Tags

, , , ,

F.C.C. Backs Opening Net Neutrality Rules for Debate, by Edward Wyatt, Technology, The New York Times

http://tinyurl.com/px528bf

The outcry over the FCC’s new neutrality rules for the Internet got the FCC’s attention. Big players, like Amazon and others, jumped in and urged the FCC to give this more thought.

For those who have not followed this story, basically the FCC’s proposed new rules would have changed the Internet as we know it today, and turn it into something more like the cable service.  The short version is that it would have allowed Internet providers to influence the content that you would see when you ran a search – not that there’s a certain amount of that going on now. Some called it going from the “free” internet to being run by the highest bidder. -CCE

Federal regulators appear to share one view about so-called net neutrality: It is a good thing.
But defining net neutrality? That is where things get messy.
On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to open for public debate new rules meant to guarantee an open Internet. Before the plan becomes final, though, the chairman of the commission, Tom Wheeler, will need to convince his colleagues and an array of powerful lobbying groups that the plan follows the principle of net neutrality, the idea that all content running through the Internet’s pipes is treated equally.
While the rules are meant to prevent Internet providers from knowingly slowing data, they would allow content providers to pay for a guaranteed fast lane of service. Some opponents of the plan, those considered net neutrality purists, argue that allowing some content to be sent along a fast lane would essentially discriminate against other content. . . .

Advertisements