Re: Re: Re: So? You accept risks by going into business -- wherever. An online "platform" don't make ya special in law so should be immune from all that you're hosting.
No, but the writer / editor / publisher, yes. Electronic publishing is publishing.
The write, editor and publisher of a blog are all the same person. The media is a web site, akin to the printing press in your example. Would you try to sue the printing press for libel or go after the person actually responsible?
Those laws don't also change or delete the existing laws that prohibit municipal broadband deployment. That legislation would be far more important than a minor threat of "we're taking our ball and going home."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
You're trying very hard to dance around the issue and twist my words to suit your purpose. Let me rephrase:
But there is still no difference between watching 100GB worth of movies in 8 hours and downloading 100GB in files from around the net in the same mount of time. Either way 100GB was consumed in 8 hours and paid for by the consumer.
The issue is NOT that Netflix uses anything. End users, consumers, use the bandwidth by pulling data from Netflix and other sources. Both the source and the drain for that consumed bandwidth was already paid for.
Re: Re: Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
Netflix is often mentioned because a significant portion of internet traffic is sourced from their servers (or cloned data centers). But there is still no difference between watching 100GB worth of movies and downloading 100GB in files from around the net. Either way 100GB was consumed and paid for by the consumer. Further, the providers of that data paid for their ability to transmit it. The ISP has already collected their pound of flesh, they aren't entitled to 2 lbs.
Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
Your comment demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding about how the internet works and what Net Neutrality was meant to guard against.
All traffic on the internet is paid for, both by the providers of that traffic and again by the consumer. ISPs pay for the traffic that transits their infrastructure to and from the "backbone" but those costs are borne by their subscribers. There is no material difference between a subscriber using their connection to watch netflix 24/7 and one who consumes the same bandwidth but spreads their usage out across 1000 providers. That bandwidth is still already paid for and the ISP has no business charging any of them. If there are costs to be borne by someone then those should be passed to their subscribers as always.
Now please, learn a little about the subject before you go spilling more FUD around the net.
Ironic since many of their "top tier" artists were discovered and made popular via social media and file sharing. Where does the music industry think their next batch of stars is going to come from?
Re: Re: Re: Hauwei IS Chinese gov't owned. They ALL are. It's a COMMUNIST state.
He insulted the article author and then (accurately) predicted a barrage of hateposts. There's really nothing to undermine here as he didn't say anything relevant to the article content.
On the post: Why (Allegedly) Defamatory Content On WordPress.com Doesn't Come Down Without A Court Order
Re: Re: Re: So? You accept risks by going into business -- wherever. An online "platform" don't make ya special in law so should be immune from all that you're hosting.
The write, editor and publisher of a blog are all the same person. The media is a web site, akin to the printing press in your example. Would you try to sue the printing press for libel or go after the person actually responsible?
On the post: Why (Allegedly) Defamatory Content On WordPress.com Doesn't Come Down Without A Court Order
Re: Re: Re: Re: DMCA is abridged civil process due sheerly to number of potential complaints.
FTFY
On the post: Why (Allegedly) Defamatory Content On WordPress.com Doesn't Come Down Without A Court Order
Re: Re: DMCA is abridged civil process due sheerly to number of potential complaints.
On the post: New Jersey The Latest State To Protect Net Neutrality By Executive Order
Re: Re: Re: That'll make for some fun arguments
On the post: New Jersey The Latest State To Protect Net Neutrality By Executive Order
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
You're trying very hard to dance around the issue and twist my words to suit your purpose. Let me rephrase:
The issue is NOT that Netflix uses anything. End users, consumers, use the bandwidth by pulling data from Netflix and other sources. Both the source and the drain for that consumed bandwidth was already paid for.
On the post: New Jersey The Latest State To Protect Net Neutrality By Executive Order
Re: Re: Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
On the post: New Jersey The Latest State To Protect Net Neutrality By Executive Order
Re: Except it's not a "line", it's a broad highway, and like on highways, heavy trucks SHOULD pay more.
All traffic on the internet is paid for, both by the providers of that traffic and again by the consumer. ISPs pay for the traffic that transits their infrastructure to and from the "backbone" but those costs are borne by their subscribers. There is no material difference between a subscriber using their connection to watch netflix 24/7 and one who consumes the same bandwidth but spreads their usage out across 1000 providers. That bandwidth is still already paid for and the ISP has no business charging any of them. If there are costs to be borne by someone then those should be passed to their subscribers as always.
Now please, learn a little about the subject before you go spilling more FUD around the net.
On the post: On The Internet, Everyone Is A Creator
Re: Problem is that everyone can be a pirate even easier!
On the post: FCC Report Falsely Claims Killing Net Neutrality Already Helping Broadband Competition
Re: damn
On the post: Court Shuts Down Trooper's Attempt To Portray New-ish Minivans With Imperfect Drivers As Justification For A Traffic Stop
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: And yet drugs WERE found.
Yeah, cause you never do that or use misdirection or whataboutism to avoid the topic or try to twist it to your own ends.
/facepalm
On the post: Classified Cabinet Docs Leak Down Under Via An Actual Cabinet Sale... Just As Aussies Try To Outlaw Leaking
Re: AND this is WHY needs criminalized, to make secretaries more careful of leaving secrets around.
On the post: Trump's FCC Pats Itself On The Back For A Historically Stupid Year
Re:
On the post: Putting Pinners First: How Pinterest Is Building Partnerships For Compassionate Content Moderation
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If the community wants to hide the message they will.
Your message, and mine for that matter, are entirely off topic and deserve to be hidden. The previous vitriol is at least on topic if off color.
On the post: Tarnishing The History Of Martin Luther King Jr.: Copyright Enforcement Edition
Re: So, you actually WANT corporations stealing the virtue of "natural" persons to sell laundry soap.
You saw a post from Mike Masnick and went berserk as usual.
On the post: Study Suggests Shutting Down Filesharing Sites Would Hurt Music Industry, New Artists
Re:
On the post: Public School Board Member Threatens Boss Of Woman Who Spoke Out Against School Book Banning
Re: No right " to ban books or to suppress the speech of the public" unless it's Google, arbitrarily denying use of its vast "platform", eh?
On the post: Israeli Music Fans Sue Two New Zealanders For Convincing Lorde To Cancel Her Israeli Concert
Re:
On the post: Verizon Folds To Government Pressure To Blacklist Huawei Without A Shred Of Public Evidence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Hauwei IS Chinese gov't owned. They ALL are. It's a COMMUNIST state.
On the post: Verizon Folds To Government Pressure To Blacklist Huawei Without A Shred Of Public Evidence
Re: Re: Re: Hauwei IS Chinese gov't owned. They ALL are. It's a COMMUNIST state.
On the post: Virginia Politicians Looks To Tax Speech In The Form Of Porn In The Name Of Stemming Human Trafficking
Re:
Next >>