Author Topic: Net Neutrality  (Read 6577 times)

longinvestor

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1521
  • Never interrupt compounding unnecessarily -Munger
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #30 on: January 01, 2018, 06:41:16 PM »
A bit mile regime of intercarrier charges has briefly come up in the past. That would stir the pot quite a bit.


LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #32 on: March 14, 2018, 06:11:36 PM »
While California and other states have begun trying to pass state laws to preserve Net Neutrality (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/att-and-verizon-data-cap-exemptions-would-be-banned-by-california-bill/), there is a bill in Congress attempting to limit states' rights: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4682/text

"Preemption Of State Law.—No State or political subdivision of a State shall adopt, maintain, enforce, or impose or continue in effect any law, rule, regulation, duty, requirement, standard, or other provision having the force and effect of law relating to or with respect to internet openness obligations for provision of broadband internet access service."

This next part is truly hilarious. They have sections requiring the FCC to classify internet service (and just about everything telecommunications) as an information service, not telecommunications.

"Broadband To Be Considered Information Service.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the provision of broadband internet access service or any other mass-market retail service providing advanced telecommunications capability (as defined in section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 1302)) shall be considered to be an information service."


So they say they are providing telecommunications capability while saying they shouldn't be considered a telecommunications service.

Hopefully this bill gets shut down and anyone in Tennessee tries to vote out the bill sponsor, Marsha Blackburn (https://www.congress.gov/member/marsha-blackburn/B001243)
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2324
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #33 on: June 21, 2018, 01:30:27 PM »
In a shining example of good corporate citizenship, AT&T has sneakily de-fanged California's net neutrality law.


https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180620/12174040079/att-successfully-derails-californias-tough-new-net-neutrality-law.shtml


Since California's law would have severely hampered AT&T's dreams of dominating the streaming video and ad wars to come, the company got right to work derailing California's legislative push in its usually-underhanded way. The company managed to convince California Assemblyman Miguel Santiago to introduce a series of last-minute secretive Tuesday night amendments that were then voted on without debate during a Wednesday morning hearing:

"The committee, lead by Assemblyman Miguel Santiago, D-Los Angeles, issued amendments to the bill late Tuesday night. Among its recommendations were to permit a controversial internet service provider practice called “zero rating,” where some websites and apps don’t count against a consumer’s data allotment. Opponents view zero rating as a backdoor way of discriminating against online services that don’t strike free-data deals with broadband and wireless companies."

"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | cash