Court Backs Rules Treating Internet as Utility, Not Luxury

[Deuce]

The ISP is not responsible to build anything, why would you say that? If they decide that it's the best course of action to not build, then that's that. If Netflix needs more bandwidth, why is it the ISP's problem and cost to build it for them? And if they do build it, what is wrong with charging for using that bandwidth?

If they well me a 10mbps line they are responsible for actually making an effort to deliver 10mbps, actually.

 

[natsb]

It would appear that you only started using the internet in 2014, or first became aware of the concept of net neutrality in 2014. Regardless of your limited experience with the internet, the rest of us have had net neutrality since the beginning of the internet.

Okay, I'll byte. What was the timeline? When did the FCC publish the current rules? When did they publish their first and second attempts? I need the education.

I gave specific dates. I will trust you to do the same. I should be easy to prove me wrong; go ahead...

Or... just post another childish retort. You are the one that has to face your own embarrassment someday.

 

[Carjosse]

Now that takes a sizable set of testosterone producing organs. You post a response proving that you know nothing of the inside workings of the Internet, then use that misinformation to call someone a liar. Call me impressed.

The Internet has always been tiered. Even since its inception; I was there. It has always been a pay for use service, and it has always offered pay for prioritization.

Netflix pays extra because they need high levels of bandwidth offered by being connected directly to the core Internet with multiple access points. That cannot be accomplished through an edge provider like Comcast. Certainly, you don't expect someone that is using petabytes of data at multiple access points to the core to pay the same fee as someone using only megabytes at a single access point on the edge?

That is not what net neutrality is about, what net neutrality means is that Comcast cannot purposefully slow down the delivery of Netflix's content. See my post above for an example. YOu pay for the connection you want and should be able to do with it what you please, not have to pay an extra fee to have Netflix content streamed to you at your full connection speed.

 

[Deuce]

Okay, I'll byte. What was the timeline? When did the FCC publish the current rules? When did they publish their first and second attempts? I need the education.

I gave specific dates. I will trust you to do the same. I should be easy to prove me wrong; go ahead...

Or... just post another childish retort. You are the one that has to face your own embarrassment someday.

I told you before:

Net neutrality was a de facto standard since the internet formed, it just wasn't codified until recently. Understand now? Going to stop spamming this nonsense?

 

[natsb]

If they well me a 10mbps line they are responsible for actually making an effort to deliver 10mbps, actually.

Nope. Read your terms and conditions with your provider. They are only required to try with an honest effort. If they don't, and can explain why, then you are out of luck.

 

[natsb]

I told you before:

Net neutrality was a de facto standard since the internet formed, it just wasn't codified until recently. Understand now? Going to stop spamming this nonsense?

Just as I expected. Another childish retort. You can say something over and over, but that will never make it true if it is false. Feel free to accept reality whenever you are ready.

 

[Carjosse]

The ISP is not responsible to build anything, why would you say that? If they decide that it's the best course of action to not build, then that's that. If Netflix needs more bandwidth, why is it the ISP's problem and cost to build it for them? And if they do build it, what is wrong with charging for using that bandwidth?

The ISP is responsible for building their infrastructure for the same reason that the power company is responsible for building power plants and putting up power lines. It is called meeting market demand. How would you feel if your power company decided that when their plant reaches capacity they are just going to cut your power in half and have a permanent brown out? Of course Netflix should pay for the service and their wnn private infrastructure.

 

[Deuce]

Nope. Read your terms and conditions with your provider. They are only required to try with an honest effort. If they don't, and can explain why, then you are out of luck.

Read more carefully

 

[Deuce]

Just as I expected. Another childish retort. You can say something over and over, but that will never make it true if it is false. Feel free to accept reality whenever you are ready.

:shrug: believe what you like.

 

[beerftw]

It's not a necessity. Tell me what you need to do that you can ONLY do on the Internet.

Everything from job searches to paying bills is moving online, to even registering your vehicle. I guess it is not a necessity if you live in the woods and never interact with society.

Back in 09 and earlier, I was still paying my electric bill in person, or through the mail, because they would not do it any other way. Since then nearly everyone uses online payments. Nearly all job searches require the internet, even if you o to an unemployment office they use the internet.

Even in my job the best tech manuals are no longer available on paper, and require internet to view them.

 

[Anthony60]

The ISP is responsible for building their infrastructure for the same reason that the power company is responsible for building power plants and putting up power lines. It is called meeting market demand. How would you feel if your power company decided that when their plant reaches capacity they are just going to cut your power in half and have a permanent brown out? Of course Netflix should pay for the service and their wnn private infrastructure.

No, not the same. Power companies are a public utility, their job is to supply power to the public as needed. If an ISP doesn't have coverage in an area, there is no obligation for them to provide it. When I was growing up, almost all the towns around us had cable TV, our town didn't get it for a good 10 years later. We had power the entire time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cardinal]

Okay, I'll byte. What was the timeline? When did the FCC publish the current rules? When did they publish their first and second attempts? I need the education.

I gave specific dates. I will trust you to do the same. I should be easy to prove me wrong; go ahead...

Or... just post another childish retort. You are the one that has to face your own embarrassment someday.

The timeline of what? The internet? That came into being in a form most of us would consider recognizable in the early 1990's. Although the principles of net neutrality were in place since then, that term was created in 2003. In 2008 the FCC sanctioned Comcast for preventing its users for using peer-to-peer downloading of large files. A court determined that the FCC overstepped its authority, setting the precedent that isp's had the leeway to throttle (or prevent) consumers based on their specific internet use. However, the court made it clear that it was only the overstepping of the authority that was the issue, but that it supported the concept of an open internet entirely. Therefore in order to maintain the net neutrality everybody had enjoyed since between roughly 1990 and 1993, the FCC responded by issuing an "open internet" order, which was a temporary fix and put the issue into limbo. It did work, however, as Verizon admitted the open order was the only thing preventing them from charging websites for reaching Verizon subscribers. In 2014 the FCC moved to solidify its order to keep the internet open, but it was only at the end of 2014 that the idea of designating the internet as a title II utility gained steam, and in the middle of 2015 the FCC published the open internet order, which was upheld by the DC circuit court despite resistance by isps.

 

[Deuce]

No, not the same. Power companies are a public utility, their job is to supply power to the public as needed. If an ISP doesn't have coverage in an area, there is no obligation for them to provide it. When I was growing up, almost all the towns around us had cable TV, our town didn't get it for a good 10 years later. We had power the entire time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is there a particularly compelling reason last-mile internet service shouldn't be treated as a utility?

 

[Carjosse]

No, not the same. Power companies are a public utility, their job is to supply power to the public as needed. If an ISP doesn't have coverage in an area, there is no obligation for them to provide it. When I was growing up, almost all the towns around us had cable TV, our town didn't get it for a good 10 years later. We had power the entire time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is internet not a utility? It is not 1974, the internet is required to do almost everything nowadays. Now it is actually considered legally a utility.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It was long ago determined that you have no idea what net neutrality is. You also told me that if I didn't like my ISP, I could just "get wi-fi."

But but but but then if you got Wifi you might be subjected to psychotronic weapons harassment because your WiFi would synchronize with HAARP.

 

[Anthony60]

Is there a particularly compelling reason last-mile internet service shouldn't be treated as a utility?

Why should it be? Maybe in some cases, but it's always a good idea to keep the federal government out of it unless absolutely necessary.

 

[Anthony60]

Everything from job searches to paying bills is moving online, to even registering your vehicle. I guess it is not a necessity if you live in the woods and never interact with society.

You know, all these things can be easily done without internet.
Another reason that internet should not be treated as a utility, just get a smartphone. Boom, you have all the internet you need without the ironfist of government sticking their unwelcome nose in it.

 

[Cardinal]

You know, all these things can be easily done without internet.
Another reason that internet should not be treated as a utility, just get a smartphone. Boom, you have all the internet you need without the ironfist of government sticking their unwelcome nose in it.

Perhaps we could just go online without the internet by using wifi or bluetooth instead?

 

[Deuce]

Why should it be? Maybe in some cases, but it's always a good idea to keep the federal government out of it unless absolutely necessary.

Why should electricity be considered a utility?

 

[Anthony60]

Perhaps we could just go online without the internet by using wifi or bluetooth instead?

Yeah, go online to your router's homepage, that should be fun.

 

[Anthony60]

Why should electricity be considered a utility?

You could probably look it up. It is a strong force of nature, if that helps you.

 

[Deuce]

You could probably look it up. It is a strong force of nature, if that helps you.

That's an argument for making gravity a utility also. Clearly "part of nature" isn't the reason for public utility legislation.

I could look it up, or just give my own opinion. But that's not the point. The point is to discover what your standard is for accepting certain services as a public utility.

maybe you're just trying to buy time to come up with a reason that doesn't end up including internet access.

 

[poweRob]

Why should electricity be considered a utility?

Or natural gas line companies?

 

[poweRob]

You could probably look it up. It is a strong force of nature, if that helps you.

IYO, what qualifies something to be a utility?

 

[Anthony60]

That's an argument for making gravity a utility also. Clearly "part of nature" isn't the reason for public utility legislation.

Um, right. Gravity is a weak force of nature. Maybe soon the government will declare gravity a utility and regulate it. We can only hope.

I could look it up, or just give my own opinion. But that's not the point. The point is to discover what your standard is for accepting certain services as a public utility.

Well, I accept electrical service as a public utility. It's something that, with few exceptions, all homes need. Obviously, internet access is no where near the necessity as electricity or water. Clearly they are on different levels. And it was a true free form of communication among the people. Government does not like that sort of thing, you must know.
They see it as a source of money, power and control. Exactly why we have a Constitution to protect us from government.

And, tell me again (if it's even been said), what was the problem that was so bad that the government needed to swoop in, declare that it has the power to do so, and start throwing down regulations?

And note the word "start", which is what this is. Government will never stop, there will be more and more of this. That's like predicting the sun will rise in the East.

maybe you're just trying to buy time to come up with a reason that doesn't end up including internet access.