FCC to propose new net neutrality rules disallowing data discrimination
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Relevant Posts
- FCC keen on commandeering TV spectrum for wireless broadband (34 days ago - 0 Comments)
- ITC rules Samsung infringed on four Sharp patents, bans import of some LCDs (21 days ago - 3 Comments)
- Samsung develops first chip for US mobile digital TV transmission, provides no release date (43 days ago - 3 Comments)
- Ask Engadget HD: Should the FCC kill DTV for better technology? (16 days ago - 51 Comments)
- Ask Engadget HD: What's the cheapest way to get streaming internet video on my HDTV? (13 days ago - 41 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
xemumanic @ Sep 18th 2009 4:51PM
YES! The FCC has been stepping up in more ways than one as of late.
Everyone's gotta do all they can to get behind this. Contact your congressman, tell your friends/family, whatever.
mjh @ Sep 18th 2009 5:40PM
heads you win tales you loose - sounds like a good idea and the theory is all well and good but ...... the networks will go pop very quickly , like some already havent without this set of new rules
Daman09 @ Sep 18th 2009 5:52PM
FCC, you make me love you more every day.
But you are still in the negative approval area.
Michael @ Sep 18th 2009 7:37PM
I didn't know that 3G was part of the internet I thought that it was the phone network?
squiggleslash @ Sep 18th 2009 8:21PM
Yes, nobody ever uses the high speed Internet features that are part of every 3G standard because high speed Internet is part of the 3G requirements to access the Internet.
minimalist @ Sep 19th 2009 9:55AM
Both are data communications networks that use public rights of way and public airwaves to function. We give cable and cellular companies mini-monopolies to run their businesses. Therefore we (the people) via the FCC have the right to make certain demands of these companies.
Thunderdome @ Sep 18th 2009 7:41PM
I was under the assumption that the reason the FCC is stepping in to regulate the big ISPs is that they're sitting back and racking up the $$$s, not improving on their networks, not lowering prices, and bottlenecking anyone who actually uses their bandwidth. They're effecting all the bad parts of a monopoly, basically. I should also mention that the very types of applications/websites that the ISPs are "gating" are in direct competition with the very ISPs that hamstringing these services. Obviously something has to be done when Comcast/Cox/TWC can cripple Hulu/BT/etc. because they're losing subscribers. These types of practices are the reason we're paying more than the rest of the world for a slower connection and worse performance.
DavidB @ Sep 22nd 2009 9:59AM
If you worked for an ISP you'd know you're full of it. Every ISP is spending BILLIONS of dollars a year upgrading infrastructure. And before you say I'm lying, go look it up for yourself. Comcast alone spent over $16BILLION in the last 4 years for improvments.
squiggleslash @ Sep 18th 2009 8:24PM
Much as I'd like to see application neutrality, I suspect this'll mean the ISPs get more obsessed with charging by the byte, which is just as awful (one DDoS attack on you, and you're paying hundreds of dollars as well as losing your Internet connection.)
thedankone @ Sep 19th 2009 2:46PM
"Cut Loose"? It's the fucking "Wild West" out there. That like telling a fat kid to eat more cake.
Michael R @ Sep 19th 2009 9:41PM
I know for a fact that Princess Cruises' ISP blocks all Skype data when the ships are in U.S. waters and everywhere else for that matter.
mitchelljd @ Sep 22nd 2009 2:33PM
I am all for net neutrality regarding legal apps and applications and data. Skype, Slingbox and etc.
But... I really don't see a problem blocking or significantly slowing illegal filesharing networks which transfer pirated music and movies. sorry, no legal right there to protect that.