I'm willing to be first on the line in the war. On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Mr. Worf <hellomahog...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > They are an evil entity that must be destroyed. > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Keith Johnson > <keithbjohn...@comcast.net>wrote: > >> >> >> Man, this is really bad for us. I'm amazed that Comcast is allowed to >> block certain types of traffic without telling subscribers. But then, this >> is the same damn outfit that cut off service to subscribers who were using >> "too much" bandwidth on downloads, but refused to give a number as to what >> exactly the download limit in GB's was. >> The FCC has been a weak, shortsighted body for years. Here they are >> actually working on something good: bringing our communications >> infrastructure up to the 20th century, and putting our Internet capabilities >> into maybe the top 20 or so industrialized countries. And now this blow? >> I am very disappointed... >> >> *********************************************************** >> >> http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2010/04/fcc_loses_comcasts_court_chall.html >> >> FCC loses Comcast's court challenge, a major setback for agency on >> Internet policies >> >> *Comcast *on Tuesday won its federal lawsuit against the Federal >> Communications Commission in a ruling that undermines the agency's ability >> to regulate Internet service providers just as it unrolls a sweeping >> broadband agenda. >> >> The decision also sparks pressing questions on how the agency will >> respond, with public interest groups advocating that the FCC attempt to move >> those services into a regulatory regime clearly under the agency's control. >> >> The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a 3-0 decision, >> ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to require Comcast, the nation's >> biggest broadband services provider, to treat all Internet traffic equally >> on its network. >> >> That decision -- based on a 2008 ruling under former FCC chairman *Kevin >> Martin* -- addresses Comcast's argument that the agency didn't follow >> proper procedures and that it "failed to justify exercising jurisdiction" >> when it ruled Comcast violated broadband principles by blocking or slowing a >> peer-sharing Web site, Bit Torrent. >> >> But it also unleashed a broader debate over the agency's ability to >> regulate broadband service providers such as *AT&T*, Comcast, and *Verizon >> Communication*s. >> >> The judges focused on whether the FCC has legal authority over broadband >> services, which are categorized separately from phone, cable television and >> wireless services. The agency currently has only "ancillary authority" over >> broadband services, a decision made by past agency leaders in an attempt to >> keep the fast-moving Internet services market at an arm's distance from the >> agency. >> >> A key part of the opinion: >> >> The Commission may exercise this "ancillary" authority only if it >> demonstrates that its action . . . is "reasonably ancillary to the ... >> effective performance of its statutorily mandated responsibilities." The >> Commission has failed to make that showing. >> >> The court's decision comes just days before the agency accepts final >> comments on a separate open Internet regulatory effort this Thursday. And >> the agency will be faced with a steep legal challenge going forward as it >> attempts to convert itself from a broadcast- and phone-era agency into one >> that draws new rules for the Internet era. >> >> *Andrew Schwartzman*, policy director for Media Access Project, said the >> ruling "represents a severe restriction on the FCC's powers." >> >> Public interest groups have urged the agency to reclassify broadband >> services so that they are more concretely under the agency's authority. The >> FCC has been reluctant to say if it would do so, and a spokesperson didn't >> immediately respond to a request for comment. >> >> Analysts said the agency may not be able to proceed on its net neutrality >> policy -- a rule that Internet service providers have fought against. And >> there is doubt the agency could reform an $8 billion federal phone subsidy >> to include money to bring broadband services to rural areas. >> >> *Bruce Mehlman*, former assistant secretary of commerce for technology >> policy, however, said the decision may help speed the development of faster >> and more robust networks. >> >> "It may drive greater investment in broadband networks by removing >> regulatory uncertainty and perceived disincentives to invest in >> infrastructure," Mehlman said. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! > Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ > > >
