Does the Net Neutrality rule violate the Bill of Rights?

"...Generally speaking, most members of the political left have tended to favor net-neutrality legislation and most on the right have tended to oppose it, but there are notable exceptions. Organizations like MoveOn.org, the American Civil Liberties Union, and a number of liberal bloggers have come out in favor of such legislation, for example, but former Clinton White House press secretary Mike McCurry is co-chairman of the Hands Off the Internet Coalition, which opposes it. On the other hand, most Republicans oppose net neutrality, but conservative groups such as the Christian Coalition and Gun Owners of America support it.

Even the most important innovators of the Internet are divided on the issue. Vinton Cerf, a co-inventor of the Internet Protocol (IP) and vice president and “Chief Internet Evangelist” for Google, is for it. Bob Kahn, inventor of the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), which provides reliable delivery of a stream of bytes over the Internet, and David Farber, a computer science and public-policy professor at Carnegie Mellon University who is known as the “grandfather of the Internet,” are against it.

And then there are the corporate interests. Large web-content providers such as Google, Yahoo!, eBay, and YouTube support net-neutrality mandates because they fear the prospect of having to pay higher prices to ensure the quality of their content, while cable and telecommunications companies such as AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and Cox Cable oppose it because they feel they should have the freedom to operate their own networks and set their own prices without interference from the government..."

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/net-neutrality-or-government-brutality/
 
..."The Net neutrality catfight points to a much more troubling trend in the emerging field of cyberlaw: the rapid proliferation of requests for federal intervention in high-tech markets for one reason or another."

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa507.pdf

Just wondering what the free-market, limited government people make of this.
 
"The full text of the new regulations will not be published until later this week...Providers will be allowed greater leeway in how to manage their networks. For instance, they will be allowed to charge websites more for faster access...The Internet you reach on your smart phone, however, will be a comparatively lawless -- but potentially less consumer friendly -- landscape. Wireless providers, subject to stricter bandwidth requirements than their broadband brethren, have been given more more control over the data traffic on their networks. While the same rules against blocking websites apply to them, mobile providers will be allowed to block any applications they desire, except ones that provide voice and video service...As Minnesota Sen. Al Franken argued this weekend on the Senate floor: If the FCC passes this weak rule, Verizon will be able to cut off access to the Google Maps app on your phone and force you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it is not as good. And even if they charge money, when Google Maps is free.

While President Barack Obama praised the new regulations, congressional Republicans have (unsurprisingly) argued that they represent an unwelcome expansion of the federal government's power. Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas have separately introduced legislation to combat the new regulations."

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/21/fcc-net-neutrality-ruling-what-does-it-mean-for-you/
 
Net Neutrality Rules Do Too Much-Says GOP FCC Commissioner ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9IHPgRXa34&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - Net Neutrality Rules Do Too Much-Says GOP FCC Commissioner[/ame]
 
apple0154 said:
AssHat, is that you?:confused:

You Socialist in wolf's clothing!
Click to expand...

It's astounding how many limited government folks are all for Net Neutrality, which is nothing if not additional government regulation of free enterprise...even stranger when you add the fact that nobody has see the final Order yet.
 
Mojo said:
It's astounding how many limited government folks are all for Net Neutrality, which is nothing if not additional government regulation of free enterprise...even stranger when you add the fact that nobody has see the final Order yet.
Click to expand...

You need to stop thinking in binary idiocy mode.
 
Mojo said:
It's astounding how many limited government folks are all for Net Neutrality, which is nothing if not additional government regulation of free enterprise...even stranger when you add the fact that nobody has see the final Order yet.
Click to expand...

i've posted a good portion of it, but you don't have the courage to address the points because you know you would look stupid

so its much easier for you to run away from facts and mindlessly bitch and moan that the information is not there
 
Threedee said:
Net Neutrality is akin the the Fairness Doctrine, meaning its highly gay.
Click to expand...

It's not at all like the fairness doctrine.


It will actually increase free speech because small sites with minority viewpoints will be just as fast as big corporate speech sites.
 
AssHatZombie said:
It's not at all like the fairness doctrine.


It will actually increase free speech because small sites with minority viewpoints will be just as fast as big corporate speech sites.
Click to expand...

Got any evidence to support that assessment and your prediction?

Or is that too much to ask?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top