Demand Net neutrality as a basic right

[klook]

Source: InfoWorld

All free speech is converging on the Internet. Can speech still be called 'free' if access to it is controlled by a profiteering few?

The New Year is upon us, and I still can't stop running dystopian Net neutrality scenarios through my head. Maybe that's because -- in the wake of the FCC's sorry compromise, ironically named the http://www.infoworld.com/t/regulation/fccs-net-neutrality-order-will-castrate-the-internet-966">Open Internet Order -- I keep encountering confused, misinformed coverage of the issue. You can see the effects in polls like this one from Rasmussen. But don't blame the respondants; blame the questions they were asked.

The questions in the Rasmussen poll could have been lifted from The Onion. They're not about an open Internet; the people responding just think they are. Here's a sample: "What is the best way to protect those who use the Internet -- more government regulation or more free market competition?" Whoever came up with loaded questions like these knows exactly why they're worded that way.

(See Paul Venezia's http://www.infoworld.com/t/regulation/fccs-net-neutrality-order-will-castrate-the-internet-966?source=fssr">full analysis of the FCC's Open Internet Order. Also on InfoWorld: Read Paul's classic http://www.infoworld.com/d/networking/open-letter-enemies-net-neutrality-764?source=fssr">open letter to the enemies of Net neutrality.)

Read more: http://www.infoworld.com/t/regulation/demand-net-neutrality-basic-right-245

---

The Right (and the cable & telecom companies) want the Information Superhighway to become a toll road.

The FCC's recent Net Neutrality compromise leaves too many loopholes, and it gives too much control of the Internet to the ISPs instead of the public. And the ISPs are guaranteed to tack on fees and limit bandwidth everywhere they can to maximize profits and make much of the Internet experience a fee-for-content goldmine for them, along the lines of the cable TV model.

We need to keep the pressure on the FCC and Congress to stop that from happening.

[ej510]

1. The fascists want 100% control of all information.

[valerief]

2. We need a free internet. The fascists can have the existing internet. nt

[NorthCarolina]

3. Too late. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. Without some significant legislation Net Neutrality is a joke

I support it, but am not so deluded to believe that the FCC alone can change much of anything. Even the weak rules they did pass will not be allowed by the courts.

The Internet is a collection of private networks that have agreed to work in concert and share certain technical standards. It is not a common carrier, it is not a franchised utility, it is not a monopoly as we have seen historically. Its not clear the FCC has much of any jurisdiction to control and limit what is going through privately held networks. Fix those kind of issues and then we can talk about returning to the original content neutral bandwidth we have had in the past.