US net neutrality rules finalized, in effect November 20

[nsane.forums]

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/2R2M6.jpg"><br><br>Get ready, America—net neutrality finally comes to the Internet on November 20, 2011.<br><br>  That's the plan, at least. The FCC has just filed its <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2011-24259_PI.pdf" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">final "open Internet" rules</a> (PDF) with the <i>Federal Register</i>,  which will publish them tomorrow and make them official. The rules go  into effect on November 20, nearly a year after they were <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/verizons-anti-net-neutrality-lawsuit-tossed-on-technicality.ars" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">passed over Republican opposition on a 3-2 vote</a>. (One of the FCC Commissioners who voted against the rules <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/after-approving-comcastnbc-deal-fcc-commish-becomes-comcast-lobbyist.ars" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">now works for Comcast</a>.)<br><br>  But the plan will likely be derailed by lawsuits. Two, by Verizon and MetroPCS, were filed earlier this year but <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/verizons-anti-net-neutrality-lawsuit-tossed-on-technicality.ars" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">tossed</a> because the rules had yet to be finalized. With tomorrow's printing in the <i>Federal Register</i>,  the litigation floodgates will be thrown open and and complaints about  the government overstepping its authority can start pouring in.<br><br>  Those complaints might well meet with success, given how the FCC went  about the whole process. Rather than reclassifying broadband services  in such a way that the FCC has clear jurisdiction over them, the agency  relied instead on its much weaker "ancillary jurisdiction." (The legal  rationale for this begins on p. 77 of the final rules, and the FCC  gamely makes a case that it has the proper authority.) As law professor  James Grimmelmann noted today in our <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/09/ars-subscriber-chat-law-professor-james-grimmelmann.ars" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">subscriber-only webchat</a>,  "The FCC is in a real tangle here. I think if they reclassified  broadband service (long story), they'd have a better shot at getting  their rules to stick."<br><br>  As for the rules, they're the same modest regulations adopted back in December. Here's the FCC's own summary:<br>  <br><blockquote><i>First, transparency: fixed and mobile broadband providers  must disclose the network management practices, performance  characteristics, and commercial terms of their broadband services.  Second, no blocking: fixed broadband providers may not block lawful  content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices; mobile  broadband providers may not block lawful websites, or block applications  that compete with their voice or video telephony services. Third, no  unreasonable discrimination: fixed broadband providers may not  unreasonably discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic.</i></blockquote><br>  Mobile networks still have broad leeway to discriminate and throttle  and even block certain apps, though some of the most obviously  objectionable activities are forbidden.<br><br>  On the miraculous off-chance that no lawsuits are filed, however,  we'll have a side of net neutrality lite to accompany Thanksgiving's  pumpkin pie. But ISPs don't like constraints, no matter how modest, so  the matter will probably be decided by federal judges.<br><br><img src="http://www.nsaneforums.com/images/view.gif"> <b>View:</b> <a href="http://anonymz.com/?http://feeds.arstechnica.com/%7Er/arstechnica/index/%7E3/JGdKvu0qMJ8/us-net-neutrality-rules-finalized-in-effect-november-20.ars" class="bbc_url" title="External link" rel="nofollow external">Original Article</a>

[DKT27]

FCC Publishes Net Neutrality Rules

The FCC has officially published rules for Net Neutrality--here's how that affects you.

After 10 months on the shelf, the Federal Communications Commission's rules on net neutrality were finally published today in the Federal Register.

As written, the rules do three broad things for customers:

- Add transparency to how broadband providers--both wired and wireless--manage networks

- Prohibit wired broadband providers from blocking lawful content, applications, services, and non-harmful devices. Wireless providers are also barred from blocking lawful websites or applications that compete with voice or video services.

- Forbid wired broadband providers from discriminating in the transmission of lawful network traffic.

However, just because the rules have been published doesn't necessarily mean they'll take effect on November 20, as they're supposed to. This is because we expect both wired and wireless providers to challenge these rules in the courts--the way Verizon and MetroPCS challenged them back in January. The Verizon and MetroPCS cases were tossed, but only because the rules hadn't been finalized.

Approval of the rules in December 2010 was strictly along party lines. Three Democrats voted yes for the rules; two Republicans voted no. Since that time, one of the Republicans has accepted a job at Comcast.

Comcast actually spurred the FCC into action after it throttled BitTorrent traffic on its network. The FCC tried to penalize Comcast for this move, but a court ruled against the agency--since the FCC had no rules on net neutrality, it couldn't penalize Comcast for violating anything.

"The rules developed by the FCC take important steps to ensure that the Internet remains an open marketplace," Parul P. Desai, policy counsel for the Consumers Union, said in a statement.

"When purchasing Internet service, consumers rightfully expect that they will have equal access to all that the Web offers and shouldn't be held back because of industry tactics," Desai added. "For the first time, there will be clear rules to protect consumers and keep the Internet growing as an open, innovative environment."

President and co-founder o Public Knowledge Gigi B. Sohn wishes the rules were stronger--but says the regulations are a "good start."

"Companies providing Internet access services have informally abided by a neutrality policy since the FCC acted," Sohn said in a statement. "In that time, the Internet has not come crashing down and the government has not taken control over it."

Still, the rules and their creators have critics.

"The rules passed in December are riddled with loopholes," Matt Wood, policy director for Free Press told PCWorld in an email. "They don't do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination that is already occurring in the marketplace and that will only get worse."

"Even in their watered-down form, the rules might do some good," Wood acknowledges. "But that would require a vigilant FCC to carefully monitor and address complaints. This Commission's track record suggests that it isn't inclined to take decisive action to protect consumers."

View: Original Article

[myidisbb]

jsut more bs. if they really care they would make bandwith caps illegal.

but no.

they would also stop states from making online companies like amazon have to collect sales tax which is illegal.

but no.

just more vodoo liberal crap that name one think and does something else.

by all means i would and i demand net neutrality base on what those wrds actually mean. no caps

we have lost a lot of rights and freedoms since 96. google already being setup like its chinese version.

btw net neutrality also means the usa ice cant keep stealing dormains and web sites like its been doing.