FCC loses key ruling on Internet `neutrality'

[ZeldaGamer00]

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FCC-loses-key-ruling-on-apf-78990100.html?x=0

tl;dr: This gives internet providers the right to charge you for "Extra programs" like how TV providers charge you for Extra channels, along with charging you for visiting a site that isn't on the "Approved" list for "Basic" Customers. (So I hope you like being able to use Google without paying an extra .99 a month for it)

I want to punch Comcast and AT&T in the face right now, and I want to punch hard.

 

[Cue]

1. Loads of companies will start using this idea.
2. One company will realise "Hey, all those guys are doing it, customers hate it, let's offer a service that doesn't use this idea!"
3. Everyone loves said company.
4. Other companies realise what a stupid move they made.
5. Things return to normal when the companies start losing shitloads of money.

That's the way I see this working, if anything.

I can't actually see how this would work that well though, since if you have packages you'd also have limits, how in the world would one make their own site if they don't have the package to do so? They'd need the unlimited access one to get into their newly purchased domain, surely?

Not worried, myself, I can't see Virgin Media doing this. Besides, just wait for Google, they're not gonna be offering package by package services any time soon.

 

[SSNTails]

I'm totally for net neutrality, but I think the picture is a little bigger than it might seem at first.

Right now, the Internet isn't controlled by anybody. No government or organization has any omnipresent authority over it. ICANN is probably as close as you'd get to something, at this point.

If a law is passed regarding net neutrality, you've just set a legal precedent for an organization to dictate what happens on the Internet. While this can be perceived as a 'good' thing for net neutrality, it also gives an organization the power to do bad things down the road, too.

With Google entering the broadband market, I feel a little bit better about just letting the Internet go as is. Like Cue mentioned, steps 1-5 will probably occur on their own.

 

[Mystic]

The only problem is that a lot of people are stuck with a single provider for their internet service. While people in heavily populated areas with multiple viable options for internet access can switch to a non-retarded ISP, people in rural areas or people where the cable company essentially has a monopoly on high-speed internet access (which Comcast is guilty of in many areas) have absolutely no choice and have to simply suck it up unless they'd like to use vastly slower options like dialup.

 

[Autosaver]

Mystic brings a good point. I know some friends that have to use X internet provider because they live in a small area.

 

[Fawfulfan]

That's the way it works for digital cable service, too. If we could, we'd change our service to a better one, but we've got the best one that's offered in our area.

 

[akirahedgehog]

I'm hoping Google's entrance into the ISP business will help keep others like Comcast and Charter(Charter is damn evil) away from adding such restrictions. I also hope Madison,WI gets to be a trial city for that fiber connection...

 

[Fawfulfan]

So you can attend the hearings, right?

 

[Project Dark Fox]

HUntsville's on that list of trial cities, too, but we haven't received any word on that. We've got three bad ISPs right now (Comcast, AT&T, and Knology) and I await the day Google rears its ugly mug here.