This is big. It allows ISPs to control how, for how much and potentially if, you can get the content you want from the Interwebitubes. For example, if viewing a movie online on Netflix starts costing more for a customer than having the disk sent because movies use more bandwidth and get charged at a higher rate by your ISP, fewer people will use it. It might not be cost effective for Netflix to offer the service anymore. Many more examples have been floated.
It will be interesting to see how Google’s proposed gigabit Internet fits into this. If they’re successful, the net neutrality issue of tiered pricing may become moot. Of course, then Google will control your bits.
A U.S. appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Federal Communications Commission overstepped when it cited cable-giant Comcast Corp. for slowing some Internet traffic on its network, dealing a blow to big Web commerce companies and other proponents of “net neutrality.”
In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the FCC exceeded its authority when it sanctioned Comcast in 2008 for deliberately preventing some subscribers from using peer-to-peer file-sharing services to download large files.
At stake is how far the FCC can go to dictate the way Internet providers like AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. manage traffic on their multibillion-dollar networks. For the past decade or so, the FCC has maintained a mostly hands-off approach to Internet regulation. But that could soon change, likely setting off a prolonged, expensive lobbying battle pitting Web-content providers against Internet-service providers.
# 26 Angus:
“If the FCC got permission to regulate the internet, couldn’t they regulate content as well ala the fairness doctrine and public decency standards? […]”
The Fairness Doctrine is dead. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) is the _only_ governmental entity that has pushed for net neutrality, other than the odd Congressman or two, who were quickly shouted down. Whoever is trying to scare you with the Big Bad Bugaboo formerly known as the Fairness Doctrine is lying to you. This fear is being pushed by Robber Barons who want free and unfettered access to our wallets without any inconvenient regulation. This may die down for a while, as most of their efforts in the near future will be spent desperately fighting the coming financial re-regulation and consumer protection proposals. (Watch for the lies about these programs to start up very soon.)
Yeah, I know the americans live in an american centered universe. But it seems to me that this is between yall. I do seem to recall a certain amount of regulation coming from the PUC (Public Utilities Commission) that would protect consumers from certain abuses that the new FCC posture might facilitate. The most remarkable aspect of this all is the ease with which certain private interests can influence government policy and regulation. The US government is soooo owned.
Once again you have a government making laws and have no idea of what they are doing.
“BTW, you CAN blame this on Bush, since it was under Bush’s ‘leadership’ that ISP’s were deregulated in order to provide for increased competition. That worked out well, didn’t it?”
Yes, deregulation almost always works… to the advantage of those deregulated over their customers.
I blogged a response to all this nonsense days ago:
http://j.mp/9dwW8o
Bottom line is that this if not any kind of legal Rubicon. The courts have put this, quite correctly, in the FCC’s hands.
Net neutrality is alive and well and currently de facto in force.
Wake me up when Comcast raises my bill for watching Youtube or Level 3 decides to start overbilling Google.
THAT will be news about net neutrality. This is just less than important, or impressive.