01.15.14Does This Ruling Mean The End of the Internet? Maybe.
If you think cable TV sucks, just wait. Craig Aaron, president and CEO of Free Press, says the end of the Internet as we know it is coming—unless we do something about that.
Translation: The judges just killed Net Neutrality.
Less-wonky translation: Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner Cable or whoever provides your Internet connection can now block, slow or otherwise mess with websites, apps and other services.
And the FCC—the agency that’s supposed to protect Internet users and oversee communications networks—can’t do anything about it.
Well, they can do one thing—which I’ll explain in a second.
But first …
What did the court actually say?
Let’s be clear: The court didn’t rule against Net Neutrality — that fundamental principle which ensures you can go wherever, browse whenever, and download whatever you want when you go online.
The court just invalidated the way the FCC tried to make Net Neutrality rules in a 2010 order. The judges rejected the legal framework used by the FCC and said the agency currently lacks the authority to implement and to enforce these rules.
Indeed, the court specifically stated that its “task as a reviewing court is not to assess the wisdom of the Open Internet Order regulations, but rather to determine whether the Commission has demonstrated that the regulations fall within the scope of its statutory grant of authority.”
So how did we get into this mess?
The reason the FCC’s authority to regulate broadband didn’t pass muster in court is because, under the Bush administration, the FCC abdicated its authority. At the urging of phone and cable lobbyists, the agency changed the way it treated broadband under the law. That was a huge mistake.
“We can still have Net Neutrality in America—but the FCC must reclaim its legal authority immediately.”
And so when the FCC tried to stop Comcast from blocking lawful file-sharing back in 2008, Comcast sued them claiming the agency didn’t have the authority. And Comcast won.
And when the FCC tried to implement watered-down but not completely worthless Net Neutrality rules in 2010, Verizon sued claiming they still lacked the authority. And Verizon won yesterday.
The silver lining is that there’s nothing in the court’s decision that prevents the FCC from reversing its earlier misguided decisions and treating broadband under the law as the “telecommunications service” it so obviously is.
read on:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/15/does-this-ruling-mean-the-end-of-the-internet-maybe.html
Love Always
mudra
If you think cable TV sucks, just wait. Craig Aaron, president and CEO of Free Press, says the end of the Internet as we know it is coming—unless we do something about that.
Translation: The judges just killed Net Neutrality.
Less-wonky translation: Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner Cable or whoever provides your Internet connection can now block, slow or otherwise mess with websites, apps and other services.
And the FCC—the agency that’s supposed to protect Internet users and oversee communications networks—can’t do anything about it.
Well, they can do one thing—which I’ll explain in a second.
But first …
What did the court actually say?
Let’s be clear: The court didn’t rule against Net Neutrality — that fundamental principle which ensures you can go wherever, browse whenever, and download whatever you want when you go online.
The court just invalidated the way the FCC tried to make Net Neutrality rules in a 2010 order. The judges rejected the legal framework used by the FCC and said the agency currently lacks the authority to implement and to enforce these rules.
Indeed, the court specifically stated that its “task as a reviewing court is not to assess the wisdom of the Open Internet Order regulations, but rather to determine whether the Commission has demonstrated that the regulations fall within the scope of its statutory grant of authority.”
So how did we get into this mess?
The reason the FCC’s authority to regulate broadband didn’t pass muster in court is because, under the Bush administration, the FCC abdicated its authority. At the urging of phone and cable lobbyists, the agency changed the way it treated broadband under the law. That was a huge mistake.
“We can still have Net Neutrality in America—but the FCC must reclaim its legal authority immediately.”
And so when the FCC tried to stop Comcast from blocking lawful file-sharing back in 2008, Comcast sued them claiming the agency didn’t have the authority. And Comcast won.
And when the FCC tried to implement watered-down but not completely worthless Net Neutrality rules in 2010, Verizon sued claiming they still lacked the authority. And Verizon won yesterday.
The silver lining is that there’s nothing in the court’s decision that prevents the FCC from reversing its earlier misguided decisions and treating broadband under the law as the “telecommunications service” it so obviously is.
read on:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/15/does-this-ruling-mean-the-end-of-the-internet-maybe.htmlLove Always
mudra
