-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
  1.   (reply to 485)
  2. (for post and file deletion)
/civ/ - Civics
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 254 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2011-01-12 Show/Hide Show All

There's a new /777/ up, it's /gardening/ Check it out. Suggest new /777/s here.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Anonymous 17/12/01(Fri)21:08 No. 485 ID: cfbfa4
485

File 151215889622.gif - (501.52KB , 300x272 , JyrIfuU.gif )

The proposal to turn the Internet into cable television:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1122/DOC-347927A1.pdf

This will be "considered" at the FCC's monthly meeting on December 14th.

It's not what I thought it was. I thought it would be about putting control of the internet into corporate hands, raising the cost of hosting and streaming services nationwide, and forcing the people to pay for access to individual web sites like cable TV channels. It does those things, but its higher priority is undoing things that were done during the previous administration. This is yet another attempt by the current administration to make the American people and the world forget there was ever a black president by erasing any trace of a political legacy that could be attributed to his leadership (even though the president has no authority to direct the FCC). Destroying the internet as we know it will be a side effect.

Specifically, the proposal reverses this order:
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Highlights:

Key to the proposal is defining broadband Internet access as a luxury, not a utility. Specifically, to reclassify broadband ISPs as Title I "information services", reversing their 2015 reclassification as Title II "telecommunications services" and bringing us back to 2014's Verizon Communications Inc. v. FCC, in which it was determined that the FCC relinquished the authority to regulate broadband ISPs blocking or throttling any information being transmitted through their networks by distinguishing them from "common carriers" as was confirmed in 2004's NCTA v. Brand X Internet Services.

The proposal repeats certain words and phrases to an almost hypnotic effect, among them "restore internet freedom" (what it purports to do) and "heavy-handed, utility-style regulation" (in reference to the 2015 order) and "light touch" (to describe it's strategy of regulation-free regulation that will magically prevent the telecom conglomerates from holding the internet for ransom).

It also claims that it will increase ISP transparency, except for all those "burdensome" transparency requirements added in 2015 (like requiring ISPs to disclose packet loss and when their network policies will affect their service) and modify some of the requirements from the 2010 Open Internet Order for "increased" transparency.

Oh, and there will be no further need for the FCC's 2015 conduct rules, because transparency and ...you can personally sue them yourself if you think they are violating the open Internet? No seriously, that's the proposal: individual people can use the existing legal system to defend their access to the Internet, if they can prove their ISP is doing something wrong, and they have the money, and the time, and ...yeah, not likely.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/02(Sat)11:10 No. 486 ID: 27723a

>>485
errata:
NCTA v. Brand X Internet Services happened in 2005, Verizon Communications Inc. v. FCC made use of the resulting Title I classification of broadband ISPs to strip rules preventing blocking and throttling from the FCC's 2010 Open Internet Order.

tl;dr: The FCC started off on the wrong side, the Supreme Court made a distinction between services that provide a communications channel and services that provide communication, while small-time ISPs fought for Title II classification to force cable lines open for licensed use (like telephone lines) and foster competition, only to lose and soon fade into history. The only side sending a consistent message and keeping their shit together have been the telecom conglomerates, who will never, ever stop trying to turn the Internet into cable TV.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/04(Mon)23:42 No. 487 ID: a870df
487

File 151242732362.jpg - (39.22KB , 640x508 , Sometimes More Is Required.jpg )

What's real fun is that under Title I and without common carrier protections, they are liable for all traffic carried over their network.

If you commit a crime using their network, under Title I they're considered to be an accomplice to the crime. This is what common carrier prevented.

But because Verizon's execs want ever-greater forms of compensation, they sued common carrier out of the way, which lead to them being classified as Title II.

Now they're back to Title I without common carrier protections. Which means they're back to being liable for acts committed by customers using their network.

Almost every sketchy business that only accepts bitcoin as payment? ISPs are now liable for them. The act of receiving and transmitting information about the blockchain transaction? Liable.

They wanted it, they got it. And I hope they choke on it.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/09(Sat)10:56 No. 497 ID: a20cea

>>487
>under Title I they're considered to be an accomplice to the crime
They're just going to make that go away with lawyers and money you know.


>>
Anonymous 17/12/10(Sun)13:28 No. 498 ID: 15ac11
498

File 151290893567.jpg - (46.90KB , 600x402 , gop-bonner-party.jpg )

>>497
They'd better beef up their legal departments, since they're accomplices on federal, state, and local levels.

Getting dragged into court in every municipality in the country tends to be a bit of a drain.

But I'm sure that the GOP, being such vocal supporters of state rights, would certainly never stand in their way.



[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]


Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason