I love how the suckers have bought into the fantasy that the advertising monopolies are our friends and the companies that provide the Internet to us are the enemies.
Verizon challenged the 2010 order but AT&T did not. Everybody challenged the 2015 order because Title II is garbage.
The article also falsely claims: "Internet access was under Title II until the mid-2000s..." But in reality, Internet access was under Title I and its predecessor from 198, with two exceptions: DSL was under Title II from the mid-90s until 2005 because it runs on phone wires. Cable modem was never under Title II until Wheeler was ordered by the White House to over-regulate it for political purposes.
I hate to have to tell you this, but AT&T and Verizon are two different companies. The 2010 Open Internet Order was dictated by the White House in the basis of compromise between Google and Verizon, and the lawsuit against that regulation was Verizon acting on its own.
Congress is no more a shit show than the Wheeler FCC was, an organization totally acting on the whims of a junior White House staffer. The Congressional bill on net neutrality was drafted in 2010 by Democratic and Republican staffers. I saw the drafts at the time.
Try doing some journalism instead of simply pulling insults out of your ass.
It is literally the FCC's job to ignore the people and do the right thing without political consideration. Putting Title II on the Internet us a very wrong and stupid thing.
The Obama Internet regulations have two glaring problems: Title II authority and the undefined "Internet conduct standard". Hence, it's deceptive to claim that all the Order did was ban blocking, throttling, and preferential treatment.
Title II is especially problematic in the interconnection context, which is why many edge providers - such as Google and Netflix - don't want their interconnection agreements to be subject to Title II.
It's a shame that it costs money to make things. This partially remedied by forcing taxpayers to cover the costs of creation through taxes and/or fees. That works for laws and regulations.
Standards are different because they're developed by private parties. Their costs are borne in a variety of ways that will come to the author with a bit of reflection.
Karl, let me compliment you on this high-quality journalism. You're doing the public a great service by presenting them with such a sober and well-researched account of the Trumpers' Evil Plans for World Domination.
I'm sure they're scared now that you've blown the lid off their scheme.
On the post: Over 190 Engineers & Tech Experts Tell The FCC It's Dead Wrong On Net Neutrality
Weak analysis
On the post: Mark Cuban Again Illustrates He Has No Idea What Net Neutrality Is Or Why It's Important
Re: Re: Re: Bode/Pro and Cuban/Con Title II address entirely separate issues
Allowing Internet designers to dictate regulation sounds a lot like letting bullet manufacturers dictate gun laws.
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
Sorry, but your life is an open book to Google, Facebook, and Amazon, even if you don't use their services.
On the post: Microsoft Unveils Plan To Deliver Broadband To 2 Million, NAB Immediately Craps All Over The Announcement
Google Fiber indeed
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
Yes, Thad, the man is keeping you down.
On the post: If You Want To Protect The Internet, Look To Congress
Congrats: You agree with AT&T and Comcast
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
Re: Re: AT&T isn't Verizon
The article also falsely claims: "Internet access was under Title II until the mid-2000s..." But in reality, Internet access was under Title I and its predecessor from 198, with two exceptions: DSL was under Title II from the mid-90s until 2005 because it runs on phone wires. Cable modem was never under Title II until Wheeler was ordered by the White House to over-regulate it for political purposes.
On the post: AT&T Pretends To Love Net Neutrality, Joins Tomorrow's Protest With A Straight Face
AT&T isn't Verizon
Congress is no more a shit show than the Wheeler FCC was, an organization totally acting on the whims of a junior White House staffer. The Congressional bill on net neutrality was drafted in 2010 by Democratic and Republican staffers. I saw the drafts at the time.
Try doing some journalism instead of simply pulling insults out of your ass.
On the post: It's Time For The FCC To Actually Listen: The Vast Majority Of FCC Commenters Support Net Neutrality
Bode is confuse
It is literally the FCC's job to ignore the people and do the right thing without political consideration. Putting Title II on the Internet us a very wrong and stupid thing.
On the post: Cable Industry's Own Survey Shows Majority Support Net Neutrality Rules
Lack of understanding
Title II is especially problematic in the interconnection context, which is why many edge providers - such as Google and Netflix - don't want their interconnection agreements to be subject to Title II.
Please correct the factual errors in your story.
On the post: Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws
User fees
On the post: Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws
Standards are different because they're developed by private parties. Their costs are borne in a variety of ways that will come to the author with a bit of reflection.
On the post: Trump's Plan Is To Gut All FCC Consumer Protection Powers
Re: Re: Keep up the good work
On the post: Trump's Plan Is To Gut All FCC Consumer Protection Powers
Keep up the good work
I'm sure they're scared now that you've blown the lid off their scheme.
On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life
Where are the t-shirts?
On the post: Here's The Truth: Shiva Ayyadurai Didn't Invent Email
Re: Re: Who invented email?
Next >>