[opendtv] Re: Multichannel News: New York Governor Mandates Net Neutrality in Contracts
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 01:12:27 +0000
John Shutt wrote:
Nope. It was Comcast lawyers, and it was the traffic they didn't want to see.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-to-do-if-your-named-bit-torrent-lawsuit.html
I work at a major university, and our Campus IT Services are constantly
sending
out warning letters to students who share content via peer-to-peer file
sharing
That's not the point, John. The issue here had nothing to do with Comcast being
the good cop on the beat. It had to do with Comcast not wanting users creating
a lot of network traffic. BitTorrent doesn't HAVE to involve copyright
infringement. It's more generally a way to circumvent the very slow uplink
speeds of the past. (Now, FiOS offers always symmetric speeds up and down,
which kind of negates any advantage of BitTorrent, at least among FiOS users.)
Comcast said no, we don't have to carry that traffic, BECAUSE we are not a
common carrier. And the FCC had no legal backing to say BS, you are supposed to
be neutral, you have no right to decide what users can send.
Here, read this to see what the relevant points are about that case, and how
today our crook of a Chairman wants to welcome non-neutral service:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/22/16691794/net-neutrality-fcc-ajit-pai-comcast-block-bittorrent
What I am getting is that YOU think network neutrality naturally flows from
1906,
but many others do not.
It flows from the Hepburn act of 1906, the Mann-Elkins act of 1910, it flows
also from the telecom act of 1934, it flows also from the telecom act of 1996.
In every case, the telecom service has to be a common carrier, neutral service.
You have to put these things in perspective. The telecom acts of 1934 and 1996
define what a telecom service is, and the FCC itself defined broadband as a
telecom service, when it described it as "advanced telecom service." It simply
took a shortcut, when classifying it in 2002, which very quickly came back to
**haunt them**. The Comcast BitTorrent case was an early example, and Vonage an
even earlier example. Why did I say "haunt"? Because the FCC Chairmen at the
time had their heart in the right place. Intuitively, they understood that
Internet access had to be neutral. They simply couldn't make this stick, having
misclassified broadband as a Title I service. The crook we have now doesn't get
any of this.
Read these two links:
https://www.bna.com/regulating-broadband-title-n17179891554/#!
"... In a series of orders beginning in 2002, the FCC classified all forms of
broadband Internet access as 'information services.' The FCC found that
broadband Internet access is a functionally integrated service because
providers offer basic transmission service as well as the capability to store
and retrieve data without offering a separate transmission component to the
public. In particular, the FCC noted that broadband Internet access service
involves the hallmarks of information services--i.e., computer processing,
information provision, computer interactivity, and interaction with stored
data. For example, broadband providers afford their customers the ability to
use the Domain Name System (DNS), which matches web page addresses with IP
addresses, and the ability to store and retrieve e-mails. These capabilities
are part and parcel of a broadband Internet access service offering and
integral to the basic functioning of the Internet. ..."
Some of that is truly ignorant lawyerly BS. Telephone companies had been doing
exactly the same kind of signal processing for many years, in order to route
and carry phone calls over different media, and no confusion ever existed as to
their nature as telecom service. The business about DNS is pure ignorance too.
Matter of fact, the way telephone number portability works is functionally
identical to the DNS, as is the use of phone numbers in VoIP, and NO ONE gets
confused that this makes telephone service like a web site. Telephone service
has to be neutral. Web sites do not. Moen.com doesn't need to carry Delta
faucets.
Also read this, paying particular attention to the actual "facts" added by Tech
Crunch, as opposed to the (disingenuous) half-truth "facts" spouted by our FCC
Chairman.
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/26/the-fccs-myths-vs-facts-sheet-defending-its-plan-to-reverse-net-neutrality-annotated/
Title II phone lines were only used to connect to an ISP.
Yes, and because of that, we had a huge choice of ISPs. Those that misbehaved
lost out. Even AOL's model lost out. Now the ISP is the monopoly. When
monopolies exist, simply put, the marketplace cannot self-regulate. That's when
you need regulations. Was true with telephone service in 1906, began to be true
with Internet service in 2000 (with broadband). Most people have one viable
choice for home broadband service. I have two. That's it. And their prices and
packages, no surprise, are almost identical. These are facts. If we had the
same choice of ISP as we had in 1995, there would most likely be no issue.
They get their internet through Verizon OTA with a fixed data cap per month.
They seem very happy
Yes, and my mom never had any broadband service, and she couldn't care less
either. And your point is?
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
