FCC wants Internet fairness


The Federal courts have repeatedly told the FCC it has no legal authority to create “net neutrality”, but the new FCC chairman is at it again.

With the courts pretty solidly in the hands of progressives, a pretty successful tactic of making legal precedent is to create a conflict – knowing it then can become an issue before the courts. Marriage used to be a state issue and the Federal courts kept hands off. Pass a Defense Of Marriage Act creating a federal definition of marriage (one man + one woman) and now the courts can assert Federal jurisdiction and essentially have the Federal Courts make up thir own laws.

Tom Wheeler wants to create regulations to allow Comcast to be able to sell better access to Netflix if they’ll pay extra to Comcast (anti net neutrality). It’s not actually what he wants. He wants Netflix to run to a Federal Court and demand Net Neutrality with the FCC as the one to determine “fairness”. He wants power that can then be leveraged into post FCC employment rewards and campaign contributions.

It’s worth pointing out the FCC is not part of the Federal Government. It is an independent commission empowered by specific federal regulations to perform limited functions like issue licenses for spectrum, test electronic devices for interference. It is not part of the Executive branch or any Department largely to keep its decisions free from Congressional micromanagement. It is self funded through fees so there are no strings to yank them around.

This entry was posted in American Politics, Internet Insecurity, Mobile Streaming, Radio Biz, The FCC. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to FCC wants Internet fairness

  1. polokfla says:

    I honestly do not believe there is anything in Washington that is NOT “Political.”
    The Progressives never quit, either.

  2. Art Stone says:

    Maybe Netflix should figure out a way to distribute their product using BitTorrent, but in a way that keeps the movies secure and everyone gets paid. That would put the ball right back in the court of the ISPs – instead of making peace with Netflix, their networks will crash under the burden of peer to peer file transfer between their customers (already 30% of their upstream traffic)

  3. CC1s121LrBGT says:

    If you have a blog, or post on a blog, how do we know your comments are safe and not offensive to everyone in the internet community?


    …. and what about if you send an email, tweet, or chat on yahoo, google, facebook? Isn’t that communication too? Its the wild west out there now – not one is regulating what people say in their chats and their emails.

    • Art Stone says:

      Beck was mentioning this morning that they want to get control of Drudge and say that political bias in web sites amounts to an “in kind” contribution that should be regulated. Tell that to Eddy Schultz who is directly being paid by the labor unions. Nothing remote covert about it.

      • CC1s121LrBGT says:

        I was just listening to Red Eye Radio this morning. They were talking about a proposed new law to may bullying illegal up to age 25. We are not talking about punching or hitting someone – those things are assault and have been illegal since the beginning of time.

        The new law makes it a crime to say something that hurts someone else’s feelings. I see a new opportunity to expand the FCC once this one passes – peer to peer communication is a wild wild west with little regulation and no enforcement agency yet.

        • Art Stone says:

          This one is headed our way. As you probably know, one of the ways I entertain myself is an online game called Runescape. It’s sort of an older version of World of Warcraft. You gather resources and build skills (largely through doing repetitive actions) and killing monsters like dragons.

          The part of the game that I’m uncomfortable is “player killing” – there is an area where people go to try to kill other people and “take their stuff” – where operating as a member of a gang is more effective. In theory, you have to be 13 to play, but some children as young as 8 play it.

          The game has built into it “taunts” (animations to make fun of other players). Yesterday, I was at an event where someone said they had an account muted for “bullying”. Runescape is based in England, but probably half the customers are in Canada and the US. Americans seem to not know that there is no first amendment outside of the United States. A company can regulate the conduct of people playing the game – that’s not the issue. The issue is governments criminalizing certain types of speech – racism, antigay marriage, questioning the official version of history, opposition to Islam, now “cyber bullying”. I’ve heard radio PSAs from the USDOJ indicating they are just drooling at the chance to lock up people for “bullying” on line. “What are you in here for? I told a your mama is so fat joke to an undercover FBI agent”

          • CC1s121LrBGT says:

            The investment opportunity is “inventory control software”. If you’re order is not filled as requested, it may make you feel hurt and upset. Call center and dispatch software will also be good investments.


            • Art Stone says:

              So we compound his stupidity of wasting the time of 911 by sending a police office and dragging him into the court system. I wonder if they seized his car under civil forfeiture? The TV story didn’t mention if he was tasered of if they shot his dog or searched his home at 4 am.

              I’m going to stick my neck out and guess he is Haitan. Before this is done, going home might look attractive.

            • Art Stone says:

              Fresh via Reason. Police shoot and kill 92 year old black woman for having a gun. Her nephew made the mistake of calling 911 to get help taking her car keys away.


            • CC1s121LrBGT says:

              People have a brainwashed view that the police are good and here to help. Most of them have quotas and are angry people that like to exercise power.

              When I used to argue with people in the 1990s about the war on drugs, the first question I would ask someone was this: “If you found that your son of daughter possessed illegal drugs would you immediately call the police to report it to get them help?” There was not one person that said yes- all would handle the issue themselves, within their family or at most with the help of a medical professional.

Leave a Reply