Speak your curses louder, pal... some damfool neighbor of mine is getting the hook-up from them as I type. [?]
And how does the day find you, sir? On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Badie <astromancer2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Comcrap...Curses! > > > --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com <scifinoir2%40yahoogroups.com>, Martin > Baxter <martinbaxt...@...> wrote: > > > > A victory only for the broadband industry and their lobbyists. [?][?] > > > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Keith Johnson <keithbjohn...@...>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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<<320.gif>>
