FCC Moves To Kill Net Neutrality — Now What?

[tang0]

I'm copying and pasting what is actually going on, as a lot of people seem to be freaking out.

They are only repealing Obama era regulations that started in 2015, so basically the internet in the US is going back to what it was before 2015.

Title II / Common Carrier / "Net Neutrality" = internet becomes gov't utility = Obamanet = not good
FTC Regulation = no monopolies, no price-fixing, no unfair stuff = good
Open Internet Rules / Bright Line Rules = no throttling, no blocking, no paid-priority = very good

The reason Obama's 2015 Net Neutrality is bad isn't because it includes the Open Internet Rules (created in 2005), but because it includes the Title II Utility Classification of the internet. AND- get this- the Open Internet Rules are only included provisionally, UNDER Title II. This basically says "hey all ur free speech is only allowed if big gov't gets to turn the internet into its utility". Umm what? 2015 Net Neutrality was advertised as being equal to the Open Internet Rules, but Open Internet had already been an FCC policy since 2005. Obama pressured the FCC to repackage the 2010 Open Internet Order under a Title II Utility Classification of the internet.

No throttling. FCC release, p.83

Many of the largest ISPs (Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Cox, Frontier, etc.) have committed in this proceeding not to block or throttle legal content.507 These commitments can be enforced by the FTC under Section 5, protecting consumers without imposing public-utility regulation on ISPs.508

The FTC’s unfair-and-deceptive-practices authority “prohibits companies from selling consumers one product or service but providing them something different,” which makes voluntary commitments enforceable.502 The FTC also requires the “disclos[ur]e [of] material information if not disclosing it would mislead the consumer,” so if an ISP “failed to disclose blocking, throttling, or other practices that would matter to a reasonable consumer, the FTC’s deception authority would apply.”

Section 1 of the Sherman Act bars contracts, combinations, or conspiracies in restraint of trade, making anticompetitive arrangements illegal. If ISPs reached agreements to unfairly block, throttle, or discriminate against Internet conduct or applications, these agreements would be per seillegal under the antitrust laws.518

If an ISP that also sells video services degrades the speed or quality of competing “Over the Top” video services (such as Netflix),526 that conduct could be challenged as anticompetitive foreclosure.

Obama attempted to create a safe space on the internet

We also conclude that the Commission should have been cautioned against reclassifying broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service in 2015 because doing so involved “laying claim to extravagant statutory power over the national economy ..."

TLDR:

If ISPs collectively conspire to paywall a content-provider, they are subject to FTC anti-trust penetration.

FCC is enforcing against throttling, censorship, restriction, etc. by invoking consumer protection and anti-trust laws (via FTC).

 

[Werewolf]

Im not sure about the big news here, Can someone explain in simple terms what this means for users like me?

Basically that ISP's can "request" that companies like Netflix, Amazon, this forum pay them money or have their traffic relegated to the "standard" (throttled) speeds.

And when I say request, I mean request in the same way the mafia suggest you might want to take out their insurance.

 

[tang0]

Basically that ISP's can "request" that companies like Netflix, Amazon, this forum pay them money or have their traffic relegated to the "standard" (throttled) speeds.

And when I say request, I mean request in the same way the mafia suggest you might want to take out their insurance.

False

No paid-Prioritization is part of the FCC Bright-Line / Open Internet Rules, which also include:

No Throttling
No monopolies
No collusion
No consumer abuse
No unfair business practice

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

 

[Yaayuh!]

False

No paid-Prioritization is part of the FCC Bright-Line / Open Internet Rules, which also include:

No Throttling
No monopolies
No collusion
No consumer abuse
No unfair business practice

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

The FCC will no longer regulate ISPs, the FTC will. The FTC will be making sure that the ISPs disclose what they are doing, not stop them from doing.

 

[tang0]

True, but the repeal of FCC Bright Line does not inhibit the FTC from enforcing an open internet

But if ISPs decide to try and go this route and try and throttle sites etc, they'll be combated with FTC anti-monopoly regulations, which means increased competition, and more ISP choices for customers that will drive price down and quality up.

 

[Craterloads]

Snip

Did you just copy and paste that from r/the_donald in a serious manner? Lol I’m sure it’s a fair and balanced account from a alt right fan club dedicated to trump.

 

[LabR@t]

Don't worry Disney will own in the internet in 5 years

 

[beachBOYken]

Reddit and Imgur are about to explode.

Looking forward to what Angry Joe has to say.

 

[Raumarik]

China have state sponsored censorship, the USA now have corporate sponsored censorship. Different governments, same policy. Corporations will now use financial levers to push people to content they want them to see.

If there is a sniff of this happening in the UK we have to do far more than what the Americans did do ensure it doesn't happen here.

 

[B&W]

China have state sponsored censorship, the USA now have corporate sponsored censorship. Different governments, same policy. Corporations will now use financial levers to push people to content they want them to see.

If there is a sniff of this happening in the UK we have to do far more than what the Americans did do ensure it doesn't happen here.

People will moan and then accept it as usual. Not saying it's right but it is what it is.

 

[timmeh]

Snip

Back to before 2015 when Comcast was throttling Netflix and demanding payment from Netflix to stop it? Yay, I can't wait.

 

[Pixel]

Wonder how long before we follow suit.

I give it a week. I also predict that they'll shoehorn the old "protecting the children" excuse in there somewhere, they love that one.

 

[Mynight]

I give it a week. I also predict that they'll shoehorn the old "protecting the children" excuse in there somewhere, they love that one.

Well we can't have them paedoterrorphiles hiding anywhere can we...

 

[gronf]

We had better speeds available to a lot of people back in 2002 than many in the US get now!

Exactly. Large swathes of the American Mid West, North West and the West coast are lucky if they even get the rubbish dial up speeds we used to have 2002. Not just talking about isolated houses either, a very large proportion of major US towns are still in this situation.

While I do agree that there are many areas in the US where internet is lacking, I'd say you guys are overstating it.

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/about/...f-the-internet-connectivity-visualization.jsp
https://www.fastmetrics.com/internet-connection-speed-by-country.php

Average speed for the US: 18Mbps
Average speed for the UK: 16Mbps

For a job, I'm currently living in Oklahoma which is just above Texas and in both the "Bible Belt" and the Midwest-ish. I pay $35 (£26) for 50Mbps, and I do get that speed rather than "up to" 50Mbps. I can choose between three ISPs, two of which offer 100Mbps, and one of them has recently introduced 1000Mbps for $80 (£60).

But I do live <10 miles from a city (Oklahoma City) with 1.3m population, and if I go out 50+ miles in any direction then I'll indeed encounter poor speeds and only 1-2 ISPs here and there. It's no doubt worse in Alabama, Mississippi, Wyoming, etc. But overall things are improving from what I see, as I do know one of my available ISPs are slowly expanding out to some of the small towns where there wasn't any/much choice previously.

 

[FTM]

at least in the uk EU law would probably prevent this and we seem much more sensible ...oh wait a minute!!!

 

[Combat squirrel]

at least in the uk EU law would probably prevent this and we seem much more sensible ...oh wait a minute!!!

This tbh.

The whole eu thing is simply the 1% of this country wanting as much freedom as their American friends to screw everyone over.

Also loosing net naturality is yet another blow to freedoms and free speech....the net will now be used how a government wants you to use it.....we drift ever more to a totalitarian world....it's just a shame so few people are getting this is what's slowly happening....it's the nature of human civilisations, you only need to look at every advanced society in history and see how they all failed eventually.

 

[cu3ed]

True, but the repeal of FCC Bright Line does not inhibit the FTC from enforcing an open internet

But if ISPs decide to try and go this route and try and throttle sites etc, they'll be combated with FTC anti-monopoly regulations, which means increased competition, and more ISP choices for customers that will drive price down and quality up.

No they wont, and thats what everyone knows fine well.
Cant blieve you actually blieve any of that, FTC are bought and paid for like the inital vote was.
What choice of ISPs?...mot areas in the US only are given one ISP to use, they big suppliers broke up who got what. Again, the FTC said and did nothing on that ( blocking Google Fibre from many states etc).

 

[ubersonic]

While I do agree that there are many areas in the US where internet is lacking, I'd say you guys are overstating it.

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/about/...f-the-internet-connectivity-visualization.jsp
https://www.fastmetrics.com/internet-connection-speed-by-country.php

Average speed for the US: 18Mbps
Average speed for the UK: 16Mbps

The piece to the puzzle you're missing with those geographical averages, is that most people in the UK live in the 16Mbps+ areas, whereas most people in the US live in the <=18Mbps areas.

 

[gronf]

The piece to the puzzle you're missing with those geographical averages, is that most people in the UK live in the 16Mbps+ areas, whereas most people in the US live in the <=18Mbps areas.

Yeah, was feebly using that + my personal situation (AKA relatively meaningless). On the latter, it's been years since I've been in the UK - how are prices? Is it possible to get solid 50Mbps for £26 (or less) like I do in the US? What about 1000Mbps (gigabit) for £60 or less?

 

[ubersonic]

it's been years since I've been in the UK - how are prices? Is it possible to get solid 50Mbps for £26 (or less) like I do in the US? What about 1000Mbps (gigabit) for £60 or less?

50Mb will run you £27-£39 depending on the area, Gigabit isn't widely available yet so you're looking at 300Mb for £42 a month in the high end.