The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Mike220 on April 06, 2010, 11:16:11 AM
-
Apparently the thought is that Net Neutrality is the greatest thing since sliced bread. That's the only reason I can think of for their reaction.
Two threads in one here.
First: Oh Noes!!! (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4333930)
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 11:20 AM
Original message
Court Strikes at 'Net Neutrality'
Source: Wall Street Journal
A federal appeals court struck down the FCC's efforts to enforce its "net neutrality" principles, ruling Tuesday that the Federal Communications Commission exceeded its authority when it issued a 2008 citation against Comcast Corp. for throttling Internet traffic from high-bandwidth file-sharing services.
A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned the citation, ruling that Congress hadn't given the FCC the power to regulate an Internet service provider's network-management practices.
"The commission has failed to tie its assertion of ancillary authority over Comcast's Internet service to any statutorily mandated responsibility," the court said in a 36-page opinion.
The court's decision could throw into question the FCC's authority to impose open Internet rules.
Read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303411604...
Hawkeye-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. Well, it's time to enact NN legislation
and nothing watered down.
Hawkeye-X
**** free speech and private business practice.
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
5. Legislation from the bench sucks ass!
Since when?
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. DC Circuit is 10-4 fascists vs. real judges.
Hitler's organization was a Cub Scout pack compared to the Bush Crime Family.
I thought there where four D type judges on the bench, not 10... And how does Bush play into all this?
And 7 posts for Godwin's Law to be invoked. They're slipping.
Thread the second: Oh Noes, Part II!!!! (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4333896)
Lakerstan (592 posts) Tue Apr-06-10 10:57 AM
Original message
Federal appeals court rules for Comcast and against FCC on 'net neutrality' case
Source: LA Times
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks.
Tuesday's ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company. It had challenged the FCC's authority to impose so called "net neutrality" obligations.
It marks a serious setback for the FCC, which needs authority to regulate the Internet in order to push ahead with key parts of its massive national broadband plan.
Read more: http://www.latimes.com/technology/sns-ap-us-tec-interne...
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
2. A sad ruling for the internet...
and perhaps the beginning of the end of what we know as the internet.
I didn't know the internet had feelings. And what's going to be any different than the way things are now? DUmbass.
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-06-10 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. Fascism!
Corporate will triumphs over the public good once again.
Was it a George W Bush appointed judge on the appeals court?
How is it fascism to permit companies to do what they want on their systems? Who's the fascist? DUmbass. And again with the Bush talk. I would say they have one track minds, but a DUmmy's mind is too narrow for that.
-
To the primitives, true freedom can only be attained when all entities are given their daily instructions from DC.
.
-
Of course, the DUmmies would have been celebrating this had it been the Bush FCC/DOJ that had received this smackdown.
-
The court asked a very simple question: what law has congressed passed that allows you to impose the rules you wish to advance?
The FCC could not point to the relevant statute.
It would be akin to the cops wanting to enforce laws not yet written. Now I know liberals are commies at heart and commies rule by diktat, but do any of them want to advance the political theory that the executive branch can write its own laws to enforce as it sees fit?
Remember DUmmies: you're just one Diebold-stolen election away from having the WH back in RW hands.
-
The court asked a very simple question: what law has congressed passed that allows you to impose the rules you wish to advance?
The FCC could not point to the relevant statute.
It would be akin to the cops wanting to enforce laws not yet written. Now I know liberals are commies at heart and commies rule by diktat, but do any of them want to advance the political theory that the executive branch can write its own laws to enforce as it sees fit?
Remember DUmmies: you're just one Diebold-stolen election away from having the WH back in RW hands.
NO, I think we're closer to me adding a few strands of barbed wire to the pasture fence and leasing it to the government to hold DUmmies.
-
NO, I think we're closer to me adding a few strands of barbed wire to the pasture fence and leasing it to the government to hold DUmmies.
In a perfect world, we could just recycle them thru the "Greenie's" waste management incinerators. Might as well light a few of these new fangled light bulbs the gubmint is mandating we use.
-
While I disagree with the DUmmys ignorance and stupidity RE: Net Neutrality, I DO agree with giving the FCC SOME power to regulate how Internet Service providers manage the data through their networks for the following reasons:
The Internet from its earliest inceptions; the theory, the IP addressing scheme, the "no single point of failure" Packet Switching protocols and redundant network connectivity used to send data across these networks, were ALL conceptualized, designed, created, and implemented using American taxpayer dollars. Originating as ARPANET (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPANET) created for DARPA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Advanced_Research_Projects_Agency), the taxpayers paid for every penny that built this network then connected it to government and defense facilities, universities, research centers, even leased lines into government officials and university teachers/researchers homes. Quite obviously the last link of connectivity to a person's home, military base, or research center was via leased telco lines and the taxpayers initially paid for those too.
The taxpayer owns the Internet per se. When the Internet was opened for public use, the final link into our homes was from an ISP that used the telco lines to make the connection between the Internet and our homes via the ISP's switching system.
Now along comes Comcast who does nothing more than "Bolt On" their commercial front end to the PUBLIC's internet and provide access to the PUBLIC Internet via their CableTV connection into our home. Same for Qwest or Verizon using their phone lines.
I can understand having to pay Comcast a fee to use the CableTV system that they built AND must maintain for access connectivity to the PUBLIC Internet but what I do NOT agree with is Comcast Throttling throughput based on THEIR arbitrary criteria. If the public Internet can handle a specific data throughput that exceeds the data throughput THROUGH their (Comcast's) system from my home to the public Internet, then Comcast needs to upgrade their system!
If this is allowed to continue the, lameassed "file sharing bandwidth hogs slow our system for others" excuse will be applied to heavy traffic premium sites like Drudge or WND and not just BitTorrent sites like The Pirate Bay (http://thepiratebay.org/). I can clearly see the left making sure that the speed to a New York Times web site far exceeds that of a hit to say Drudge and others in the future.
Eventually Comcast and others will begin to charge a tiered fee based on which ever package you pay for, the speed of connectivity to specific web sites could be quite delayed or slowed or UNACCESSABLE based on your subscription fees.
All this with an Internet system that WE paid for.
It's like the taxpayers paying for and building the ultimate information building and library then Comcast "bolting on" their own front door and charging us not only entry fees, but different rates for using either the stairs, regular, or express elevators for access based on extra fees we pay. If Comcast built and maintains the access point, then I will pay a fee to use it but once inside, I MUST be allowed equal access to ANYWHERE in the library at *MY* discretion.
-
Eventually Comcast and others will begin to charge a tiered fee based on which ever package you pay for, the speed of connectivity to specific web sites could be quite delayed or slowed or UNACCESSABLE based on your subscription fees.
Satellite already does this. They have a tier program, not for throughput but for the amount you download and upload. Top dollar is $80 bucks.
-
Why cant the dimwits see that this is another situation that an unfettered free market will fix all by itself ?
If people don't like Comcast's policies, they will go someplace else. And if there isn't a someplace else to go, someone will invent one. Up here we have FiOS competing directly with Comcast, and now prices are dropping like a stone while extra ponies keep getting offered by both companies. Competition, its a beautiful thing.
-
If the Dummies do not like Comcast then go to Verizon and get one of their mobile MiFis and just get on line with that. Up to 5 DUmmies can share a connection,assuming those tards paid the bill. and be done with it.