Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Net Neutrality ...


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,270 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 23 December 2010 - 04:11 PM

All this debate puzzles me. The private sector did not put a dime into "inventing" the internet.

Are we still using that Internet or has private companies built their own internet similar to the one the government created?

It seems to me that a tracert to pretty much anywhere I go doesn't use the same Internet that existed when I got my first domain (1995). Nowadays the connections are private backbone to private backbone with the government nets only popping up when visiting government and some educational sites.

#22 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,550 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 23 December 2010 - 04:50 PM

Are we still using that Internet or has private companies built their own internet similar to the one the government created?

It seems to me that a tracert to pretty much anywhere I go doesn't use the same Internet that existed when I got my first domain (1995). Nowadays the connections are private backbone to private backbone with the government nets only popping up when visiting government and some educational sites.

I don't disagree. Much like the railroads in the west in the 19th Century, or the spreading of the power grid during the early 20th Century, where in both cases the Government facilitated the effort every step of the way, the Internet is a privately owned public utility system.

The tension is between the private owners and the "public" nature of the utility. The government has to maintain the balance.

"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#23 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Know Nothing

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 5,710 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 23 December 2010 - 05:02 PM

I'm guessing the some here on this thread work for ISPs that will be affected by the rules and are desperately engaging in propaganda to skew public opinion in their favor and against fairness to the consumer.
Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#24 OFFLINE   Nick

Nick

    Keep going - don't give up!

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 21,357 posts
  • LocationThe Beautiful Golden Isles of Coastal Georgia
Joined: Apr 23, 2002

Posted 23 December 2010 - 06:24 PM

Doesn't it all come down to whom do we trust to protect
net neutrality, the ISPs (Comcast, AT&T, etc.) or the FCC?

Here are our choices:

1. [ ] ISPs
2. [ ] FCC
3. [x] None of the above


What's that??? 'None of the above' isn't a choice?

My bad. :(

.


~ 12 Year Anniversary ~
Charter Gold Club Member
DBSTalk Club ~ 21k Club
Top 10 Poster

.


#25 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,550 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 23 December 2010 - 08:29 PM

Doesn't it all come down to whom do we trust to protect
net neutrality, the ISPs (Comcast, AT&T, etc.) or the FCC?

Here are our choices:

1. [ ] ISPs
2. [ ] FCC
3. [x] None of the above


What's that??? 'None of the above' isn't a choice?

My bad. :(

Actually, I'm not sure the FCC has the authority to do it either. So if you put it ISPs, Congress, or None of the above, the latter is really the only option.

"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#26 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Know Nothing

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 5,710 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 23 December 2010 - 09:36 PM

I've learned form many years of personal experience NOT to trust AT&T. Never had to deal with Comcast that I know of.


I cant' think of a single reason why it shouldn't be under the FCC. It's certainly a communications method. And it uses telephone, television (cable) and or radio/wireless/cellular services for access, all of which are already under FCC control.

Edited by SayWhat?, 23 December 2010 - 09:41 PM.

Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#27 OFFLINE   trh

trh

    This Space for Sale

  • Registered
  • 3,390 posts
  • LocationNE FL
Joined: Nov 02, 2007

Posted 23 December 2010 - 10:39 PM

The internet has gotten along just fine without the "help" of the FCC until now, it is not necessary and will ultimately lead to more regulations and restrictions than freedoms & "neutrality".

Sure it has [heavy sarcasm]. That is why the US ranks #15 when it comes to speed and costs. See Gizmodo link in post #11 of this thread. Japan averages speeds of 12 times faster than the US for 1/12th the price. Yep, we're doing just great.

I don't want the FCC to regulate the internet other than to ensure that we are allowed to surf/download without being blocked by the ISP. Some ISPs that are also content providers (e.g. COMCAST), have already shown that in their model of 'our' internet, they will block/throttle access to their competition.

#28 OFFLINE   kenglish

kenglish

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 972 posts
  • LocationSalt Lake City, Utah, USA
Joined: Oct 02, 2004

Posted 26 December 2010 - 10:11 AM

The FCC doesn't have to "ask" Congress' permission for anything...
Congress actually runs the FCC.
The FCC is a special type of entity that is under no other department or branch of government, except Congress itself. It does only THEIR bidding.

#29 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,270 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 26 December 2010 - 08:02 PM

The FCC doesn't have to "ask" Congress' permission for anything...
Congress actually runs the FCC.

So if the commissioners wanted to do something that was against what Congress wanted ... they would 'ask'.

The FCC has a lot of leeway with making their own decisions. As long as they are not going against Congress they make their own rules.

#30 OFFLINE   kenglish

kenglish

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 972 posts
  • LocationSalt Lake City, Utah, USA
Joined: Oct 02, 2004

Posted 27 December 2010 - 09:05 AM

Congress gives the FCC their orders, and the FCC is expected to make the rules that will carry them out. If the FCC goes too far, Congress can rein them in and make them change the rules.
But, Congress is the only body that can do so, since the FCC is not under any department (like Justice, Commerce, etc). Every other agency has a department or branch of government between them and the Congress/Administration.

#31 OFFLINE   James Long

James Long

    Ready for Uplink!

  • Super Moderators
  • 40,270 posts
Joined: Apr 17, 2003

Posted 27 December 2010 - 11:51 AM

Congress gives the FCC their orders, and the FCC is expected to make the rules that will carry them out.

The FCC does more than just copy the rules that Congress wrote. :rolleyes:

#32 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,550 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 27 December 2010 - 12:07 PM

Every other agency has a department or branch of government between them and the Congress/Administration.

A number of independent agencies exist.

In terms of domestic policy, probably the most important today is the Federal Reserve System which has the responsibility to conduct the nation's monetary policy, supervise and regulate banking institutions, maintain the stability of the financial system and provide financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions.

The first was the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) was a regulatory body in the United States created by the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which was signed into law by President Grover Cleveland. (The agency was abolished in 1995.) The ICC's original purpose was to regulate railroads (and later trucking) to ensure fair rates, to eliminate rate discrimination, and to regulate other aspects of common carriers.

Wikipedia lists about 30 examples under an article entitled Independent agencies of the United States government.

An example that many of us remember was when in 1971 Congress eliminated the Cabinet position of Postmaster General and created the United States Postal Service, defined by statute as an "independent establishment" of the federal government.

"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#33 OFFLINE   Shades228

Shades228

    Hall Of Fame

  • Banned User
  • 5,914 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 28 December 2010 - 07:26 PM

The FCC can reclassify ISP's and then they fall into the FCC domain for regulation on internet. They are attempting to not use that legal loop hole. They have the authority to do so under those laws. That's all the Appeals court validated was that if the FCC doesn't change the clasification they don't have that authority.

If people hate carriage disputes now wait until there are such things with ISP's. The only difference is in most areas you're limited on choices to maybe 2-3 options. Yes there are some areas where you have 5+(you don't need to tell us) those are the exception to the rule.

I'm not a fan of regulations because if written poorly or done incorrectly they have the potential for the same backlash. Companies are going to find ways to make as much money as possible. That's their goal and we award them for it. However I am in favor of something that clearly and unerringly states that companies in charge of distribution of bandwidth may not impede speed, or delivery of any legal content. If the need for clasification needs to be made then it needs to be written so that new clasifications cannot be created by adding a "feature" to it.

I cannot see in any way how this can impede a companies ability to design new content and compete. I can see how it can impede a companies ability to start new fee systems like we have currently for TV. Imagine having to pay more for unhindered access to Disney's websites. The possibilities are endless on how pay for content/bandwidtch could change the internet in a negative way. It isn't much of a stretch to say that the current pay for TV model could be the next internet usage model.
  • yosoyellobo likes this

#34 OFFLINE   FTA Michael

FTA Michael

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,474 posts
Joined: Jul 21, 2002

Posted 30 December 2010 - 11:28 AM

Imagine having to pay more for unhindered access to Disney's websites.

In a way, we're already there. I'd love to have access to streaming video on ESPN3 (formerly ESPN360.com), but it's completely unavailable to me because of my ISP.

If I had chosen Comcast to provide my internet access, ESPN3 would be free to me. Since I use Qwest instead, ESPN3 is unavailable at any price.

I don't know that I'd be willing to spend more than a dollar or two for ESPN3, but it irks me that it has to be either in the "basic tier" of internet service (so every ISP user pays for it) or not available.
Yes, FTABlog is active again. Why do you ask?

#35 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,550 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 19 February 2014 - 02:34 PM

From FCC to try again on net neutrality we learn:

 

Will net neutrality live? The FCC said today it will propose new Open Internet rules, an announcement that comes about a month after a court decision was thought to have killed hopes about equal treatment of online traffic.

 

A federal appeals court last month handed Verizon a victory in its lawsuit challenging the Federal Communications Commission’s authority to regulate its broadband business. Verizon immediately stated its commitment to an open Internet. But the ruling was widely viewed as a blow to the Internet as we know it, a move that would pave the way for broadband providers to slow or block certain Internet traffic. Our own Troy Wolverton wrote: “If you like how cable television works, you’re going to love how a court decision Tuesday could change the Internet.”

 

“The FCC must stand strongly behind its responsibility to oversee the public interest standard and ensure that the Internet remains open and fair,” said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler in a statement today. Wheeler said his office would not legally challenge the Verizon decision, but that it would “hold Internet Service Providers to their commitment” to “honor the safeguards articulated in the 2010 Open Internet Order.”


"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#36 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Know Nothing

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 5,710 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:40 PM

 

Los Angeles Times
24 minutes ago
  photo.jpg
Written by
dawn chmielewski          
Updated to correct the name of Netflix's Open Connect initiative. Netflix Inc. has agreed to pay Comcast Corp. to ensure the online service's subscribers get seamless access to movies and TV shows delivered over the Internet,

I've also seen mention that Verizon may be doing the opposite - throttling speeds to NF.

 

 

And so it begins.


Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#37 OFFLINE   SayWhat?

SayWhat?

    Know Nothing

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 5,710 posts
Joined: Jun 06, 2009

Posted 23 February 2014 - 03:44 PM

 

Long-running disputes involving Verizon, Netflix, and Internet bandwidth providers are flaring up, causing recent slowdowns in Netflix speed.

 

According to a Wall Street Journal report tonight, "[t]he online-video service has been at odds with Verizon Communications Inc. and other broadband providers for months over how much Netflix streaming content they will carry without being paid additional fees. Now the long simmering conflict has heated up and is slowing Netflix, in particular, on Verizon's fiber-optic FiOS service, where Netflix says its average prime-time speeds dropped by 14 percent last month."

http://arstechnica.c...ic-wsj-reports/


Help stamp out Twits and Twitterers!

HD, SchmacHD!! Just be glad you've got a picture at all.

#38 OFFLINE   jsk

jsk

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 735 posts
Joined: Dec 26, 2006

Posted 23 February 2014 - 08:27 PM

If I pay for Internet service, I should be able to go to any website that I please.  What if Comcast/Vivendi/Universal/NBC/(soon to be)Time Warner Cable take it to the next level and decided to block websites for unfriendly political candidates, their competitors, or ideas that they don't like?  These companies are getting too powerful in deciding what they will allow you to see.

 

I was a little irritated that when I was in Target one time, whenever I went to some of their competitors' websites, it redirected me to the Target website.  Even though their WiFi is "free," (which I am really paying for when I buy something) they shouldn't be deciding which websites I visit.  It looks like they have stopped doing this, but it shows that companies will do things like this.


Dish Player DVR 722K with OTA module connected to the Eastern Arc

#39 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,550 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 23 April 2014 - 05:39 PM

From The Hollywood Reporter:

 

...The  Federal Communications Commission is expected to begin circulating new rules on Thursday that would open the way for content companies to pay Internet service providers like Comcast, Charter, Verizon, AT&T and Cox Communications for faster service and special access to consumers.

 

The new rules come after a federal appeals court in January struck down net neutrality rules pushed by the Obama administration and approved by the FCC  that prohibited Internet providers from blocking or prioritizing Web traffic. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has said in February that there would be new rules proposed in light of the court ruling.

 

Under the proposed rules, Internet service providers would still be prevented from blocking or discriminating against specific  websites but they would be able to offer preferential treatment as long as it is done at a reasonable price and is offered to everyone. It will be up to the FCC to decide what is reasonable.

 

 

If I were starting a new thread, I would entitle it "End to Net Neutrality Coming". It's unclear what this will actually mean in the year 2020 other than paying higher fees to streaming services like Netflix and Amazon. I'm sure it won't slow down access to my personal web site. :sure: 


"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#40 OFFLINE   Nick

Nick

    Keep going - don't give up!

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 21,357 posts
  • LocationThe Beautiful Golden Isles of Coastal Georgia
Joined: Apr 23, 2002

Posted 23 April 2014 - 06:40 PM

I agree ...  it's the beginning of the end of net neutrality. When

Comcast squeezed Netflix' nuts we all felt a sharp twinge of pain.

Too big to fail has turned into 'too big to lose'. Thanks, FCC and

DOJ and a bought and paid for Congress.

 

For consumers, it's all downhill from here. Say goodnight, Gracie.


.


~ 12 Year Anniversary ~
Charter Gold Club Member
DBSTalk Club ~ 21k Club
Top 10 Poster

.





Protected By... spam firewall...And...