Mr Worf, in cases like these, all I'm seeing/hearing is the money talking. And anyone who believes that the courts are impartial... I've got prime oceanfront property south of Rapid City that might interest them.
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Mr. Worf <hellomahog...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm always bothered at how often the courts rule in favor of big > businesses. Sometimes it is because the courts don't know much about the > issue at hand so they play it safe. I believe this ruling is holding us back > in unforeseen ways. > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 5:33 AM, Martin Baxter <martinbaxt...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> >> A victory only for the broadband industry and their lobbyists. [?][?] >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:06 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/ > >
<<323.gif>>
<<320.gif>>
