Under the prior commissions, the FCC tried to interject itself to enforce Internet “fairness” under the banner of “Net Neutrality”
The FCC has no jurisdiction over broadband Internet providers (other than those who need licensed spectrum). A Federal Appeals Court reaffirmed that the FCC cannot just make up rules because companies might refuse to provide unlimited bandwidth capacity for free.
As the way people are using the Internet and watching video is changing, what this means is that cable TV potentially has a conflict of interest in being your broadband Internet provider and also selling video on demand content. They could slow down or block services like Netflix, or force them to install local servers at the cable company to decrease the stress on the backbones.
During peak times, it is estimated that half of all Internet traffic is Netflix and YouTube and similar services. Streaming audio isn’t remotely a target, at least on wired connections.
As Charter Cable tries to take over Time Warner, keep all this in mind. While the judges ruled the FCC has no law permitting them to regulate the Internet, they didn’t say Congress can’t pass one. Time to open the check books, boys. It’s election season coming up.
Formula: Corrupt FCC plus Internet = Taxes plus stupid regulations plus loss of free speech plus too many videos.
The new FCC Chairman’s background has been as a lobbyist for the wireless phone industry. The Republican Hindu guy wants to revive AM radio. The black woman from South Carolina wants Obamaphones.
The other Repblican is a 20 year DC policy wonk with a BA degree and no work history outside the beltway. His term is up in 6 months.
Don’t Panic!
Hey, pass a law that bans free HD video. That could free up some bandwidth. Netflix and YouTube may end up spending some $$ on servers instead of “riding dirty” on da Bone.
YouTube (owned by Google) already does, although I don’t know the details. I’ve noticed that when I visit a low view count video, there is a long delay before it starts to play. It has the feel that the video is being pulled (and maybe being converted between formats) and being downloaded to a caching server.
Internet providers have tried to work around the edges – not by singling out who provides the content but by curbing excessive bandwidth, either by charging for it or limiting speeds.
As long as the phone companies are competing against cable, things will stay relatively reasonable. If AT&T starts buying up cable owners, then it is Katie bar the door.
Who knows the first song to sing about Google/Youtube?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfkDfoMJr18
Didn’t ATT sell their cable company to Comcast?
You had me going there for a second 😉
Yes, in 2001 AT&T sold their broadband business to Comcast – but that was when AT&T was the long distance company and not your local phone company (Ameritech, SBC, Pacbell, Southern Bell). Cleverly AT&T managed to regain control of the former baby bells which had thir own broadband services. Sell you business then turn around and go right back into the same business and profit! Isn’t America great?
Well run businesses are great. When is the last time you paid for a “long distance” call?
The federal government’s constraining ATT to “long distance” back in the early 1980s would be like constraining Chevrolet to carburetors back at that time. Basically neither carburetors nor long distance exist today, but ATT survived.
Probably a more accurate question is – when is the last time you didn’t pay for a local phone call?
I don’t pay for either local or long distance calls. I only get a monthly bill for taxes to pay for the Obamaphones and 911 services. I have been a happy customer of this company after buying their device from Costco several years ago:
http://ooma.com/