• 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!

U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality [W:23]

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Any semblance of net neutrality in the United States is as good as dead. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Tuesday struck down the Federal Communications Commission’s 2010 order that imposed network neutrality regulations on wireline broadband services. The ruling is a major victory for telecom and cable companies who have fought all net neutrality restrictions vociferously for years.

Get ready for corporate censorship of the internet.

Article is here.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

You would not be fine with it When you find out they are censoring you

Again, I have absolutely no problem with private censorship. There is no "right" to be heard.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Again, I have absolutely no problem with private censorship. There is no "right" to be heard.

353466679_da441b1ff9_m.jpg
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Again, I have absolutely no problem with private censorship. There is no "right" to be heard.

Why do you oppose government censorship but have no problem with private censorship? Censorship is censorship and if it infringes on my right to free speech I have the right to protest the censorship.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Guess who comes out on top? The provider who DOESN'T censor anyone.

Badabing!

Again, I have absolutely no problem with private censorship. There is no "right" to be heard.

Oh *sigh*

- How ever did you come to that?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

not good.

Appeals court strikes down FCC's net neutrality rules | PCWorld

you had better hope that the small sites that you enjoy have unlimited cash to make sure that their data is treated preferentially. also, the way i'm reading it, ISPs could block or slow any data that they want.

the idiots writing the decision said:
In support of its conclusion that broadband providers could and would act to limit Internet openness, the Commission pointed to four prior instances in which they had done just that. These involved a mobile broadband provider blocking online payment services after entering into a contract with a competing service; a mobile broadband provider restricting the availability of competing VoIP and streaming video services; a fixed broadband provider blocking VoIP applications; and, of course, Comcast’s impairment of peer-to-peer file sharing that was the subject of the Comcast Order.

well, yeah, no ****, Sherlock. way to go. ****heads.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Why do you oppose government censorship but have no problem with private censorship? Censorship is censorship and if it infringes on my right to free speech I have the right to protest the censorship.

Because the state has a state granted monopoly on legal force. Any individual can tell a censoring company to walk, I do not want to interact with you anymore, but they cannot tell the government that.

Free speech has nothing to do with private entities or private people, it has only to do with the government suppressing speech.

How ever did you come to that?

You think that "right" exists?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Because the state has a state granted monopoly on legal force. Any individual can tell a censoring company to walk, I do not want to interact with you anymore, but they cannot tell the government that.

Free speech has nothing to do with private entities or private people, it has only to do with the government suppressing speech.



You think that "right" exists?

The government is not the only entity capable of surpressing free speech. Corperations have the ability to that too, albeit indirectly.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

The government is not the only entity capable of surpressing free speech. Corperations have the ability to that too, albeit indirectly.

Except they are the only entity that can suppress free speech. That is specifically what free speech means, the absence of state suppression of speech. Are you referencing voting?
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

The First Amendment, with regards to free speech...it isn't without limitations. The government (at various levels) can intervene if speech is determined to be outside of its limitations.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

The First Amendment, with regards to free speech...it isn't without limitations. The government (at various levels) can intervene if speech is determined to be outside of its limitations.

If it is an action.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

If it is an action.

Huh....SPEECH IS AN ACTION...verbally, in art, etc, etc, etc, .....speech is express a multitude of ways...NO? Don't answer.

Thanks for that LONG fulfilling response. Anything else? I haven't got much time. Those 1 to 5 word replies and statements are extremely time consuming.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Huh....SPEECH IS AN ACTION...verbally, in art, etc, etc, etc, .....speech is express a multitude of ways...NO? D

No.

Speech is speech until it turns into an action, which comes from that often cited SCOTUS quote about yelling fire in a crowded theater.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

And then more competition from corporations who dont censor. Free market win.

The internet provider industry is not a free market. That's the problem.

My stance on Net Neutrality has always been that it's the poorer, but more realistic, of two options.

The best option would be to remove the regulations that largely grant geographical monopolies or duopolies to a few telecom giants. That, sadly, is unlikely to happen. So the next option is to use regulation to deal with the pitfalls caused by your other regulation.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

No.

Speech is speech until it turns into an action, which comes from that often cited SCOTUS quote about yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Uh huh...OH MY GAWD...REALLY? You are a genius. Try reading sometime...YOU JUST REPEATED MY POINT! Okay...continue trolling....
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Huh....SPEECH IS AN ACTION...verbally, in art, etc, etc, etc, .....speech is express a multitude of ways...NO? Don't answer.

Thanks for that LONG fulfilling response. Anything else? I haven't got much time. Those 1 to 5 word replies and statements are extremely time consuming.

Joining the crowded field with SAID poster I see .
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Why do you oppose government censorship but have no problem with private censorship? Censorship is censorship and if it infringes on my right to free speech I have the right to protest the censorship.

Because the Constitution doesn't guarantee a right to free speech across the board, it only guarantees that the government cannot stop you. You have no right to use another person's platform for your speech. There's this really bizarre idea that the 1st Amendment guarantees that no one, anywhere, for any reason, can stop you from saying whatever you want to say. It's ludicrous and entirely false.

Have some realistic expectations.
 
Re: U.S. appeals court kills net neutrality

Moderator's Warning:
Take the back and forth to the basement. Everyone needs to stop baiting/trolling and get on topic
 
Back
Top Bottom