Trade groups, AT&T urge U.S. court to reverse 'net neutrality' rules - Polidicks

[quote]Trade associations representing wireless, cable and broadband operators on Friday urged the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to reverse a ruling upholding the Obama administration's landmark rules barring internet service providers from obstructing or slowing consumer access to web content. A three-judge panel in June, in a 2-1 decision, backed the Federal Communications Commission's so-called net neutrality rules put in place last year to make internet service providers treat all internet traffic equally. Wireless trade association CTIA said in a court filing on Friday seeking a rehearing that "few final rules of any federal administrative agency have ever had so much potential to affect the lives of so many Americans." AT&T also urged the court to reverse the ruling. And in a separate petition, US Telecom and CenturyLink Inc (CTL.N) asked the court to reconsider the ruling, as did the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and American Cable Association. The cable groups said the court should correct "serious errors" in a decision "that radically reshapes federal law governing a massive sector of the economy, which flourished due to hundreds of billions of dollars of investment made in reliance on the policy the order throws overboard." The FCC rules prohibit broadband providers from giving or selling access to speedy internet - essentially a "fast lane" on the web's information superhighway - to certain internet services over others. In siding with the FCC, the court treated the internet like a public utility and opened the door to further internet regulations. "It comes as no surprise that the big dogs have challenged the three-judge panel’s decision," FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said in a statement. He said he was confident the full court would agree with the panel's decision.[/quote] [url]http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-idUSKCN1091OS[/url]

yeah that's a fucking terrible idea

No thank you. I'd prefer keeping it as it is.

Ofc the big companies want to reverse it so they could have more control, aka more money.

ending net neutrality would be a horrible anti-consumer move. don't let people hold monopolies on Web traffic of all things ffs

[quote]The cable groups said the court should correct "serious errors" in a decision "that radically reshapes federal law governing a massive sector of the economy, [B]which flourished due to hundreds of billions of dollars of investment made in reliance on the policy the order throws overboard.[/B]"[/quote] Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the idea of an internet 'fast lane' relatively new? It flourished because it was free (as in freedom) and open for everyone, not because people [I]wanted[/I] to buy into getting rammed up the ass.

companies are already doing their best to bypass the net neutrality regulations by throttling netflix then pushing their own service over "our own cables", which is bullshit since they all have netflix cache servers anyways so the lions share of the traffic never leaves your isp's internal network either way.

Go suck a dick, AT&T. Net Neutrality needs to stay; my DSL I'm stuck with from them is already crappy enough as-is. EDIT: Plus, haven't some of these major telecom companies been caught misusing federal subsidy money for things it was never meant for?

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;50816662]Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the idea of an internet 'fast lane' relatively new? It flourished because it was free (as in freedom) and open for everyone, not because people [I]wanted[/I] to buy into getting rammed up the ass.[/QUOTE] Perhaps they should start selling silicone sculptures, since that's obviously a billion-dollar business.

Only two words are really needed. Fuck off. It's like a coal company asking to be exempt from safety regulations while promising they'll keep their workers nice and safe. Riiiiiight.

Get fucked ISPs

Of course AT&T is the one to talk. God forbid someone watches on demand and try to play a game at the same time without 100+ ping with their shit overpriced service.

the FCC has been amazing recently.[URL="http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/fcc-forces-tp-link-to-support-open-source-firmware-on-routers/"] recently they forced TP-link to support open source firmware on their routers[/URL]

The FCC just needs to be penetrated and replaced and it will be all downhill from there. Even if the FCC is good now, who knows what will happen once replacements occur? There will always be heavy pressure from corporations to make sure that net neutrality vanishes and it probably will.

[URL="https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168"]just a reminder that donald trump is opposed to net neutrality[/URL]

Dickheads. This isn't the first time they've tried getting the decision reversed, is it? Can they try to push for a reversal as many times as they want, or...? As in, as a legal move.

[QUOTE=Spetsnaz95;50817032]Dickheads. This isn't the first time they've tried getting the decision reversed, is it? Can they try to push for a reversal as many times as they want, or...? As in, as a legal move.[/QUOTE] What's funny is until Verizon sued the government (back in 2011, I think) forcing the FCC to decide on a new set of regulations, not many were worried about Net Neutrality. However, after Verizon beat the FCC in court on a technicality, the FCC under Wheeler setup the current, pro-Net Neutrality regulations, which all the major ISPs have attacked for fear of having to actually provide good service for once.

[QUOTE=TheHydra;50816975][URL="https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168"]just a reminder that donald trump is opposed to net neutrality[/URL][/QUOTE] And Hillary supports the TPP. Neither is better in this regard. But honestly this isn't surprising, and I'm sure they'll continue to lobby against it.

their circular logic is sound we arent common carriers so your rules dont apply but you also shouldnt have classified us as common carriers so your rules could apply

This is going to go all the way to the supreme court more than likely.

How about fuck you, and while we're at it, make internet access a human right with a constitutional amendment.

[QUOTE=Disgruntled;50817402]How about fuck you, and while we're at it, make internet access a human right with a constitutional amendment.[/QUOTE] No that's a bit much.

[QUOTE=Disgruntled;50817402]How about fuck you, and while we're at it, make internet access a human right with a constitutional amendment.[/QUOTE] .... Maybe we should start smaller with something a little more vital, like water?

[QUOTE=Propane Addict;50817636].... Maybe we should start smaller with something a little more vital, like water?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-privatisation-of-water-nestle-denies-that-water-is-a-fundamental-human-right/5332238[/url] been done

[QUOTE=JETFIGHTER5;50817301]And Hillary supports the TPP. Neither is better in this regard. But honestly this isn't surprising, and I'm sure they'll continue to lobby against it.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure she doesn't

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50817668]I'm pretty sure she doesn't[/QUOTE] she said she didn't because her voters didn't like it, but she actually does

[QUOTE=TheDrunkenOne;50817679]she said she didn't because her voters didn't like it, but she actually does[/QUOTE] how do you know that

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50817692]how do you know that[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/terry-mcauliffe-hillary-clinton-tpp-trade-226253[/url] even with "a few tweaks" she has flip flopped over whether she supports it or not for the past few years

[QUOTE=TheDrunkenOne;50817724][url]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/terry-mcauliffe-hillary-clinton-tpp-trade-226253[/url] even with "a few tweaks" she has flip flopped over whether she supports it or not for the past few years[/QUOTE] A guy says clinton would do something, her campaign immediately shoots him down and he retracts his comment, and this is proof that Clinton secretly supports the TPP? I mean, what exactly would be the problem with supporting a version of the TPP without the things that make the TPP bad?

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50817772]A guy says clinton would do something, her campaign immediately shoots him down and he retracts his comment, and this is proof that Clinton secretly supports the TPP? I mean, what exactly would be the problem with supporting a version of the TPP without the things that make the TPP bad?[/QUOTE] because hillary is totally known for being truthful and consistent with her views [video=youtube;-dY77j6uBHI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI[/video] yeah right also the tpp is horrible because it will kill small businesses and tens of thousands of people will be unemployed