Now the FCC wants to regulate apps!

[Revere]

They aren't demanding I carry any content at any speed.

But they're encouraging developers to make an app to let me know if my ISP is intentionally monkeying around with speeds, which gives me information to use to change to a different ISP who does not do that if I so choose.

What business is that of the FCC's?

An open marketplace allowing more competition when it comes to broadcast, and now internet, has always been under the FCC's purview.

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

 

[Modbert]

Yes, in the case of government, it is usually followed by a fist of some sort.

Do you know what corporate cronyism means?

So this thread is essentially a "Maybe, what if in the future" thread?

 

[Revere]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. regulators are asking software developers in an "Open Internet Challenge" to create apps that let Internet users know when their service provider -- fixed or mobile -- is interfering with content.

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is trying to get consumers to help police Internet service providers for network management abuses such as slowing bandwidth-hogging content from movies.

The wants to spur the deployment of innovative technologies to protect the openness of the Internet.

Did you bother to even read your own article? I'm guessing a strong no.

You are just a member of the Internet Stasi.

You're funny.

 

[elvis]

Yes, in the case of government, it is usually followed by a fist of some sort.

Do you know what corporate cronyism means?

So this thread is essentially a "Maybe, what if in the future" thread?

It's a slippery slope. Revere is greasing it up.

 

[RadiomanATL]

What business is that of the FCC's?

An open marketplace allowing more competition when it comes to broadcast, and now internet, has always been under the FCC's purview.

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

 

[Modbert]

It's a slippery slope. Revere is greasing it up.

Maybe he can give us the next mega millions jackpot when it goes up again. Be useful.

 

[Revere]

An open marketplace allowing more competition when it comes to broadcast, and now internet, has always been under the FCC's purview.

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

 

[Modbert]

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

How did you get that from this?

National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The court ruled 6-to-3 that the law regarding the distinction between telecommunication services and information services was vague, and that the FCC has the authority to make the decision.[3] The decision of the Court of Appeals was reversed.

Ultimately, the FCC decided that cable companies were information services and did not have to allow their competitors access to their faster connections.[4]

 

[RadiomanATL]

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

Thanks for proving yourself wrong

That ruling has to do with classifications of IPS's, not kicking the FCC off the internet.

Maroon.

 

[Modbert]

Thanks for proving yourself wrong

That ruling has to do with classifications of IPS's, not kicking the FCC off the internet.

Maroon.

We have found PI's Heir.

 

[elvis]

No, the SCOTUS has ruled the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet, and the statist bastards re-regulated it anyway.

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

Hi, sis.

 

[xotoxi]

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

Thanks for proving yourself wrong

That ruling has to do with classifications of IPS's, not kicking the FCC off the internet.

Maroon.

 

[Revere]

Here we go. The previous link references the older decision.

http://www.techlawjournal.com/courts2003/brandx/20031006.pdf

 

[elvis]

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

Thanks for proving yourself wrong

That ruling has to do with classifications of IPS's, not kicking the FCC off the internet.

Maroon.

 

[Revere]

So the FCC is continuing to violate the law and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and says "well, what can you do"?

Forgive me if I don't believe your interpretation.

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

Hi, sis.

If you do something on your network that impedes my access to it, why do I have a grievance with the FCC?

 

[Revere]

Ass.

 

[Modbert]

Hi, sis.

I think I know who should take this thread head on.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDZBgHBHQT8[/ame]

The truth is out there.

 

[Modbert]

If you do something on your network that impedes my access to it, why do I have a grievance with the FCC?

Seriously?

 

[Revere]

When't the next kaffeeklatsche in my profile?

 

[Modbert]

I don't need you to believe me.

Supreme Court Rules in Brand X Case, 6/27/2005.

So why don't you tell us Revere how this case ruled that the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet. I could use some evening entertainment.