• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FCC looks at ways to assert authority over Web access

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,099
Reaction score
33,418
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Link

By Cecilia Kang
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 15, 2010; A22

The Federal Communications Commission is considering aggressive moves to stake out its authority to oversee consumer access to the Internet, as a recent court hearing and industry opposition have cast doubt on its power over Web service providers.
The FCC, which regulates public access to telephone and television services, has been working to claim the same role for the Internet. The stakes are high, as the Obama administration pushes an agenda of open broadband access for all and big corporations work to protect their enormous investments in a new and powerful medium.
"This is a pivotal moment," said Ben Scott, director of policy at the public interest group Free Press. The government wants to treat broadband Internet as a national infrastructure, he said, like phone lines or the broadcast spectrum. But federal regulators are grappling with older policies that do not clearly protect consumers' access to the Web, their privacy or prices of service.
The issue may have reached a turning point last week when a federal appeals court questioned the limits of the FCC's authority in a 2008 case involving Comcast. The agency had ordered the Internet and cable giant to stop blocking subscribers' access to the online file-sharing service BitTorrent. But in an oral hearing last Friday, three judges grilled an FCC lawyer over whether the agency had acted outside the scope of its authority.
The appeals court is still hearing the case, but analysts predict that the FCC will lose and that the ruling could throw all of its efforts to oversee Internet access into question. A loss could undermine the legality of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's push for policies that would prohibit service providers from restricting customers' access to legal Web content -- the concept known as net neutrality -- and throw into doubt the agency's ability to oversee pricing and competition among Internet service providers.
The agency said it will continue to argue that it had the authority to rule against Comcast, but it is making plans to deal with a loss.
Click to expand...
Obama is looking to control the Internet now. This socialist needs to be taught a lesson at the ballot box.
 
American said:
Link


Obama is looking to control the Internet now. This socialist needs to be taught a lesson at the ballot box.
Click to expand...

Reading that article, it appeared to me that the FCC is attempting to reduce restrictions on the Internet.

Then again, to do so they would have to have more authority over it, so in that you are correct.
 
The FCC needs to be told the Internet is not for them to control.

This is an outrage.
 
American said:
Link


Obama is looking to control the Internet now. This socialist needs to be taught a lesson at the ballot box.
Click to expand...

YOU IN YOUR OWN OP said:
The Federal Communications Commission is considering aggressive moves to stake out its authority to oversee consumer access to the Internet, as a recent court hearing and industry opposition have cast doubt on its power over Web service providers.
The FCC, which regulates public access to telephone and television services, has been working to claim the same role for the Internet. The stakes are high, as the Obama administration pushes an agenda of open broadband access for all and big corporations work to protect their enormous investments in a new and powerful medium.
Click to expand...

It's the FCC that wants the control, Obama is pushing for internet openness. Can you read?
 
Orius said:
It's the FCC that wants the control, Obama is pushing for internet openness. Can you read?
Click to expand...

Umm...

I got the impression that Obama is pushing for the FCC to have more control over the internet in order to enforce internet openness.

Not that they were opposed.

Was I wrong?
 
The Mark said:
Umm...

I got the impression that Obama is pushing for the FCC to have more control over the internet in order to enforce internet openness.

Not that they were opposed.

Was I wrong?
Click to expand...

If that's true it doesn't make sense. Why do they need more control in order to make it less controlled. Just leave it as is.
 
Orius said:
If that's true it doesn't make sense. Why do they need more control in order to make it less controlled. Just leave it as is.
Click to expand...

If you read the article linked in the OP, it appears that the FCC wants more power over the internet so they can prevent the various internet providers from blocking some things on the parts of the net they control.

Edit: But I don't trust a government body to not then abuse that control.
 
The FCC needs more regulatory over the internet to keep ISPs from blocking content and favoring certain providers over others.

In the case sited - Comcast was blocking access to BitTorrent. The FCC cannot tell Comcast to stop blocking BitTorrent unless it is given the power to do so.

I guess you could think it about it like roads. Roads are highly regulated to allow for greater freedom of movement. No one is allowed to block the highway just because it runs past their house or town. So while roads are highly regulated they are open for all to access.

Some interesting links on net neutrality -

Cost-benefit analysis: net neutrality makes economic sense

What is Net neutrality? - Definition from Whatis.com - see also: network neutrality, First Amendment of the Internet

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H69eCYcDcuQ"]YouTube- Ask A Ninja Special Delivery 4 "Net Neutrality"[/ame]
 
The Mark said:
Reading that article, it appeared to me that the FCC is attempting to reduce restrictions on the Internet.

Then again, to do so they would have to have more authority over it, so in that you are correct.
Click to expand...

Has no one been paying attention? Obama and his brown shirts are using classic double speak at every turn and this statement proves somethings Obama learned, uses, and counts on that he learned from the last National Socialist leader to fool people; “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think," “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed,” “The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.” and
“By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise” to name a few Obama counts on from the play book of his hero Adolph.

I leave you with this one that sums up why so many people want to follow this lying bum even after he's caught in lie after lie. “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think”

This may help: http://www.damronplanet.com/doublespeak/whatisdoublespeak.htm
 
Last edited:
Councilman - really. Does this have anything to do with the topic?

The FCC wants the authority to keep ISPs from blocking or downgrading internet traffic based on its use or source - as per the original topic of this thread.

So the FCC wants to ensure that your ISP cannot interfere with traffic to favor its own content or the content of those companies that wish to pay for enhanced services.

This seems so basic to me - perhaps I am missing something here? Are you suggesting that we rely on the good will of Comcast and ATT to keep things fair? Especially considering that these companies have monopolies on broad band cable in many parts of the country?

Cable Television: An Unnatural Monopoly

Cable Monopoly In the Making? Sure Looks That Way - Project Partners Wanted News Story
 
Councilman said:
and counts on that he learned from the last National Socialist leader to fool people;
Click to expand...

emot-godwin.gif
 
Next, the liberals are going to be regulating our bowel movements, claiming improved digestive health and efficiency in public sewage treatment.
 
Taylor said:
Next, the liberals are going to be regulating our bowel movements, claiming improved digestive health and efficiency in public sewage treatment.
Click to expand...

It's the conservatives that sided with the FCC in regards to Janet Jackson's 1/5 second tit shot.
 
satandog said:
Councilman - really. Does this have anything to do with the topic?

The FCC wants the authority to keep ISPs from blocking or downgrading internet traffic based on its use or source - as per the original topic of this thread.

So the FCC wants to ensure that your ISP cannot interfere with traffic to favor its own content or the content of those companies that wish to pay for enhanced services.

This seems so basic to me - perhaps I am missing something here? Are you suggesting that we rely on the good will of Comcast and ATT to keep things fair? Especially considering that these companies have monopolies on broad band cable in many parts of the country?

Cable Television: An Unnatural Monopoly

Cable Monopoly In the Making? Sure Looks That Way - Project Partners Wanted News Story
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't Comcast block BitTorrent if it costs them money and is used mostly for intellectual property theft?

I don't want the FCC controlling the internet even if their intention is to reduce restrictions. Why? Because there will eventually be a conservative president, and they already kicked Howard Stern off my radio.
 
Why shouldn't Comcast block BitTorrent if it costs them money and is used mostly for intellectual property theft?
Click to expand...

Because they are abusing monopoly status on taxpayer subsidized infrastructure. I pay Comcast to deliver me my packets, and anything that interferes with that is unacceptable.

I don't like the FCC much, but ISP's have clearly shown themselves to be incapable of running our infrastructure. The FCC is simply a lesser evil by comparison. Sometimes you simply have to pick the choice that sucks the least.
 
Tsunami said:
Why shouldn't Comcast block BitTorrent if it costs them money and is used mostly for intellectual property theft?
Click to expand...

"Intellectual property theft" does not exist except in the minds of the RIAA, and MPAA... seriously, search results for this term only comes up with stuff from them, and related extremist orgs who rely on skewed statistics [sometimes skewed facts too] and hyperbole to sucker the people [and bribe politicians] into draconian copyright / patent laws that only protect them and not the "artists" and "inventors" they claim they help.

So far nothing in the way of legal document, or results from independent legal experts on a crime called "Intellectual property theft."

Even so, yes it is used for piracy more likely than not, but that does not magically negate the legal uses that BitTorrent carries with it... just like with any other tool, physical, or electronic/technical.

You don't throw the bathtub out when the baby sh*ts in it.
 
Last edited:
Travelsonic said:
"Intellectual property theft" does not exist except in the minds of the RIAA, and MPAA... seriously, search results for this term only comes up with stuff from them, and related extremist orgs who rely on skewed statistics [sometimes skewed facts too] and hyperbole to sucker the people [and bribe politicians] into draconian copyright / patent laws that only protect them and not the "artists" and "inventors" they claim they help.

So far nothing in the way of legal document, or results from independent legal experts on a crime called "Intellectual property theft."

Even so, yes it is used for piracy more likely than not, but that does not magically negate the legal uses that BitTorrent carries with it... just like with any other tool, physical, or electronic/technical.

You don't throw the bathtub out when the baby sh*ts in it.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point. Are you saying artists don't mind if you steal their work? Are you saying once something is made it should be freely distributed? Or is it the term "intellectual property" you have a problem with?
 
Tsunami said:
Why shouldn't Comcast block BitTorrent if it costs them money and is used mostly for intellectual property theft?
Click to expand...

I have downloaded 268.4GB using uTorrent (BitTorrent lite pretty much), and not one byte of that was pirating.

Sure, a lot of it was repeat DL's of F2P MMO's (which I should know by now will never be good), but it proves that Torrents are used for much more than just Pirating.
 
Orius said:
It's the FCC that wants the control, Obama is pushing for internet openness. Can you read?
Click to expand...
The FCC works for Obama.
 
Redress said:
It does? How so? Has he even appointed a commissioner for the FCC yet?
Click to expand...

The FCC is part of the Federal Government. And whether or not Obama has appointed a commissioner or not, the FCC is under direct and independent direction of the President. There are 5 commissioners and not just a Chairman that runs the FCC and yet, there's an acting Commissioner in place and following the direction of the Federal Government - ie., Obama.
 
Ockham said:
The FCC is part of the Federal Government. And whether or not Obama has appointed a commissioner or not, the FCC is under direct and independent direction of the President. There are 5 commissioners and not just a Chairman that runs the FCC and yet, there's an acting Commissioner in place and following the direction of the Federal Government - ie., Obama.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are 5 commissioners, appointed for 5 year terms, so I would guess that 4 of the 5 are Bush appointees. Now, can you show me where it says they are under the direction of Obama, because I cannot find it. In other words, can you document your claim?
 
Councilman said:
Has no one been paying attention? Obama and his brown shirts are using classic double speak at every turn and this statement proves somethings Obama learned, uses, and counts on that he learned from the last National Socialist leader to fool people; “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think," “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed,” “The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.” and
“By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise” to name a few Obama counts on from the play book of his hero Adolph.

I leave you with this one that sums up why so many people want to follow this lying bum even after he's caught in lie after lie. “How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think”

This may help: Doublespeak's Definition
Click to expand...

It's so funny how Republicans manage to get people to work toward their own oppression, as this post demonstrates. One of the more obvious things they do is to get people to believe that the 'enemy' is doing something, when in fact they are making that accusation to deflect attention from the fact that they (the Republicans) are doing the very thing they are accusing the enemy of doing!! They are very good at this, and getting better at it.


It is the Republicans who use 'doublespeak'. It is the Republicans who are working toward a less free Internet. It is the Republican who want to 'Control'.

All the while accusing the Democrats of doing so. And people believe it. Amazing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom