FCC - treat all content providers equal.

9 replies
The FCC chairman is moving forward to take a media consolidation approach to governing ISPs.

Essentially this doctrine is to govern internet data under the same doctrine as phone data:

FCC to Regulate Web in Victory for Google Over Comcast, AT&T - BusinessWeek

The decision by Genachowski (FCC Chairman) will let the FCC "ensure consumers are fully protected against blocking or degradation of websites and applications of their choice by broadband providers," said Markham Erickson, executive director of the Open Internet Coalition, in an e-mailed statement.


The coalition, with members including Google, EBay and Amazon, and consumer groups urged Genachowski to use the telephone rules in place of the regulations attacked in the Comcast case.
This seems to be a step toward embracing the philosophies and doctrine expressed in this 2007 interview with the FCC commissioner:

Bill Moyers Journal . Watch & Listen | PBS
#content #equal #fcc #treat
  • Profile picture of the author SageSound
    This is kinda funny. First these guys wanted to distinguish between services based on technical differences between the data sources. Now they want to blur those technical details to say they have a right to allocate resources however they see fit, regardless of the nature of the data.

    A court said the FCC can't tell Comcast what to do about their data, so the FCC took the next logical route -- the fell back to earlier rulings and said, "well, since there's really no technical difference between data bits on the network, we'll extend voice data regulations to embrace all kinds of data transfers.

    So now nobody is happy except large web hosts like Google, eBay, and Amazon (cited in the article). And it's another opportunity for conservative Republicans to accuse yet another rule-making body of ... well ... making rules.

    (I don't get the idea of lawmakers (themselves almost all lawyers) accusing judges of being "activist" through the practice of setting legal precedents. Legal theories only move forward through rulings that set precedents. Yet these same lawmakers seem very happy publishing and voting on reams of laws they've never read, and then mock anybody who says they're stupid laws.)

    -David
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2066118].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Josh Anderson
      Originally Posted by SageSound View Post


      So now nobody is happy except large web hosts like Google, eBay, and Amazon (cited in the article). And it's another opportunity for conservative Republicans to accuse yet another rule-making body of ... well ... making rules.
      1. Political discussions are not allowed on this forum. I was hoping to keep this one out of politics but I know it can be difficult because its closely tied to politics. Please lets just stick to what this means to our businesses online not to politicians and their parties.

      2. I am happy. For now it means that you and I can stay in business without the gatekeepers blocking our content from reaching people who would otherwise want it.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2068255].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bgmacaw
        Originally Posted by Josh Anderson View Post

        1. Political discussions are not allowed on this forum. I was hoping to keep this one out of politics but I know it can be difficult because its closely tied to politics. Please lets just stick to what this means to our businesses online not to politicians and their parties.
        On a topic like this, it's hard to avoid the political connnection. What's odd about this one is that you end up with very liberal and very conservative organizations in favor of the concept while more mainstream ones, unions and conservative think-tanks, are opposed.

        Originally Posted by Josh Anderson View Post

        2. I am happy. For now it means that you and I can stay in business without the gatekeepers blocking our content from reaching people who would otherwise want it.
        What concerns me is that we would be exchanging one gatekeeper, current ISPs like Comcast and AT&T, for another one, namely the government, perhaps operating closely with politically connected corporations like Google. While Comcast, AT&T and such aren't paragons of virtue, I tend to trust them more than I do government bureaucrats and privacy-challenged corporations like Google.

        Basically, the whole problem is a lack of competition for Internet services is because cable and phone services are government controlled monopolies for the most part. If there was actual free market competition, net neutrality wouldn't be needed at all.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2069200].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
          Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

          On a topic like this, it's hard to avoid the political connnection.
          No it isn't. The real question is whether net neutrality is good for the consumer or not. That is an economic question about market forces, and it doesn't matter what politicians may or may not think about it.
          Signature
          "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2069277].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author bgmacaw
            Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

            No it isn't. The real question is whether net neutrality is good for the consumer or not. That is an economic question about market forces, and it doesn't matter what politicians may or may not think about it.
            It does matter, simply because government is already a significant player in the market because it began by imposing a monopoly or near-monopoly on telecommunications industry and heavily regulating it.

            And, if you don't think politicians matter and you're a US citizen, try starting a poker site that features gambling for money. Some consumers may want it but that doesn't matter to the politicians who have donors who want something banned, controlled or highly regulated.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2069410].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
              Originally Posted by bgmacaw View Post

              It does matter
              Not to the question we can discuss here, it doesn't. You are more than welcome to go discuss the question we can't discuss here... somewhere else.

              What part of this do you not understand?
              Signature
              "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2069457].message }}
  • Do a search for net neutrality. Obama is trying to force ISP's to treat all content and websites equal. I believe the Supreme Court just shot it down, or some agency did. Now, they are trying to get around the ruling.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2066399].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
      Originally Posted by Charles Montgomery View Post

      Do a search for net neutrality. Obama...
      ...has not a damn thing to do with it. Tim Wu was writing and testifying on the matter in 2003. What was Obama doing in 2003?

      Running for state Senate, wasn't he?

      "I don't like it! It must be that guy's fault, because I don't like him either!"

      :rolleyes:
      Signature
      "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2066928].message }}

Trending Topics