UPDATE 4-U.S. FCC commissioners support open Internet rule

Thu Oct 22, 2009 3:22pm EDT
* All 5 commissioners vote to seek public comment on rule
* Two Republican commissioners have some reservations
* Draft rule would allow for 'reasonable' net management
* Public comments accepted until Jan. 14
* Telecom firms worry rule would hamper network management (Adds vote

by commissioners, quotes, background)
By John Poirier and Sinead Carew

WASHINGTON/CHICAGO, Oct 22 (Reuters) - U.S. communications regulators voted unanimously Thursday to support an open Internet rule that would prevent telecom network operators from barring or blocking content based on the revenue it generates.

The proposed rule now goes to the public for comment until Jan. 14, after which the Federal Communications Commissions will review the feedback and possibly seek more comment. A final rule is not expected until the spring of next year.

"I am pleased that there is broad agreement inside the commission that we should move forward with a healthy and transparent process on an open Internet," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said.

The vote came despite a flurry of lobbying against the net neutrality rule by telecommunications service providers like AT&T Inc (T.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Qwest Communications International Inc (Q.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), which say it would strip them of the ability to manage their networks effectively and would stifle innovation and competition.

The rule would prevent operators from discriminating against any legal content a third party wants to deliver to consumers on their networks, though it allows for "reasonable" network management to unclog congestion, clear viruses and spam, and block unlawful content like child pornography or the transfer of pirated content.

The full FCC slate of three Democrats, led by Genachowski, and two Republicans voted in favor of issuing a proposed network neutrality rule for public comment.

But the two Republicans, Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker, did express concern with the content of the rule, saying they do not share the majority's view that the Internet is showing breaks and cracks and that the government is the best tool to fix it. They also questioned whether the FCC has the legal authority to regulate the Internet network.
Nonetheless, the vote was 5-to-0 for proceeding with the rulemaking, and 3-to-2 for approving the notice's language in its entirety, said Jen Howard, an FCC spokesman.

The FCC will accept public comments until Jan. 14; then it will review them and can ask for further comment, with replies due by March 5.
"We commend the FCC for beginning the process," said Senators Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, and Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican, in a joint statement. They proposed a net neutrality bill in the last session of Congress.
NET NEUTRALITY

Advocates of net neutrality such as Google Inc (GOOG.O: Quote, Profile,
Research, Stock Buzz), Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and public interest groups say Internet service providers must be barred from blocking or slowing traffic according to how much revenue the content generates.
But service providers say the increasing volume of bandwidth-hogging services, such as video sharing, requires active management of their networks.

AT&T President of Operations John Stankey said he is anticipating the rule with as much dread as if he were going to the funeral of a dear friend.
"Regulators should understand that there's plenty of competition in this market," Stankey said at the Supercomm trade show in Chicago.
Verizon Communications warned of unintended consequences from government rulemaking and added it is seeking "common ground" with others in the industry on policies that would apply to all.

"The Internet ecosystem is serving consumers very well, and there is no problem that requires new government regulation," said Tom Tauke, executive vice president of policy and communications.

Late on Wednesday, Verizon Wireless softened its opposition by issuing a joint policy blog statement with Google. They said they believe it is essential that the Internet remain an unrestricted and open platform.
Google and Verizon Wireless, a joint venture of Verizon Communications and Vodafone Group Plc (VOD.L: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), are partnering to develop an Android-based mobile phone.

"We have cleared the first hurdle in this process, and are on the road towards creating a framework that promotes innovation and consumer choice on the Internet," said the Washington-based Open Internet Coalition, which represents Google, Amazon and eBay Inc (EBAY.O: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz).

With the threat of of a court fight looming, Democrats in Congress are mulling legislative options to promote net neutrality. But Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, said he introduced legislation on Thursday aimed at prohibiting the FCC from enacting rules to regulate the Internet. (Additional reporting by Steve Holland; Editing by Tiffany Wu and Gerald E. McCormick, Phil Berlowitz)

© Thomson Reuters 2009. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.




Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.

__________________

Net neutrality is important, and it's good that the FCC is defending an open internet.

The statement you made bold that I underlined:

Verizon Wireless softened its opposition by issuing a joint policy blog statement with Google. They said they believe it is essential that the Internet remain an unrestricted and open platform.

Translation: Verizon believes it is essential that the Internet remain unrestricted and open platform, which is why they now SUPPORT the FCC's new policy on net neutrality rather than opposing it.

This "regulation" is not really "regulation" at all. It is a rule that PREVENTS internet service providers from "regulating" what content their subscribers can and can not access through the provider's network. This means an ISP can't "throttle" the speed of certain content (by slowing down streaming video content, torrent downloads, P2P file sharing programs, or blocking those services from being used on their networks entirely). This means YOU will continue to be able to access whatever content you want, free from restrictions imposed by your internet service provider.

Again, this is a GOOD thing.

__________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want, makes Santa Claus pretty much obsolete.

The politicians now know that elections can be affected by the internet.

Lo, and behold, Obama is slipping in the polls because he can't squash and/or hide the horrific policies from the internet.

Anything which threatens scheming politicians will be targeted.

__________________
...out
______________________________________
You haven't countered nothing, because the points you made are not valid, you are basing your counter on information you don't understand, regardless the accuracy of the information, because it does not state what you are saying.. (Brazko)

You must mean "slipping in THE poll", THE poll being the Rasmussen Reports poll, which is the only major poll that reports a drop in Obama's approval rating.



So, you're saying that you wouldn't mind if your ISP decided they didn't want you accessing this web site anymore, and blocked it? You'd be fine if you couldn't access YouTube, Hulu, Skype, or The Wall Street Journal? That's all this "regulation" amounts to. Stopping ISPs from restricting user's access to certain types of content.

__________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want, makes Santa Claus pretty much obsolete.

You realize net neutrality is a GOOD thing, right?
The gubbermint is on YOUR side in this case. There is no conspiracy.

__________________
Gaw Dam Mongorians!

Net Neutrality (Here in known as NN, since I don't feel like typing it out) is extremely important! While there is always the ability for government to abuse it, it is much more difficult for the government to control than it is for internet service providers. Since I'm a bit high (yay for buddies!) AND tired, I'm not going to get extremely technical.

A few examples of what NN will prevent, some of which have already seen the light of day;

- Blocking or throttling of certain protocals like BitTorrent.
- Refusing access to google and forwarding requests to their own search engine.
- Preventing service providers from blocking connections to competing providers, such as online VoIP, video streaming, ondemand and the like.

I'm lazy so I'm going to copy and paste the definition of NN directly from the wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality;

At its simplest network neutrality is the principle that all Internet traffic should be treated equally.[9] Net neutrality advocates have established three principal definitions of network neutrality:

Absolute non-discrimination Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu: "Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle. The idea is that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally."[2] According to Imprint Magazine, University of Michigan Law School professor Susan P. Crawford "believes that a neutral Internet must forward packets on a first-come, first served basis, without regard for quality-of-service considerations."[10]

Limited discrimination without QoS tiering United States lawmakers have introduced bills that would allow quality of service discrimination as long as no special fee is charged for higher-quality service.[11]

Limited discrimination and tiering This approach allows higher fees for QoS as long as there is no exclusivity in service contracts. According to Tim Berners-Lee: "If I pay to connect to the Net with a given quality of service, and you pay to connect to the net with the same or higher quality of service, then you and I can communicate across the net, with that quality of service."[1] "[We] each pay to connect to the Net, but no one can pay for exclusive access to me."[12]

--
It also forces companies like AT&T and Verizon to play nicely with various devices that use their 3G network. An example would be throttling iphone users because they watch too much video but not throttling blackberry or windows mobile users. This will force providers to upgrade their network instead of providing lower-quality service to some users and higher-quality to other users just because they use less all while charging the same price across the board.

Unfortunately though, one of the things it does seem introduce is the government ability to block certain sites or packets via court-order. While you are trading a greater evil for a lesser evil, it still sucks. I don't trust the government anymore than I trust service providers, however while more service providers to control, its harder to manage from a government perspective. In my opinion at least.

Ugh, I'm way to tired to really convey my feelings on this issue, maybe tomorrow. At least the above is some useful information. While I'm generally against regulation, I beleive NN is something that does need to be upheld. While consumers do speak with their wallets, too many of us have only once choice in a provider. So if our provider decides to block a service or re-direct a website, we have no choice but to either live with it or stop using the internet. This is where NN comes in.

A better way to deal with all this is to stop the wire-exclusivity and force the cable and DSL networks to open their lines more, similar but in a much more efficient way the way long distance providers work. More competition will eliminate a lot of these issues.

Sorry guys, I'll probably most a much more indepth thought on this issue later, when my mind isn't in a haze.

__________________
42 = LIFE, 420 = EVERYTHING (Yes, I'm a Douglas Adams Fan)
Current Grow Journal: http://www.rollitup.org/grow-journal...door-grow.html

Can you please reference the following claim?
Unfortunately though, one of the things it does seem introduce is the government ability to block certain sites or packets via court-order

I can't seem to find any part of the new FCC policy that would allow such a thing, although I do believe that the government already has the power (in theory) to use court orders to block material on the internet, as do private citizens, corporate entities, and anyone else who wants to. These orders, naturally, are at the discretion of the courts.

__________________
A government big enough to give you everything you want, makes Santa Claus pretty much obsolete.

doobs who are you tryin to convince, yourself?



Barack Obama sees worst poll rating drop in 50 years

The decline in Barack Obama's popularity since July has been the steepest of any president at the same stage of his first term for more than 50 years.



By Toby Harnden in Washington
Published: 7:38PM BST 22 Oct 2009

Barack Obama's popularity has fallen steeply since being elected last year Photo: AFP



Gallup recorded an average daily approval rating of 53 per cent for Mr Obama for the third quarter of the year, a sharp drop from the 62 per cent he recorded from April.
His current approval rating – hovering just above the level that would make re-election an uphill struggle – is close to the bottom for newly-elected president. Mr Obama entered the White House with a soaring 78 per cent approval rating.

The bad polling news came as Mr Obama returned to the campaign trail to prevent his Democratic party losing two governorships next month in states in which he defeated Senator John McCain in last November's election.

Jeffrey Jones of Gallup explained: "The dominant political focus for Obama in the third quarter was the push for health care reform, including his nationally televised address to Congress in early September.
"Obama hoped that Congress would vote on health care legislation before its August recess, but that goal was missed, and some members of Congress faced angry constituents at town hall meetings to discuss health care reform. Meanwhile, unemployment continued to climb near 10 per cent."

Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey is in severe danger of defeat while Democrats are fast losing hope that Creigh Deeds can beat his Republican opponent in Virginia. Twin Democratic losses would be a major blow to Mr Obama's prestige.

Campaigning for Mr Corzine in Hackensack on Wednesday night, Mr Obama delivered a plea that almost seemed as much for himself as the local candidate: "I'm here today to urge you to cast aside the cynics and the sceptics, and prove to all Americans that leaders who do what's right and who do what's hard will be rewarded and not rejected."

Mr Corzine, a former Goldman Sachs executive and multi-millionaire, is currently running even in New Jersey, which is normally comfortably Democratic, while Mr Deeds is trailing badly in Virginia, a swing state that was key to Mr Obama's 2008 victory.

Mr Obama is also facing widespread criticism for his drawn-out decision-making process over what to do next in Afghanistan.

Republicans sense Mr Obama is in a vulnerable position and this week saw the return to the public stage of his perhaps most vehement opponent – Vice-President Dick Cheney.

In a blistering speech on Wednesday night, he accused Mr Obama of failing to give Americans troops on the ground a clear mission or defined goals and of being seemingly "afraid to make a decision" about Afghanistan "The White House must stop dithering while America's armed forces are in danger," Cheney said at the Center for Security Policy in Washington.
"Make no mistake, signals of indecision out of Washington hurt our allies and embolden our adversaries."

He hit out at Obama aides who suggested that the Bush administration had failed to weigh up conditions in Afghanistan properly before committing troops.

"Now they seem to be pulling back and blaming others for their failure to implement the strategy they embraced. It's time for President Obama to do what it takes to win a war he has repeatedly and rightly called a war of necessity."

__________________

The Govt. needs to keep their grubby little hands off the Internet. Net Neutrality is actually idea control.

Ideas should be rewarded on its merit, not a predetermined threshold, where all ideas, no matter how inane get equal exposure.

__________________
...out
______________________________________
You haven't countered nothing, because the points you made are not valid, you are basing your counter on information you don't understand, regardless the accuracy of the information, because it does not state what you are saying.. (Brazko)

I really don't think the wingnuts understand what this means... p2p is something I use daily...hated when my isp tried to trottle my download speed, so I can't download as fast and as much....This stops them from doing that.....

__________________
I like to lie..Everything I say here is a lie to make me look cool