Posted on 10/22/2009 5:20:21 PM PDT by RobinMasters
* All 5 commissioners vote to seek public comment on rule
* Two Republican commissioners have some reservations
* Draft rule would allow for 'reasonable' net management
* Public comments accepted until Jan. 14
* Telecom firms worry rule would hamper network management (Adds vote by commissioners, quotes, background)
By John Poirier and Sinead Carew
WASHINGTON/CHICAGO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators voted unanimously Thursday to support an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates.
The proposed rule now goes to the public for comment until Jan. 14, after which the Federal Communications Commissions will review the feedback and possibly seek more comment. A final rule is not expected until the spring of next year.
"I am pleased that there is broad agreement inside the commission that we should move forward with a healthy and transparent process on an open Internet," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Ping.
AS RUSH SAID TODAY- WHEN IS THE 10 MILLION MAN MARCH
I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO MARCH ON GOP HEADQUARTERS
Where is Brutus?
The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc (T.N), Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N) and Qwest Communications International Inc (Q.N), which say it would strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition.
The rule would prevent operators from discriminating against any legal content a third party wants to deliver to consumers on their networks, though it allows for "reasonable" network management to unclog congestion, clear viruses and spam, and block unlawful content like child pornography or the transfer of pirated content.
Re-read that quote but keep in mind the words that are added to get you emotionally vested in a side of an issue when you do. If you recognize the propaganda piece of it, it becomes clearer.
I’m dumber than I thought. I still don’t get it. Is net neutrality a good thing for consumers or a bad thing for consumers?
Very bad.. big brother will regulate who does what and when. They use words to draw emotion out like stopping ‘child pornography’ but when the government is involve, they can draw any equivocation- such as political disagreements being labeled as ‘hate speech’. They throw promises out like ‘stopping viruses’ as if the government is more capable than a business who has a financial interest in defeating viruses to keep their network (and thus revenue stream) alive.
Watch the feces hit the political fan.
The Internet has historically operated on a principal known as “net neutrality”. In layman’s terms, it means that you downloading a 2 gigabyte movie from iTunes in your home must be treated with the same respect as a professor downloading video for his classroom or a hospital downloading medical records. In other words, all data and all searchers are equal.
ISP providers have attempted to “throttle” their networks based on revenue, which has caused concern by consumer advocates. They want the right to charge higher prices for preferred access to networks so that a hospital has better service (and generates more revenue for the ISP) than you do watching movies in your home.
The Internet has been a great force for the democratization of information by allowing people to come together and discuss ideas. Net neutrality - that is, treating all data equal and forbidding ISPs to regulate it based on source - is extremely important if we are to maintain a free Internet. It ensures that no one gets to make a value judgment on your search or Internet usage to determine if you are more or less important than another source.
Most of the big giants, such as Google, support net neutrality. The huge ISPs, such as Time Warner, are attempting to snuff it out so they can charge more (e.g., $1 for every gigabyte over 10 gigabytes transfer per month so downloading a bunch of movies could cost you a ton of money like your cell phone).
I hope that explains the concept.
The bottom line: If Net Neutrality is DEFEATED, then you will find your Internet usage just like a cell phone, constantly worrying about “overage” charges and “bandwidth” fees. That’s the real intent, if you look at some of the past actions of the big providers. They are trying to create billions of dollars in revenue from fees and charges.
In short, it’s the camel’s nose under the tent, dear.
It’s Big Brother taking over your life and limiting your freedom. It’s bye bye America. It’s kiss your future goodbye. It’s slave time on a RAT farm.
Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
It's time to draw a line for these ungodly demons and dare them to cross it!
IT IS ON OF THOSE ‘ORWELLIAN’ NAMES
LIKE “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY” OR ‘WAR IS PEACE”
OR ‘FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT’
BUMP
Nose? It rather smells like the other end of the camel, IMO...
BUMP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.