Al Franken takes dummy Ted Cruz to School

[Carla_Danger]

 

[ClosedCaption]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

Thats the question and the Telecoms want to change it to a corporate playground where companies can pay for faster internet. The internet is fast already.

Make no mistake VERIZON SUED THE GOVT on this issue. They didnt sue because the govt wanted to DO SOMETHING. They sued because the govt WOULDNT ALLOW THE TELECOMS to change the internet.

“Verizon vs. FCC presents a very significant historical moment,” says Susan Crawford, a tech policy expert and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who served as Special Assistant to President Obama for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. “The question presented by the case is: Does the U.S. government have any role in ensuring ubiquitous, open, world-class, interconnected, reasonably priced Internet access?”
​

Landmark Verizon 8216 Net Neutrality 8217 Case Tests Open Internet Rules TIME.com


The principle of net neutrality was enshrined in the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet order, which aims to prevent Internet service providers (ISPs) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from interfering with Internet traffic or favoring their own services in order to disadvantage rivals. The main thrust of the order boils down to three rules. First, the order requires ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion; second, the ISPs are prohibited from blocking traffic such as Skype or Netflix on wired networks; third, the order outlaws “unreasonable” discrimination, meaning the ISPs can’t put such services into an Internet “slow lane” in order to benefit their own competing services.

Now I dont know about you but it would suck if I couldnt get onto google because Comcast forced me to Bing. Or Ebay over Deals.com. Or I couldnt buy a book from a local shop because I cant get onto the site but Amazon is running smooth.

Do you think this is good for the Consumer?

Our internet is slower and more expensive than other nations.

Do you think that is something that will change once they get to put their product infront of others?

Will you at least read up on it before being against it outright? Yes the govt wants to treat it like a utility and that can change but the alternative is letting them put what they want in front and making other areas of the internet virtually inaccessible. Sure you can wait wait for a site while it buffers you to death too. Thats always an option

 

[RDD_1210]

If this is just about Netflix and Apple why are so many other major companies in favor of Net Neutrality?

What businesses are against Net Neutrality? The Major ISPs and thats it. Why is that?

The content providers are in favor of new law which ensures a free ride for them. The backbone operators seek to recoup the cost of their investments by charging the heavy media users - specifically Google, Amazon, NetFlix, and Blizzard, for the load they place on the system.

Oh, and out here in the Peoples Republic, we weigh trucks and charge them based on that weight for using certain roads - so we are talking exactly the same thing here.

So which companies are against net neutrality? I missed the part where you posted that.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

What you just said, is absolute nonsense. You are completely, entirely, making things up out of nowhere. Fear mongering? Talking about taxes and other such blatherings is the real fear mongering.

Listen, if you want to be against net neutrality, be against it. But be honest. Admit what you're real interests are. If you believe that Comcast and Time Warner censoring content based on who is willing to pay them to be accessible, and to coerce people into consuming more their own content, then just say so. If you think it's a great idea for Comcast to block Fox News online and only allow NBC and MSNBC in, then just admit that that's what you want. If you just hate something because you hate Obama and you'd rather be anti-Obama than actually think an issue through, confess that that's how you feel. But please, for the love of god, do not go around making up more stupid shit. Because all you're accomplishing when you do that is giving John Gruber a virtual hand job.

The only reason the government wants control of the internet is content and income. Are you too stupid to actually follow that? Comcast and Time Warner need people signed up for their service and if blocking certain sites will reduce their income then they won't do that. On the other hand only the government has unlimited funding and has no incentive to provide what people want but what they want you to have.

We have net neutrality right now, the best kind of net neutrality. The kind where consumers dictate what they want and how much of it they will get for what price.

I hate obie, he's a lying piece of shit. Gruber actually told you this administration would lie to you to get any law passed yet you still believe in them. I'm not the liar here your president and the Gruber's of his administration are.

If net neutrality passes you will be paying new taxes on it and you will be only seeing what the government want's you to see.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

What you just said, is absolute nonsense. You are completely, entirely, making things up out of nowhere. Fear mongering? Talking about taxes and other such blatherings is the real fear mongering.

Listen, if you want to be against net neutrality, be against it. But be honest. Admit what you're real interests are. If you believe that Comcast and Time Warner censoring content based on who is willing to pay them to be accessible, and to coerce people into consuming more their own content, then just say so. If you think it's a great idea for Comcast to block Fox News online and only allow NBC and MSNBC in, then just admit that that's what you want. If you just hate something because you hate Obama and you'd rather be anti-Obama than actually think an issue through, confess that that's how you feel. But please, for the love of god, do not go around making up more stupid shit. Because all you're accomplishing when you do that is giving John Gruber a virtual hand job.

The only reason the government wants control of the internet is content and income. Are you too stupid to actually follow that? Comcast and Time Warner need people signed up for their service and if blocking certain sites will reduce their income then they won't do that. On the other hand only the government has unlimited funding and has no incentive to provide what people want but what they want you to have.

We have net neutrality right now, the best kind of net neutrality. The kind where consumers dictate what they want and how much of it they will get for what price.

I hate obie, he's a lying piece of shit. Gruber actually told you this administration would lie to you to get any law passed yet you still believe in them. I'm not the liar here your president and the Gruber's of his administration are.

If net neutrality passes you will be paying new taxes on it and you will be only seeing what the government want's you to see.

Your hate for "obie" has made you delusional. There's only one kind of Net Neutrality, and we have it now. We are trying to keep it that way. You just pulled the new taxes lie right out of your ass. You're making shit up as you go.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

Thats the question and the Telecoms want to change it to a corporate playground where companies can pay for faster internet. The internet is fast already.

Make no mistake VERIZON SUED THE GOVT on this issue. They didnt sue because the govt wanted to DO SOMETHING. They sued because the govt WOULDNT ALLOW THE TELECOMS to change the internet.

“Verizon vs. FCC presents a very significant historical moment,” says Susan Crawford, a tech policy expert and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who served as Special Assistant to President Obama for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. “The question presented by the case is: Does the U.S. government have any role in ensuring ubiquitous, open, world-class, interconnected, reasonably priced Internet access?”
​

Landmark Verizon 8216 Net Neutrality 8217 Case Tests Open Internet Rules TIME.com


The principle of net neutrality was enshrined in the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet order, which aims to prevent Internet service providers (ISPs) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from interfering with Internet traffic or favoring their own services in order to disadvantage rivals. The main thrust of the order boils down to three rules. First, the order requires ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion; second, the ISPs are prohibited from blocking traffic such as Skype or Netflix on wired networks; third, the order outlaws “unreasonable” discrimination, meaning the ISPs can’t put such services into an Internet “slow lane” in order to benefit their own competing services.

Now I dont know about you but it would suck if I couldnt get onto google because Comcast forced me to Bing. Or Ebay over Deals.com. Or I couldnt buy a book from a local shop because I cant get onto the site but Amazon is running smooth.

Do you think this is good for the Consumer?

Our internet is slower and more expensive than other nations.

Do you think that is something that will change once they get to put their product infront of others?

Will you at least read up on it before being against it outright? Yes the govt wants to treat it like a utility and that can change but the alternative is letting them put what they want in front and making other areas of the internet virtually inaccessible. Sure you can wait wait for a site while it buffers you to death too. Thats always an option

And you actually believe the government is going to solve this problem. You know who can solve this problem? You. Why would comcast make you go to bing when you can choose your own search engine? If they don't allow that maybe you should change providers. And as a side note why would they ever force you to use a search engine you don't like?

The only way they could possibly make you use bing, or google or any other search engine with no choice of your own is government regulation. The same regulation you fear that comes with lobbying our law makers for net neutrality. Which may as well be named "net we keep shit the same and don't let anyone else out do us because it's the law".

Net neutrality means the net will get more expensive, less options and less user friendly. Kind of like obiecare and your SS retirement.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

What you just said, is absolute nonsense. You are completely, entirely, making things up out of nowhere. Fear mongering? Talking about taxes and other such blatherings is the real fear mongering.

Listen, if you want to be against net neutrality, be against it. But be honest. Admit what you're real interests are. If you believe that Comcast and Time Warner censoring content based on who is willing to pay them to be accessible, and to coerce people into consuming more their own content, then just say so. If you think it's a great idea for Comcast to block Fox News online and only allow NBC and MSNBC in, then just admit that that's what you want. If you just hate something because you hate Obama and you'd rather be anti-Obama than actually think an issue through, confess that that's how you feel. But please, for the love of god, do not go around making up more stupid shit. Because all you're accomplishing when you do that is giving John Gruber a virtual hand job.

The only reason the government wants control of the internet is content and income. Are you too stupid to actually follow that? Comcast and Time Warner need people signed up for their service and if blocking certain sites will reduce their income then they won't do that. On the other hand only the government has unlimited funding and has no incentive to provide what people want but what they want you to have.

We have net neutrality right now, the best kind of net neutrality. The kind where consumers dictate what they want and how much of it they will get for what price.

I hate obie, he's a lying piece of shit. Gruber actually told you this administration would lie to you to get any law passed yet you still believe in them. I'm not the liar here your president and the Gruber's of his administration are.

If net neutrality passes you will be paying new taxes on it and you will be only seeing what the government want's you to see.

Your hate for "obie" has made you delusional. There's only one kind of Net Neutrality, and we have it now. We are trying to keep it that way. You just pulled the new taxes lie right out of your ass. You're making shit up as you go.

The government has been trying their best at every level to tax it. Have you not noticed this?

You're right we have net neutrality now. Why would you want to fuck that up with government intervention in something that is working perfectly?

The internet will stay exactly as it is right up to the moment the government gets to decide what it is. How stupid do you have to be to actually think government is actually going to make the internet better.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

Thats the question and the Telecoms want to change it to a corporate playground where companies can pay for faster internet. The internet is fast already.

Make no mistake VERIZON SUED THE GOVT on this issue. They didnt sue because the govt wanted to DO SOMETHING. They sued because the govt WOULDNT ALLOW THE TELECOMS to change the internet.

“Verizon vs. FCC presents a very significant historical moment,” says Susan Crawford, a tech policy expert and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who served as Special Assistant to President Obama for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. “The question presented by the case is: Does the U.S. government have any role in ensuring ubiquitous, open, world-class, interconnected, reasonably priced Internet access?”
​

Landmark Verizon 8216 Net Neutrality 8217 Case Tests Open Internet Rules TIME.com


The principle of net neutrality was enshrined in the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet order, which aims to prevent Internet service providers (ISPs) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from interfering with Internet traffic or favoring their own services in order to disadvantage rivals. The main thrust of the order boils down to three rules. First, the order requires ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion; second, the ISPs are prohibited from blocking traffic such as Skype or Netflix on wired networks; third, the order outlaws “unreasonable” discrimination, meaning the ISPs can’t put such services into an Internet “slow lane” in order to benefit their own competing services.

Now I dont know about you but it would suck if I couldnt get onto google because Comcast forced me to Bing. Or Ebay over Deals.com. Or I couldnt buy a book from a local shop because I cant get onto the site but Amazon is running smooth.

Do you think this is good for the Consumer?

Our internet is slower and more expensive than other nations.

Do you think that is something that will change once they get to put their product infront of others?

Will you at least read up on it before being against it outright? Yes the govt wants to treat it like a utility and that can change but the alternative is letting them put what they want in front and making other areas of the internet virtually inaccessible. Sure you can wait wait for a site while it buffers you to death too. Thats always an option

And you actually believe the government is going to solve this problem. You know who can solve this problem? You. Why would comcast make you go to bing when you can choose your own search engine? If they don't allow that maybe you should change providers. And as a side note why would they ever force you to use a search engine you don't like?

The only way they could possibly make you use bing, or google or any other search engine with no choice of your own is government regulation. The same regulation you fear that comes with lobbying our law makers for net neutrality. Which may as well be named "net we keep shit the same and don't let anyone else out do us because it's the law".

Net neutrality means the net will get more expensive, less options and less user friendly. Kind of like obiecare and your SS retirement.

Net Neutrality means more Obummer FEMA camps and coffins. LOL!

 

[Carla_Danger]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

What you just said, is absolute nonsense. You are completely, entirely, making things up out of nowhere. Fear mongering? Talking about taxes and other such blatherings is the real fear mongering.

Listen, if you want to be against net neutrality, be against it. But be honest. Admit what you're real interests are. If you believe that Comcast and Time Warner censoring content based on who is willing to pay them to be accessible, and to coerce people into consuming more their own content, then just say so. If you think it's a great idea for Comcast to block Fox News online and only allow NBC and MSNBC in, then just admit that that's what you want. If you just hate something because you hate Obama and you'd rather be anti-Obama than actually think an issue through, confess that that's how you feel. But please, for the love of god, do not go around making up more stupid shit. Because all you're accomplishing when you do that is giving John Gruber a virtual hand job.

The only reason the government wants control of the internet is content and income. Are you too stupid to actually follow that? Comcast and Time Warner need people signed up for their service and if blocking certain sites will reduce their income then they won't do that. On the other hand only the government has unlimited funding and has no incentive to provide what people want but what they want you to have.

We have net neutrality right now, the best kind of net neutrality. The kind where consumers dictate what they want and how much of it they will get for what price.

I hate obie, he's a lying piece of shit. Gruber actually told you this administration would lie to you to get any law passed yet you still believe in them. I'm not the liar here your president and the Gruber's of his administration are.

If net neutrality passes you will be paying new taxes on it and you will be only seeing what the government want's you to see.

Your hate for "obie" has made you delusional. There's only one kind of Net Neutrality, and we have it now. We are trying to keep it that way. You just pulled the new taxes lie right out of your ass. You're making shit up as you go.

The government has been trying their best at every level to tax it. Have you not noticed this?

You're right we have net neutrality now. Why would you want to fuck that up with government intervention in something that is working perfectly?

The internet will stay exactly as it is right up to the moment the government gets to decide what it is. How stupid do you have to be to actually think government is actually going to make the internet better.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

Thats the question and the Telecoms want to change it to a corporate playground where companies can pay for faster internet. The internet is fast already.

Make no mistake VERIZON SUED THE GOVT on this issue. They didnt sue because the govt wanted to DO SOMETHING. They sued because the govt WOULDNT ALLOW THE TELECOMS to change the internet.

“Verizon vs. FCC presents a very significant historical moment,” says Susan Crawford, a tech policy expert and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law who served as Special Assistant to President Obama for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy. “The question presented by the case is: Does the U.S. government have any role in ensuring ubiquitous, open, world-class, interconnected, reasonably priced Internet access?”
​

Landmark Verizon 8216 Net Neutrality 8217 Case Tests Open Internet Rules TIME.com


The principle of net neutrality was enshrined in the FCC’s 2010 Open Internet order, which aims to prevent Internet service providers (ISPs) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from interfering with Internet traffic or favoring their own services in order to disadvantage rivals. The main thrust of the order boils down to three rules. First, the order requires ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion; second, the ISPs are prohibited from blocking traffic such as Skype or Netflix on wired networks; third, the order outlaws “unreasonable” discrimination, meaning the ISPs can’t put such services into an Internet “slow lane” in order to benefit their own competing services.

Now I dont know about you but it would suck if I couldnt get onto google because Comcast forced me to Bing. Or Ebay over Deals.com. Or I couldnt buy a book from a local shop because I cant get onto the site but Amazon is running smooth.

Do you think this is good for the Consumer?

Our internet is slower and more expensive than other nations.

Do you think that is something that will change once they get to put their product infront of others?

Will you at least read up on it before being against it outright? Yes the govt wants to treat it like a utility and that can change but the alternative is letting them put what they want in front and making other areas of the internet virtually inaccessible. Sure you can wait wait for a site while it buffers you to death too. Thats always an option

And you actually believe the government is going to solve this problem. You know who can solve this problem? You. Why would comcast make you go to bing when you can choose your own search engine? If they don't allow that maybe you should change providers. And as a side note why would they ever force you to use a search engine you don't like?

The only way they could possibly make you use bing, or google or any other search engine with no choice of your own is government regulation. The same regulation you fear that comes with lobbying our law makers for net neutrality. Which may as well be named "net we keep shit the same and don't let anyone else out do us because it's the law".

Net neutrality means the net will get more expensive, less options and less user friendly. Kind of like obiecare and your SS retirement.

Net Neutrality means more Obummer FEMA camps and coffins. LOL!

Why the fuck are you stepping into the coffin and happily closing the lid?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“He has it completely wrong, he just doesn’t understand what this issue is,” the Minnesota Democrat said of Cruz. “We’ve had net neutrality the entire history of the Internet.”

And of course Cruz isn't alone among republicans who have it wrong.

 

[Clementine]

“CNN’s website, [and] a blogger in Duluth, Minnesota travels at the same speed… The New York Times, their website travels the same speed,” Franken pointed out. “That’s the way that it’s been from the beginning. And we want to keep it that way.”

Er, so why does the government have to get involved?

The same reason they wanted to get involved in mortgage loans, auto companies, banks and health care. They are control freaks. Of course, like with everything else, they claim they are doing it to protect us, but the reality is that more power for them will be written into the bill and that is the real reason they are getting involved. It's one thing to just keep fair laws on the books and another for them to inject themselves in the middle of the free market and dictate everything.

 

[Judicial review]

Lets get something straight right now. Cruz is fucking overrated and a dumbass who will never ever be president. If he runs our country and mainly gop primarys will hurt. He will fuck with the rights chances to win and do more harm than good. The only thing in life hes done is win a senate seat. He has no record and no proposls or ideas. Hes fucked.

 

[Dana7360]

Net neutrality is nothing more than a ploy for government regulating what you can see based on their perception of what you need.

Net neutrality is a foot in the door to net taxes, net regulations and much like healthcare ended up making one group pay for another group to get it free.

All of this bullshit about wanting to keep it like it is fear mongering. It is like it is because it's not regulated by the fucking government. That's what makes it work so well. So how do you fuck that up? You tell people it's going to change if the government doesn't get involved and then the government promptly makes the net exactly as bad as they said it would be without them. Only this time they need revenue to fix what they fucked up and of course that means taxes.

We have a perfect system without the government, why would anyone want to fuck that up?

I'm sorry but the internet is regulated. It's been regulated since day one. In fact the government owned and created it.

When it started regulations made it illegal to do commerce on the internet. That was changed in the early 1990s.

Here's some of the regulations and laws passed on the internet:

• 1997 NET Act
  • This was the first act to relate specifically to the Internet. The No Electronic Theft (NET) Act made the online distribution of copyrighted material illegal. The effects of this were made quite apparent in the famous case of A&M Records v. Napster. Internet TV websites are in direct breach of this law if they display or distribute copyrighted content without permission from the copyright holder. This has caused video-giant YouTube to have strict rules regarding copyrighted material. If the copyright holder requests a clip to be taken down, the website has to comply.
    
    YouTube does contain copyrighted material, however, and as long as it is authorized by the owner, there is no legal issue at all. There are many websites where you can watch Internet TV legally, so there is little need to even visit an illegal website. For example, NBC, CNN and ESPN's websites let you catch up on TV for free, and there are even websites which offer movies legally.
    
    
  1998 Digital Milennium Copyright Act
  • The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) increased the penalties of Internet-based copyright infringement, and also introduced laws against bypassing or manipulating any systems in place to prevent copyright infringement. So even if you don't actually break copyright law, if you circumvent any measure designed to protect it, you are also breaking the law.
    
    For Internet TV, these regulations begin to affect websites like Peek Vid, which merely linked to infringing content. It is easy to understand how they could have been seen to be facilitating the breaking of the NET Act, and the government is tightening the regulations, although linking laws still remain hazy. As is evident from Web TV Wire's interview with linking law expert Stephen Ott, the bottom line is that if you receive a DMCA request to take down a link to material that is not authorized by the copyright owner, you must comply if you want to keep your website up.

Older laws/regulations for copyright also apply to the internet:

1967 Copyright Act

• The Department of Justice's 2002 report on Intellectual Property Theft gives a clear run down of the evolution of copyright law. The 1967 Copyright Act provided the general laws regarding copyright infringement. It is an elaboration on a set of basic laws (passed in 1897) that prohibited the replication of music or dramas without the copyright owners' permission. As technology moved on, the law changed to accommodate, and we now have more specific rules prohibiting the reproduction or unauthorized recording of films, albums and live performances. Obviously these earlier rules were established without specific reference to Internet TV, but the booming online industry encourages and perhaps even facilitates the breaking of these basic government regulations.
  
  Here's a link to a couple sites that lists some of the regulations on the internet:
  
  Internet Government Regulations | Regulations & Law
  
  Government Laws / Internet Laws : Online Resources | The Business Library

 

[Judicial review]

The only thing the internet is good for is porn. Oh shit and this board...

 

[BluesLegend]

Lets get something straight right now. Cruz is fucking overrated and a dumbass who will never ever be president. If he runs our country and mainly gop primarys will hurt. He will fuck with the rights chances to win and do more harm than good. The only thing in life hes done is win a senate seat. He has no record and no proposls or ideas. Hes fucked.

Hell if the country elected Obama and Biden they will elect anyone.

 

[Judicial review]

Lets get something straight right now. Cruz is fucking overrated and a dumbass who will never ever be president. If he runs our country and mainly gop primarys will hurt. He will fuck with the rights chances to win and do more harm than good. The only thing in life hes done is win a senate seat. He has no record and no proposls or ideas. Hes fucked.

Hell if the country elected Obama and Biden they will elect anyone.

Dude, dont say shit like that. Stuff like that turns the bats loose in my head. Im trying to stay sane here. I will be right back. Clonopin time.

 

[MaxGrit]

First of all, the courts have stated that the internet can be regulated under title II. Secondly, placing it under Title II doesn't change the internet as it is today. It provides more consumer protections against corporate take over of the base function of the internet, which is to provide equality among users.

The internet is currently a title I utility. This means that it is loosely regulated. CHANGING it to a title II utility as Net Neutrality seeks to do makes it a tightly regulated utility.

You of the left see more government as better, and total government as perfect - I get it. But Cruz is right on the nose that this is the same shit as Obamacare, democrats are flat out lying about the issue and what you propose. You are NOT leaving things the same, you seek a drastic change that is not in the interest of the consumer.

{
The other road — which relies on Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 — would resuscitate decades-old public-utility regulations and enable the FCC (and a new layer of state agencies) to regulate prices and micromanage Internet services. This is the road back in time that the president endorsed.

Each year, the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) prepares an “Investment Heroes” report identifying the companies that are investing the most in the United States. In 2013, the telecom and cable industry led the list with $46 billion in investment. Compare that with Europe, where Title II-style regulations have suffocated broadband innovation and investment. Indeed, even the president admitted in his announcement that “network investment remained strong” under the current rules.}

Obama s plan to regulate the Internet would do more harm than good - The Washington Post

Don't fix what isn't broken. EZ

 

[The Rabbi]

So why do we need a law to keep it the same?

Because they're trying to put in fast lanes. They want to create a 2 tiered system. What part of that don't you understand?

What a bitch, I was asking a question. What is your issue?

I have no opinion on net neutrality. I am trying to get info, not to worry, I'll ask people that aren't bitchy. Have a good night and I hope you get that stick out of your ass.

I apologize. You're right, that was rude. I thought you were being sarcastic, and I was getting tired of repeating myself.

This might help.

Thank you for the video, I struggle with making the Internet a utility. I am just wondering however, why we want or need more regulation, I work in a very regulated industry and find while some laws are helpful, many are needless. That is why when you said it wouldn't change anything, then I wonder why we need more laws. I'll continue to research, my knee jerk response is no, but that is why I research before I decide.

This is one issue that I think Republican's would be on board with the free market. Without Net Neutrality there is no free market on the internet.

So gov't regulation makes things more free? Seriously?

 

[eagle1462010]

1. If it isn't broken don't fix it. Any new law is designed to fix something that is broken and I don't see it. I haven't dug deeply into this issue but will tonight.

2. Almost any new law passed in Congress is about lining the political pockets of one party or the other. Follow the money. Who stands to gain, and who stands to lose. Who is in who's pocketbook to create a new law. Nearly every time they pass a new law they usually hose the public for financial gain.

3. Allowing more massive regulation usually screws thing up. Which usually means BIG Interest want it. Because they are more than likely behind the law who can handle the cost of new regulations. The smaller types will get fed to the wolves as they are less likely to be able to deal with the cost of regulations.

4. When the Gov't gets it's teeth into something.............they usually like to bite hard. Is this just another way to increase taxes on everything on the internet. For years they have wanted to tax the internet, but have problems figuring out how to do so across the board. With the FCC getting into it, and controlling it.............will this open the door for new taxes which is usually the aim of Gov't involvement as well.

5. I bundle my internet, phone, and cable. If their service sucks, I drop them. There isn't much competition in other offered services where I live, but I basically have the choice of 3 options. I will always go for the best service for the buck, and that is the nature of capitalism. I also have net flix. If that service becomes useless due to lower speeds I will drop them. But if that service becomes slower because of some asshole regulating them, and/or purposely slowing their speed........then that would be BS..................

I do not trust the Congress on either side. Any law they pass is usually for hooking up their buddies to get political cash. When the Gov't regulates, they create red tape usually screwing shit up. So right now, until I dig deeper into this I'm undecided on who is really trying to screw who.............

Off to get ready to work, using internet that isn't broken. Will this new law BREAK IT? That is the ultimate question for me on this issue.