The FCC and Net Neutrality

[DSUrocks07]

It's scarier when they post a Padme .gif to express a political point.

It's the meme generation, you know, with our short attention spans and all.

[BDKJMU]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendric ... eutrality/

This is what happens when you let a big Govt liberal run the FCC. Now our only hope on stopping the govt takeover of the net is the courts, where this should be tield up for a long time.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/fccs-net-ne ... 1424919940" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If that doesn't work can only hope Hillary isn't elected and a republican appointed FCC chair can roll this back.

[kalm]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendric ... eutrality/

This is what happens when you let a big Govt liberal run the FCC. Now our only hope on stopping the govt takeover of the net is the courts, where this should be tield up for a long time.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/fccs-net-ne ... 1424919940" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If that doesn't work can only hope Hillary isn't elected and a republican appointed FCC chair can roll this back.

Sweet Jim Bob Jesus, BDK, Tom Wheeler was a venture capitalist and worked for telecommunications and wireless firms before that. Also, you have to have a subscription to the WSJ to read the rest of the article.

[Chizzang]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendric ... eutrality/

This is what happens when you let a big Govt liberal run the FCC. Now our only hope on stopping the govt takeover of the net is the courts, where this should be tield up for a long time.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/fccs-net-ne ... 1424919940" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If that doesn't work can only hope Hillary isn't elected and a republican appointed FCC chair can roll this back.

You ^ are completely uninformed

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Stop digging...............

[Chizzang]

Stop digging...............

$500 Billion and counting... its time we quit f***ing around with the con men and take back what we paid for

"The telecos got the rules changed while we weren't watching,"
says Johnston in the accompanying interview. Basically, the phone and cable companies lobbied Washington to change laws and regulations to favor their business over their customers. Over the course of the last 20 years, nearly $500 billion has been collected by the telecom companies to (allegedly) bring America into the 21st century with an "Information Superhighway," says Johnston.

That works out ot $3,000 per household to have access to high-speed Internet.

But America did not get what it was promised and much of the country will never get fiber optic lines, Johnston tells The Daily Ticker. And even in cities that do have the faster service, the service is not always accessible.
"The companies essentially have a business model that is antithetical to economic growth," he says. "Profits go up if they can provide slow Internet at super high prices."
The relationship between phone and cable providers has essentially become a cartel, says Johnston, who cites the relationship between Verizon and Comcast.
In terms of phone service, what America really got was a duopoly, says Johnston, noting that AT&T and Verizon control 60% of phone service in America.

and:

Verizon was funded HUGELY by American Tax Payers and we got nothing for our money
The map below shows you what America got for its BILLIONS in Subsidies to Verizon
Most of which went into executive pockets

http://gizmodo.com/after-billions-in-su ... 1682854728" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

No shit, and now they are going to regulate the internet after last weeks ruling.

The FCC is run and paid for by the corporations that own our government, we are fu*ked either way. This isnt new news, maybe to you it is, but not me.

[kalm]

No shit, and now they are going to regulate the internet after last weeks ruling.

The FCC is run and paid for by the corporations that own our government, we are fu*ked either way. This isnt new news, maybe to you it is, but not me.

That would be the fear. But on paper it's at least better than the corporations running it directly.

Campaign finance.

[Chizzang]

No shit, and now they are going to regulate the internet after last weeks ruling.

The FCC is run and paid for by the corporations that own our government, we are fu*ked either way. This isnt new news, maybe to you it is, but not me.

It's uncanny how you're wrong about almost everything
The FCC wasn't involved at all previously
because lobbyists insured (by doing what they do) that the FCC wouldn't be

Now the FCC is taking a glance at the colossal fraud over the past two decades and waking up
As the lobby bribe money is now exposed and the public exposure is becoming increasingly a problem

The only politicians that are complaining...
are complaining because their Comcast Verizon gravy train money is ending

[houndawg]

I was neutral on the whole net neutrality issue, but the triumphant celebration by the younger generation in this country and across the world is starting to terrify me a bit.

I agree, it's weird. It's like they don't think anything can go wrong despite still living in their parents basements.

More like they realize why they still live in their parents basements.

This may be the generation that starts killing bankers for the good of the planet.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

No shit, and now they are going to regulate the internet after last weeks ruling.

The FCC is run and paid for by the corporations that own our government, we are fu*ked either way. This isnt new news, maybe to you it is, but not me.

It's uncanny how you're wrong about almost everything
The FCC wasn't involved at all previously
because lobbyists insured (by doing what they do) that the FCC wouldn't be

Now the FCC is taking a glance at the colossal fraud over the past two decades and waking up
As the lobby bribe money is now exposed and the public exposure is becoming increasingly a problem

The only politicians that are complaining...
are complaining because their Comcast Verizon gravy train money is ending

Dont act like Comcast Verizon dont want this.....................its cute of you to try but we know the real story.......oh and that money train? It just added some more cars, a wet bar and a stripper pole. Its going to be the hottest ticket in town in a few years.

[Chizzang]

It's uncanny how you're wrong about almost everything
The FCC wasn't involved at all previously
because lobbyists insured (by doing what they do) that the FCC wouldn't be

Now the FCC is taking a glance at the colossal fraud over the past two decades and waking up
As the lobby bribe money is now exposed and the public exposure is becoming increasingly a problem

The only politicians that are complaining...
are complaining because their Comcast Verizon gravy train money is ending

Dont act like Comcast Verizon dont want this.....................its cute of you to try but we know the real story.......oh and that money train? It just added some more cars, a wet bar and a stripper pole. Its going to be the hottest ticket in town in a few years.

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Dont act like Comcast Verizon dont want this.....................its cute of you to try but we know the real story.......oh and that money train? It just added some more cars, a wet bar and a stripper pole. Its going to be the hottest ticket in town in a few years.

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

Yes, that is a drop in the bucket to sell it to the rest of the country that doesnt pay attention to these things, think about how much money they saved doing it this way.

[Chizzang]

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

Yes, that is a drop in the bucket to sell it to the rest of the country that doesnt pay attention to these things, think about how much money they saved doing it this way.

You are hilarious...

[dbackjon]

Yes, that is a drop in the bucket to sell it to the rest of the country that doesnt pay attention to these things, think about how much money they saved doing it this way.

You are hilarious...

Alphie only opposes it because Obama wants it.


I would love for Obama to endorse breathing.

[Baldy]

Dont act like Comcast Verizon dont want this.....................its cute of you to try but we know the real story.......oh and that money train? It just added some more cars, a wet bar and a stripper pole. Its going to be the hottest ticket in town in a few years.

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

What's $18.5 million when they really want a $45 BILLION merger with Time Warner to go through?

Comcast loves the FCC’s net neutrality rules, wants limits on “fast lanes”

There are a lot of good things for Comcast in the Federal Communications Commission’s network neutrality proposal, and Comcast is smart enough to recognize it.

Today, Comcast Executive VP David Cohen announced that “we support the FCC putting in place legally enforceable rules to ensure that there is a free and open Internet, including transparency, no blocking, and anti-discrimination rules.”

Comcast submitted a 71-page filing to the FCC in which Senior VP of Regulatory Affairs Kathryn Zachem laid out the reasons for the company’s support. The rules are so good, Comcast said, that it might be wise to apply them to cellular carriers as well as fixed Internet providers.

Comcast also supports what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal doesn’t do. For example, the proposal would not reclassify broadband Internet as a common carrier service that would be subject to utility-style regulation, and the proposal would not regulate interconnection deals, such as the one in which Comcast charges Netflix for a direct connection to its network.

Comcast's support of the FCC also seems to be part of its plan to win approval of its acquisition of Time Warner Cable (TWC).

David Cohen probably has a pair of designer knee pads and his own linens in the Lincoln Bedroom.

[Chizzang]

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

What's $18.5 million when they really want a $45 BILLION merger with Time Warner to go through?

Comcast loves the FCC’s net neutrality rules, wants limits on “fast lanes”

There are a lot of good things for Comcast in the Federal Communications Commission’s network neutrality proposal, and Comcast is smart enough to recognize it.

Today, Comcast Executive VP David Cohen announced that “we support the FCC putting in place legally enforceable rules to ensure that there is a free and open Internet, including transparency, no blocking, and anti-discrimination rules.”

Comcast submitted a 71-page filing to the FCC in which Senior VP of Regulatory Affairs Kathryn Zachem laid out the reasons for the company’s support. The rules are so good, Comcast said, that it might be wise to apply them to cellular carriers as well as fixed Internet providers.

Comcast also supports what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal doesn’t do. For example, the proposal would not reclassify broadband Internet as a common carrier service that would be subject to utility-style regulation, and the proposal would not regulate interconnection deals, such as the one in which Comcast charges Netflix for a direct connection to its network.

Comcast's support of the FCC also seems to be part of its plan to win approval of its acquisition of Time Warner Cable (TWC).

David Cohen probably has a pair of designer knee pads and his own linens in the Lincoln Bedroom.

Wait WHat..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Comcast also supports what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal doesn’t do. For example, the proposal would not reclassify broadband Internet as a common carrier service that would be subject to utility-style regulation, and the proposal would not regulate interconnection deals, such as the one in which Comcast charges Netflix for a direct connection to its network."


Well f***k me...
How does the federal Government screw everything up it touches..!!!
Jeezus titty fucking christ

Our Government is simply UP FOR SALE to the highest bidder and Wheeler is the middle man

[CID1990]

So... that's why Comcast spent $18.5 million to stop Net Neutrality - because they want it..?

What's $18.5 million when they really want a $45 BILLION merger with Time Warner to go through?

Comcast loves the FCC’s net neutrality rules, wants limits on “fast lanes”

There are a lot of good things for Comcast in the Federal Communications Commission’s network neutrality proposal, and Comcast is smart enough to recognize it.

Today, Comcast Executive VP David Cohen announced that “we support the FCC putting in place legally enforceable rules to ensure that there is a free and open Internet, including transparency, no blocking, and anti-discrimination rules.”

Comcast submitted a 71-page filing to the FCC in which Senior VP of Regulatory Affairs Kathryn Zachem laid out the reasons for the company’s support. The rules are so good, Comcast said, that it might be wise to apply them to cellular carriers as well as fixed Internet providers.

Comcast also supports what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal doesn’t do. For example, the proposal would not reclassify broadband Internet as a common carrier service that would be subject to utility-style regulation, and the proposal would not regulate interconnection deals, such as the one in which Comcast charges Netflix for a direct connection to its network.

Comcast's support of the FCC also seems to be part of its plan to win approval of its acquisition of Time Warner Cable (TWC).

David Cohen probably has a pair of designer knee pads and his own linens in the Lincoln Bedroom.

Man I love it when you get in a lather over something

You aren't usually a TRUE BELIEVER on much but on this you're all in- and you seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject

If all the government wants to do with this regulation is bring super bandwidth and speed to the masses like some modern day Henry Ford, then I'm all for it

But there are other entities that seem to want the government hammer for this nail also- your allies if you will...

The first ones that come to mind are the NPC and DoJ. You make strange bedfellows, Clitz.

There's fine print here, and I wonder whether we need legislation that injects the government into the Internet, or if there are not already antitrust laws on the books that could be applied here that limit government involvement outside of prosecuting cases against Comcast an others for predatory practices?

[kalm]

What's $18.5 million when they really want a $45 BILLION merger with Time Warner to go through?

Comcast loves the FCC’s net neutrality rules, wants limits on “fast lanes”



David Cohen probably has a pair of designer knee pads and his own linens in the Lincoln Bedroom.

Wait WHat..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Comcast also supports what FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal doesn’t do. For example, the proposal would not reclassify broadband Internet as a common carrier service that would be subject to utility-style regulation, and the proposal would not regulate interconnection deals, such as the one in which Comcast charges Netflix for a direct connection to its network."


Well f***k me...
How does the federal Government screw everything up it touches..!!!
Jeezus titty fucking christ

Our Government is simply UP FOR SALE to the highest bidder and Wheeler is the middle man

Baldy's article is from July 2014. The new FCC ruling does indeed reclassify broadband as a utility and regulates fast lanes and interconnection deals. My boys are happy that xbox won't be slowing down.

Baldy fail.

[Chizzang]

Man I love it when you get in a lather over something

You aren't usually a TRUE BELIEVER on much but on this you're all in- and you seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject

If all the government wants to do with this regulation is bring super bandwidth and speed to the masses like some modern day Henry Ford, then I'm all for it

But there are other entities that seem to want the government hammer for this nail also- your allies if you will...

The first ones that come to mind are the NPC and DoJ. You make strange bedfellows, Clitz.

There's fine print here, and I wonder whether we need legislation that injects the government into the Internet, or if there are not already antitrust laws on the books that could be applied here that limit government involvement outside of prosecuting cases against Comcast an others for predatory practices?

You know I worked for a small European Tech company called Belgian America Radio Corp. Network (BARCONET)
and we were purchased by Scientific Atlanta and then Scientific Atlanta was purchased by Cisco...

I watched from a front row seat - this entire debacle - while it was unfolding
I have opinions about it because I lived it

When the Gubmn't was handing out free money to build this thing and companies were using that money to buy their competition monopolize their corner and pocketing the rest - its a sad sad situation...

See:
Cisco & Comcast

[CID1990]

Man I love it when you get in a lather over something

You aren't usually a TRUE BELIEVER on much but on this you're all in- and you seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject

If all the government wants to do with this regulation is bring super bandwidth and speed to the masses like some modern day Henry Ford, then I'm all for it

But there are other entities that seem to want the government hammer for this nail also- your allies if you will...

The first ones that come to mind are the NPC and DoJ. You make strange bedfellows, Clitz.

There's fine print here, and I wonder whether we need legislation that injects the government into the Internet, or if there are not already antitrust laws on the books that could be applied here that limit government involvement outside of prosecuting cases against Comcast an others for predatory practices?

You know I worked for a small European Tech company called Belgian America Radio Corp. Network (BARCONET)
and we were purchased by Scientific Atlanta and then Scientific Atlanta was purchased by Cisco...

I watched from a front row seat - this entire debacle - while it was unfolding
I have opinions about it because I lived it

When the Gubmn't was handing out free money to build this thing and companies were using that money to buy their competition monopolize their corner and pocketing the rest - its a sad sad situation...

See:
Cisco & Comcast

OK-

what youre talking about is some pretty cut and dried monopolistic behavior- or at least an attempt at it.

We busted up Ma Bell AT&T with existing antitrust laws and it worked pretty well... so again I wonder- why do we need a new law that guarantees constant government control? Why not use DoJ Antitrust division and bring the suit against Comcast and the very few others who are manipulating speeds and prices?

[kalm]

You know I worked for a small European Tech company called Belgian America Radio Corp. Network (BARCONET)
and we were purchased by Scientific Atlanta and then Scientific Atlanta was purchased by Cisco...

I watched from a front row seat - this entire debacle - while it was unfolding
I have opinions about it because I lived it

When the Gubmn't was handing out free money to build this thing and companies were using that money to buy their competition monopolize their corner and pocketing the rest - its a sad sad situation...

See:
Cisco & Comcast

OK-

what youre talking about is some pretty cut and dried monopolistic behavior- or at least an attempt at it.

We busted up Ma Bell AT&T with existing antitrust laws and it worked pretty well... so again I wonder- why do we need a new law that guarantees constant government control? Why not use DoJ Antitrust division and bring the suit against Comcast and the very few others who are manipulating speeds and prices?

That's a great question.

[Chizzang]

You know I worked for a small European Tech company called Belgian America Radio Corp. Network (BARCONET)
and we were purchased by Scientific Atlanta and then Scientific Atlanta was purchased by Cisco...

I watched from a front row seat - this entire debacle - while it was unfolding
I have opinions about it because I lived it

When the Gubmn't was handing out free money to build this thing and companies were using that money to buy their competition monopolize their corner and pocketing the rest - its a sad sad situation...

See:
Cisco & Comcast

OK-

what youre talking about is some pretty cut and dried monopolistic behavior- or at least an attempt at it.

We busted up Ma Bell AT&T with existing antitrust laws and it worked pretty well... so again I wonder- why do we need a new law that guarantees constant government control? Why not use DoJ Antitrust division and bring the suit against Comcast and the very few others who are manipulating speeds and prices?

Indeed ^ Why not..?
And when this was all going down - why go after Microsoft for the very same thing?
Taking Microsoft to Antitrust - all the while heavily funding and supporting the exact same behavior
Behavior that you are holding one company accountable for in court - and behind the curtain paying another

These are very good questions CID, indeed, Why?

HINT:
I already know the answer

http://gizmodo.com/how-much-money-big-c ... 1657002442" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summar ... D000000461" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)
Greg Walden (R-Ore.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)

They have a history of accepting campaign donations from Comcast while simultaneously creating huge obstructions for legislation that would get us back what we paid for...

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign donations for members of Congress, Upton has received $466,000 from cable companies and the telecom lobby during his 18-year congressional career. Walden has received $316,000 during his 16 years in office, and Thune has received $76,000 over the course of 17 years.

http://www.freepress.net/blog/2015/02/0 ... neutrality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CID1990]

OK-

what youre talking about is some pretty cut and dried monopolistic behavior- or at least an attempt at it.

We busted up Ma Bell AT&T with existing antitrust laws and it worked pretty well... so again I wonder- why do we need a new law that guarantees constant government control? Why not use DoJ Antitrust division and bring the suit against Comcast and the very few others who are manipulating speeds and prices?

Indeed ^ Why not..?
And when this was all going down - why go after Microsoft for the very same thing?
Taking Microsoft to Antitrust - all the while heavily funding and supporting the exact same behavior
Behavior that you are holding one company accountable for in court - and behind the curtain paying another

These are very good questions CID, indeed, Why?

HINT:
I already know the answer

http://gizmodo.com/how-much-money-big-c ... 1657002442" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summar ... D000000461" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)
Greg Walden (R-Ore.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)

They have a history of accepting campaign donations from Comcast while simultaneously creating huge obstructions for legislation that would get us back what we paid for...

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign donations for members of Congress, Upton has received $466,000 from cable companies and the telecom lobby during his 18-year congressional career. Walden has received $316,000 during his 16 years in office, and Thune has received $76,000 over the course of 17 years.

http://www.freepress.net/blog/2015/02/0 ... neutrality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wait

I know corporate money buys influence in DC - but three dudes? Plus, DoJ is a cabinet level department and independent of Congress in terms of their ability to bring suit.

I get the money angle, but blaming campaign contributions to three congressmen - and one of them took 76k over seventeen years (I could have wrote those checks and got a bridge named after me?).... that's a LOT of influence for some chump cha.ge right there

It would be better to take a look at who were the ACS during all of this- see what THEIR connections to the service providers were, but when it comes to antitrust cases, pointing at campaign contributions to minority members of Congress is weak sauce. DoJ could have brought the suit at any time and there would have been nothing they could do about it.... and the president gets to reap the political popularity for making Clitz's internet run at warp speed.

All that aside, I think a new law... this one especially... is a bad idea chock full of unintended consequences ( which is synonymous with governnent)

[Baldy]

Indeed ^ Why not..?
And when this was all going down - why go after Microsoft for the very same thing?
Taking Microsoft to Antitrust - all the while heavily funding and supporting the exact same behavior
Behavior that you are holding one company accountable for in court - and behind the curtain paying another

These are very good questions CID, indeed, Why?

HINT:
I already know the answer

http://gizmodo.com/how-much-money-big-c ... 1657002442" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summar ... D000000461" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)
Greg Walden (R-Ore.)
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)

They have a history of accepting campaign donations from Comcast while simultaneously creating huge obstructions for legislation that would get us back what we paid for...

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign donations for members of Congress, Upton has received $466,000 from cable companies and the telecom lobby during his 18-year congressional career. Walden has received $316,000 during his 16 years in office, and Thune has received $76,000 over the course of 17 years.

http://www.freepress.net/blog/2015/02/0 ... neutrality" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wait

I know corporate money buys influence in DC - but three dudes? Plus, DoJ is a cabinet level department and independent of Congress in terms of their ability to bring suit.

I get the money angle, but blaming campaign contributions to three congressmen - and one of them took 76k over seventeen years (I could have wrote those checks and got a bridge named after me?).... that's a LOT of influence for some chump cha.ge right there

It would be better to take a look at who were the ACS during all of this- see what THEIR connections to the service providers were, but when it comes to antitrust cases, pointing at campaign contributions to minority members of Congress is weak sauce. DoJ could have brought the suit at any time and there would have been nothing they could do about it.... and the president gets to reap the political popularity for making Clitz's internet run at warp speed.

All that aside, I think a new law... this one especially... is a bad idea chock full of unintended consequences ( which is synonymous with governnent)

Cid, you know the answer, but I doubt Cleets will admit it.

Comcast donated $325,000+ to the Obama reelection fund in 2012 alone (not counting what super bundler David Cohen did personally). The DoJ (Holder) might be independent of Congress, but he is/was Obama's puppet and would never allow anti-trust litigation against Comcast. Not in a million years.