You Canadians have to make it an issue.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
CONFIRMED: FCC Chariman will seek reclassification using Title II
- Thread starter Herpes Reasons
- Start date
- Status
You Canadians have to make it an issue.
Definitely helps to have a concentration of internet-based companies here in the U.S. to provide additional pressure.
Maninthemirror
Banned
.
Where does it say that??
Well, if you reclassify it as a utility ie: electric or gas, then wouldn't your monthly internet payment be based on use? So metered pricing?
Jackben
bitch I'm taking calls.
Can we not start trotting out the "But this is what ISPs might do in response" FUD against reclassification? "Well who knows what ISPs will do if this goes through, let's just do nothing and continue to let them fuck everyone sans lubrication."
ISPs might do anything in the future and we can face that challenge when we come to it. What this is about is what they are both doing and trying to do right now being scummy and extremely anti-consumer. Which is why we need Title II reclassification.
ISPs might do anything in the future and we can face that challenge when we come to it. What this is about is what they are both doing and trying to do right now being scummy and extremely anti-consumer. Which is why we need Title II reclassification.
Bull. You're crazy if you think social issues like abortion, marriage equality, climate change, immigration, and now to a lesser degree--net neutrality--will take a backseat in the general election for millenials.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I believe the payments being based on use has something to do with the amount of wear & tear sustained usage can incur, as well as the fact there is a considerable cost to creating electricity or gas, and that gas and/or water can have a scarcity of supply.
I don't think any of those things apply to internet, really.
Back when people had land-lines, your phone bill didn't go up if you made a ton of local calls. Then again, long-distance bills used to be a motherfucker.
But as Jackben just pointed out: worrying about what ISPs might do in response seems like.. not quite putting the cart before the horse, but not even getting a cart because you're afraid someone might tip it over.
A utility doesn't inherently imply that, not to mention 'bandwidth' isn't a physical object like water or gas, nor have direct production costs like electricity.
That said, most internet is metered in a meta sense already. You have tiers for different bandwidth levels and/or data cap limits. I wouldn't assume this move automatically means metering in the conventional sense.
Hatty
Member
it pretty much is in some states
eBay Huckster
Member
Oh my God why did I start reading them
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
Hellsing321
Member
It'd be easier and cause less Human misery if the U.S. just invaded Canada and made it the 51st state.
You can start right now.
Interesting that Wheeler mentions some changes to Title II, but doesn't expound on them.
All the conservatives I've argued with about pushing ISPs to Title II use the "innovation ROI" argument as the main reason not to. Sounds like Wheeler has something up his sleeve to cut that complaint off at the pass.
All the conservatives I've argued with about pushing ISPs to Title II use the "innovation ROI" argument as the main reason not to. Sounds like Wheeler has something up his sleeve to cut that complaint off at the pass.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
" because heavy regulation of the Internet will create uncertainty and chill investment among the many players"
Lol, what investments? Freaking Google comes out with their first internet company and its what, 5 times faster? They CHOSE this happening via their bullshit. Cry them tears or give us something better than what the FCC chairman is offering.
Lol, what investments? Freaking Google comes out with their first internet company and its what, 5 times faster? They CHOSE this happening via their bullshit. Cry them tears or give us something better than what the FCC chairman is offering.
I certainly wouldn't expect a first attempt at reclassification to solve everything (I'm surprised it plans to solve anything, honestly), but I would have liked to have seen far more. There are a lot of fundamental issues with broadband in America, and throttling is only one of them. My biggest concern is that the Title II reclassification will go through, the providers will grumble and try to sue and not get anywhere, and then the powers that be will declare the problem 'solved' and not attempt to push the issue any further.
I really, really hope to be proven wrong here, but government agencies have a history of doing the bare minimum possible to solve a problem, in a way that generally fails to solve the problem (like the ACA, which while it's a hell of a lot better than what we had, is a far cry from the universal, single-payer system that we really need). I guess I'll take what we can get though.
This is a technical limitation. Verizon does not personally throttle in this instance unlike where they purposely throttle Netflix.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
They're literally engaging in a racket.
"It be a shame if anything happens to your internet"
Perfect. Anytime the telecom industry is mad, it means consumers won.
Yup, as a general rule, I think this is true.
That's because of all the public outcry after announcing his old plan. Protesters were blocking the driveway of his house, the Dem base was in an uproar at Obama about it, so Obama gave Wheeler some "recommendations."
This and the SOPA episode a few years back prove that grass roots activism can completely change the politics of an issue if people are engaged in the process beyond just voting.
The funny thing is that if the current "players" don't want to play by the new rules, there will be other players willing to play. There is still money on the table to be made, but now you will most likely not be allow to gouge your customers.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
No one knows,
this is just giving the FCC the authority to regulate. They haven't announced any regulations yet and likely wont for a while. And I think things like T-mobile's service is a bit safer than Comcast's since it allows others service and doesn't penalize others technically. And they are going to be more lenient to mobile for now.
FCC Fact sheet released.
Includes more details.
https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-wheeler-proposes-new-rules-protecting-open-internet
A lot of ISPs and wireless carriers are going to be pissed.
From the above document:
Includes more details.
https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-wheeler-proposes-new-rules-protecting-open-internet
A lot of ISPs and wireless carriers are going to be pissed.
From the above document:
Good, that means the FCC is doing the right thing.
Cow Mengde
Banned
FCC don't fail me now!
BlackGoku03
Member
If this is enacted, how will the FCC ensure it's being enforced? What will they do to check the last mile of the ISPs?
Haint
Member
Most of the South East is already on metered pricing. Comcast has the largest SE Metros on 300GB caps with $10/50GB overages. AT&T caps at 150GB stand alone or 250GB with Uverse with $10/50GB overages. Many smaller companies (e.g. Mediacom Cable) also have hard caps with overages.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Read that sentence again, Dubs.
Compare that to how we felt a year and some change ago.
Surreal isn't it?
Fines. Don't get caught.
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
You have to look at all of the internet issues collectively.
It's not about Net Neutrality as much as it's the fact that the internet as become over the past decade a fundamental core part of society to function in the Western World, but we don't treat it as such with regards to our laws, rules, and regulations like we do with say gas or electricity.
Yeah there are some minuses that come with this (I'm assuming that you're correct, those will go bye bye), but at the same time without Comcast getting to prop up it's own VOD unfairly against competitors, they actually have to provide a decent service to compete fairly, and newcomers will also be able to more easily shake things up.
So you lose a 'free' option that will stagnate over time as they weed out competitors through unfair pricing, but you win a competetive climate where a few years down the line you have a better overall service due to companies actually working to win you as a customer.
Fines. How will they find out? You and me. We can complain and the FCC will investigate.
Damerman
Member
just this morning I was asking if there was hope for the human race... even if we would measure this hope in scientific notation.
meanspartan
Member
A lawsuit from Verizon is what started all this, who gives a shit. They were so dumb. Net Neutrality existed, but in it's weakest possible form. They got greedy and wanted even weak NN gone and sued.
This is the result.
Let them sue, the FCC is well within their authority to reclassify. The Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit practically suggested reclassification in Verizon v. FCC when they knocked down the 2010 rules.
titiklabingapat
Member
Thank you Obama. Seriously, this is a direct result of Obama being the commander in chief.
I think it would affect it. It's not hard to classify what tmo is doing as paid prioritization.
Dude, I know it's absolutely bonkers. Even a few months ago this was unthinkable. I was at tech week back in October and there was a talk by three activists trying to get this done and I imagine they're all drowning in champagne right now. From our discussion I don't think they ever saw this coming.
I read that as the FCC is not going to dictate how telecom's bill their customers, not that they are prohibiting those things. At least within the scope of this order, anyway.
Chaotic-Strike
Banned
I'll start celebrating if this makes it through court.
Needless to say though this is a good first step.
Needless to say though this is a good first step.
- Status