In Wake Of Trump Win, ISPs Are Already Laying The Groundwork For Gutting Net Neutrality

>With Donald Trump now the President elect, all eyes in telecom have turned to what happens now in regards to FCC telecom enforcement generally, and our shiny new net neutrality rules specifically. Trump has proclaimed he opposes net neutrality, despite making it abundantly clear he doesn't appear to actually know what it is (he appears to falsely believe it has something to do with the fairness doctrine). As such most people believe he'll work to gut the current FCC, which as we've noted has, for the first time in arguably twenty years or so, actually been doing a few things to actually help broadband consumers and sector competition.

>Trump is said to have appointed Jeffrey Eisenach, "a crusader against regulation," who has consistently criticized current FCC boss Tom Wheeler, to handle his telecom transition team:

>>In 2012 Eisenach arrived as a fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute — and in that role, he’s been an outspoken antagonist of FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and his policies. In his research and advocacy, often backed by tech and telecom interests, he's slammed the Obama administration's efforts on net neutrality, broadband investment and more.

>As such, any newly-configured FCC is more than a little likely to consist of the kind of revolving door regulators that either will move to strip back net neutrality protections (difficult but not impossible), or (potentially more likely) simply refuse to enforce them. ISPs are already making it clear they see an opportunity to role back "onerous FCC regulations" at the behest of giant ISPs -- likely in the form of a complete Communications Act rewrite courtesy of the Republican-controlled House and Senate.

Other urls found in this thread:

techdirt.com/articles/20161109/10362936007/wake-trump-win-isps-are-already-laying-groundwork-gutting-net-neutrality.shtml
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>This enthusiasm includes former Congressman Rick Boucher, who at one point in time was a fantastic crusader for fair use rights, but has since made his living playing parrot for the telecom industry over at Sidley Austin, a law firm that effectively acts as an AT&T policy arm. Not wasting any time, an e-mail dropped into Techdirt's inbox this morning by the Internet Innovation Alliance (also part of AT&T's telecom policy efforts), featuring Boucher proclaiming that it was time to "return to the bi-partisan light regulatory oversight of broadband":

>>The first order of business for the new FCC should be a return to the bi-partisan light regulatory oversight of broadband launched during the Clinton administration. The decision to treat broadband as an information service unleashed a wave of investment in internet infrastructure that enabled our communications network to become the envy of the world. That progress has been undermined by the Commission's decision to treat broadband as a telecommunications service with regulatory requirements designed for the monopoly era of rotary telephones. Few regulatory changes would do more to promote investment and a stronger U.S. economy than a return to the time-honored light regulatory regime for broadband.

>If you're playing along at home and don't speak telecom sock-puppet, Boucher's effectively arguing Trump should back off the FCC's recent decision to reclassify ISPs as common carriers (which put the FCC on the proper legal footing to enforce net neutrality) and return to the FCC's earlier mantra of going out of its way to avoid doing much of anything that would hinder incumbent ISP profits. That's unfortunate, given that this was a period during which we pretended that if we let ISPs dictate all regulation they would magically deploy amazing new competitive broadband networks.

techdirt.com/articles/20161109/10362936007/wake-trump-win-isps-are-already-laying-groundwork-gutting-net-neutrality.shtml

Serious question: When did we actually have neutrality because the last time I checked people were still still getting throttled and most ISP's had data caps. Is this supposed to be manufactured outrage at something which never came to fruition?

...

Next time post a summary you constructed youre self instead of copy pasting a wall of text. No one cares about this thread because you dont know how to make one.

"Net Neutrality" was not what it should've been anyways. The decision was made by an un-elected, nondemocratic bureau, without the approval of Congress, and without the consent of the American people. If the people really want it, we need a new bill that would become the de facto authority on the internet, approved by Congress, and therefore by the majority of Americans, rather than five people sitting in a room who don't represent the people.

Did they only throttle you in pages with information they didn't want you to see?

you can get throttled, but just not on a per-content basis. ie you can't be given (by the isp) a slower up/down with hulu but a normal speed with netflix.

Is throttling not showing favor to those who use less bandwidth?

I really didn't understand the entire take of the FCC and what they meant by net neutrality. I remember something about how Netflix should not have to pay for their open connect devices that they Colo with isps.

throttling does so "equally", it doesn't throttle -specific- content providers in such a way that you would be likely to go somewhere else for that content.

So it's meant to only protect large corporations. I see.

Well what you just said is still happening sort of as far as I've heard (ISP's still counting Netflix as traffic even if it comes from their servers), but the whole debacle was supposed to be about how people claimed that ISP's could create "fast lanes" on the basis of content.
Honestly I do not agree with it. Like, let's say if I were a Muslim, for example, and I own an ISP, I would not be required to deliver content to customers such as an image with Muhammad's face. Thankfully I'm not a fucking muslim but that's the first example I came up with off the top of my head.

t. big data

I'm so glad my only choice is a local owned isp. Been rolling out fibre since 1993. No data caps afaik, could be in the terabytes that I never hit. Reasonably priced cable net where fibre isn't available.

WHERE DO YOU LIVE

Here's the kicker... alabama.

In America only, so much for the land of the free

FREEDOM!!!!

Cedar Falls, Iowa, has the same thing.

...

Tell me where motherfucker because that's where I live.

Troy

Fucking kill it already so we can get a new one. This time without normies.

sucks to be american

but muh memes

Good.

Wow, sure are a lot of Comcast shills here today!

you don't want the american public making decisions on how the internet is provided to us. people who vote the most can barely plug in their TV withoutasking their braindead teen for help. Any vote on an issue like this will result in ISPs fucking the public because it will make them more money and give them more control over content.

So president elected by memes want the free flow of memes?

Mass media has the dumbass assumption that they can successfully shoehorn people into watching only their shit. People will stop buying. Hell, if they try throttling traffic to Netflix and others they'll only be hurting themselves. Take Sony's streaming service for example: Sony is one of the biggest media companies on the planet, cuntbag ATT/Comcast/etc don't stand a chance.

What?

WW 1 was the war to end all wars like George W. Bush was the incompetent president to end all incompetent presidents.

Sony doesn't own the (tr/b)illions of dollars in infrastructure necessary to provide internet. Nor will they have access to the cable company poles. Just like Google Fiber.

That's what happens when people in a community get together and make decisions about their fate instead of depending on politicians and big business

FCC is well within their authority to govern as they please.

>backbone ISPs lay and maintain thousands of miles of fiber cables across the world to transport terabytes of data every second
>content providers build massive data centers to ensure your shitty weeb animes don't stutter while serving millions of other users at the same time
>ISPs you deal with link up with backbone ISPs at an internet exchange point that already exists, use existing telephone/TV cable lines built in the 70's to link you to the internet, and bitch when you use the bandwidth you purchased to the fullest

Are ISP's the niggers of the internet?

I'm glad.

anti-net neutrality is a plebbit meme and has no place here

How much are they paying you?

They are paying in good boy points

>This picture
>Implying it wasn't completely posed
I fucking hate liberals. There is NO WAY that this was legit and not just acting to try and dissuade people from voting Trump.

>t. Jamal

Wait, since when the fuck do blacks support the republican party? Aside from some 5%.
No, moron, I'm white - and British.

No.

If bandwidth costed nothing then why does Netflix charge more money for HD streaming? Why does Amazon charge out the ass for more bandwidth in hosting?

>techdirt
Opinion discarded. Let me know when someone else backs this up.

Just google "trump net neutrality"

i have no problem with it

the internet is and always has been a mistake

i really can't wait to lose access to websites, have slower speeds and have my bill increase 300%

it's a shop of a still from a popular movie you dumb faggot

>i've never seen american history: x

but my memes
but my rebellion against identity politics

Are you literally a fucking stupid fucking retard idiot?

Identity politics doesn't even extend much beyond tumblr

meshnet bruh

Amazon charges a hell of a lot less than Comcast.

GOOD

He is saying that since you are a moron you are black.

Bandwidth costs nothing, after the capital required to implement infrastructure to route that bandwidth.

What you're paying Amazon for isn't bandwidth, it's the cost for them to install enterprise routing hardware/software, and the cost for them to buy bandwidth from a service like Level 3 (who also has to pay to install enterprise routing hardware/software)

anything hard to understand is unfit for anything resembling full democracy, because 'the people' will never be simultaneously wise and enthusiastic enough for that to happen. that's (one reason) why our government has republican and committee components, not to mention federal bureaus.

do you think that the people would vote on a carbon tax? do you think even 25% of american voters understand the intricacies of conservation law? even 10% have foundational knowledge enough to know what the FDA does?

>why do they charge more for...
um...money? is that...difficult for you?

>last time I checked people were still still getting throttled and most ISP's had data caps.
Welcome to the United States of America, the land of the freedom

>implying he won't work to open up competition between ISPs

>implying large corporation don't collude.

This is a very good for competition. This also translates to more options and cheaper prices for consumers. It's been working for the past 13 years here in America. We really don't need Net Neutrality.

Retarded communists BTFO!

fuck off shill

also did he died

Go to bed, Wheeler.

lmaoing@the asian dude in the back completely missing out on the action

boy i cant wait for all the poor americans to dissapear from the internet that i visit because of throttling.
I feel life will become much more peaceful. Thanks Trump!

Don't thank me.

This is the future of American internet

We'll get more options. Unlike the rest of the World.

"Net Neutrality" is bad, retard.

>tfw would save money by cutting out all the bullshit
oki where do i sign

It's okay user, you are allowed to disagree with Mr. Trump. It's a free country.

The package that doesn't block Sup Forums is $70/month.

Why is there a sudden surge of plebs on this site

You must be GNU here! xD

You a whack ass bitch, go outside

not happening. he has peter thiel and kim dotcom advising him.

I hope Americans let it and cause harm to their own tech industry.

China will remain #1 for at least 10,000 years :DDD

Is Trump's win going to result in negative consequences for Google, compared to Facebook?

Schmidt was a strong supporter support of the Hillary campaign and Google had strong ties with the Obama administration. There have been allegations of bias on their part. Facebook, on the other hand, has Peter Thiel on their board, the guy who donated 1.25 million to Trump's campaign and was basically the only character in SV who supported him, and is apparently being considered for a position in the administration.

No. Trump wants to keep Google's contributions to the NSA.

No he is just 12

The FCC needs to be ABOLISHED

This is what you retards have been saying for 15 FUCKING YEARS

AND IT STILL NEVER HAPPENED

FUCK YOU


THE FCC DOESN'T NEED TO CONTROL THE INTERNET

KILL YOURSELF

You want microwave burns that cause a lifetime of intense pain?

>implying you know anything at all about economics
>implying they aren't competing all of the time
>implying the ones that try to collude won't get absolutely fucked over by the ones that compete

No.

>without the FCC microwave companies would release dangerous products and risk getting sued and going bankrupt

Are you retarded?

>Claims another user doesn't know about economics
>Himself doesn't mention market leads in a discussion about collusion.
kek

We didn't have it all the way yet because the telecom indsutry were being silmy fucks as usual, but we were making progress, especially since the FCC chair obama put in office actually turned out to be based as fuck and has been doing his job well

Except it is happening you cuck, look up zero rating

Also, the telecom industry is a giant fucking group of regional monpolies working together and fucking over consumers.

They nickel and dime you with data caps and fees for nesscary hardware, and then sell out your information to advertising companies

The FCC has actually been doing a good job trying to stop that shit

Thank god, I'm finally going to be free.

>Also, the telecom industry is a giant fucking group of regional monpolies working together and fucking over consumers.

Yes because they're in bed with the government and use state power to fuck over their competition.

Fuck you.

>The FCC has actually been doing a good job trying to stop that shit
Wow you REALLY enjoy every last bit of free speech left in america censored don't you?

Just fucking kill yourself.

>especially since the FCC chair obama put in office actually turned out to be based as fuck and has been doing his job well
Jesus christ you're such a lying shill piece of shit.

Nobody knows what you're talking about.

Peter Thiel is going to redpill the fuck out of him first.

"Net Neutrality" is a horrible fucking idea.

>obama
>not a complete retard and disaster

>fcc
>not an authoritarian pile of shit

Why the fuck are you even on this board?

wow, Trump is going to be another shitty corporatist republican with some shitty xenophobia tacked on
>muh populism
pathetic times

No, that's what happens when you ACTUALLY allow free market competition.