the sort

  • Joe

    I remember over the summer either this site or engadget ran a piece on why they were in favor of net neutrality. I couldn’t believe it. Do people really think that options will be better once this is in place? When the government uses language like “fair,” what they really mean is control.

    “the intended purpose of these rules is theoretically to ensure consumers are protected while not imposing too much control over ISPs and content providers” – yea, I’m sure that’ll work out great in practice. You give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. People who freely hand over their rights baffle me.

    • Anonymous

      Maybe after reading on the issue, you could dialog with Woz for awhile … in the Atlantic, talking about true net neutrality (not this weakened hybrid): ” Finally, the thought hit me that every time and in every way that the telecommunications careers have had power or control, we the people wind up getting screwed.”

  • Jfinbox

    now somebody please tell me why in the hell we still support these DemocRATS. there supposed to be for Liberty, and the party of more CHOICE. bull crap. the GOP rightfully so has pledged to fight this, and use congress, which thank god will be in different stewardship this next 2 years, to neutralize this.

    now, we welcome a decent debate about that, but illiterate-government-loving idiots need not apply.

    • Norm

      The Democrats are no different than republicans. They may claim to be there for minorities, gays, and other special interests, but all in all they just want to control what you do. They may not do it in the name of God like the Republicans, but its the same none the less.

      Just keep chanting YES WE CAN you fucking sheeple.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1201199 Davis Solomon Darvish

        The first comment Norm made where he DOESnt say DROID DOES! and it was intelligent too. there may be hope for this troll. I agree that the FCC is a joke and they democrats are no diff than republicans.

    • Anonymous

      silly boy. read the literature. Even with this version of the ruling, Verizon will be able to cut off access to the Google Maps app on your phone and force you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it is not as good. And even if they charge money, when Google Maps is free. Or they won’t, because they’re all about giving customers choices.

      It comes down to how much you trust corporations not to abuse their near-monopolistic powers as they continue to cut more services, raise more prices and post more record-breaking profits.

      After I’m done laughing, let’s talk.

      • ihatestupidpeople

        I agree that the government doesn’t care about what the people think, but it’s even worse when people like @crescentdave follow and copy word for word (from Al Franken’s speech) and don’t have a mind to think for themselves.

      • Anonymous

        Oh … I can think for myself-I liked how Franken put it. It’s touching how much you folks “trust” corporations.” Tell me … how’s that diversity of carriers and telcos going for you? Generate a lot more competition? Meh. Like our world internet rankings?

        Chew on this … it’s got a graphic, so you ought to be able to understand it. wired.com/epicenter/2010/12/carriers-net-neutrality-tiers/

      • Joe

        That’s why we have competition. If “evil” corporations like verizon start increasing rates and cutting services, they will lose profits because the consumer will move elsewhere. Profits which, by the way, are only sustained AFTER they pay their over 200,000 employees. The private sector doesn’t have the luxury of using taxpayer dollars to sustain itself.

        You know what does increase rates, though without allowing for the opportunity to change providers? More regulations.

        Found this techdirt headline particularly funny:

        Irony: If You Want To Know What The FCC’s Rules On Internet Openness Are, You Need To File A FOIA

      • Anonymous

        Found your closing “particularly funny.” From one of the many articles covering this: “The formal order has not been released yet, because the FCC needs to incorporate the majority’s response to the written dissents of the commissioners who disagree with the order. FCC officials said it could take a few days before the order is made public.” Then it shows some excerpts of the ruling on Scribd. Oh the “irony” of the myth of FOIA clashing with the reality of Scribd. Here’s the link to background info and FACTS, btw: wired.com/epicenter/2010/12/fcc-order/.

      • uDummy

        the only problem, Joe, is your using Wireless as an example and its already been stated that wireless has less stringent rules.

        We do have options for wireless, hence seperating them into another category.

        For high-speed internet at home, what many of you are missing is that millions of us don’t have options.

        Who offers high-speed internet in my neighborhood? Brighthouse (Time-Warner). At&t, Verizon, ComCast, etc. do not service this area. My only option, if I want my ‘voice’ to be heard, is to give up services period. I like my Xbox Live and if I can’t get a solid high speed option, will just have to do without. Clearwire and Dish TV internet are not able to provide stable internet services for such things as gaming.

        all in all… we’re screwed. Gov’t steps in, screwed. Gov’t doesn’t step in, still screwed. There wouldn’t be such thing as a net neutrality issue if the media conglomerates weren’t making moves to take control of the internet already. You people think this crap just appeared out of thin air? There are people in high places ready to pull the rug out from under all of us.

    • Drew

      Do you really think shit will change with the change of political parties?? C’mon, don’t be naive. There’s just ONE evil government that happens to have TWO sides…

  • Donny

    Not open source

  • Anonymous

    There is not going to be a perfect solution for everyone to agree upon.

    • Noone

      wow sounds like everything

  • http://twitter.com/justmeblue5ft3 blue5ft3

    PLEASE EXPLAIN more big brother tactics or freedom that we are guaranteed by the constitution in words we understand WHAT THE HECK you are doing to us

blog comments powered by Disqus