By: Sam Yun

Sam Yun
Mon, 06 Apr 2015 23:43:28 +0000

The points you bring up are flat out incorrect. These “1930s era” regulation are still relevant in today. Or is the constitution also irrelevant?

It seems sir, that you don’t understand what this actually is.

ISPs are using (and have used) Title II to gain tax benefits for their fiber lines, but cry out when they are about to be regulated under the same act?

“…these rules would open the door to more taxes, fees and oversight of almost every actionable item on the Internet.” That is a straight up lie. It will NOT add ANY more taxes or fees, unless ISPs decide to arbitrarily raise prices, like they could (and would) even without the new order.

How is this good for innovation? Let me explain to you what net neutrality is. Prior to the order, it was legal for ISPs to throttle (or slow down) certain kind of traffic for any reason. For example, during the Comcast/Netflix disagreement, Netflix speeds slowed immediately after negotiations started. After an agreement for Netflix to pay Comcast was reached, speeds rose. If I wanted to start a video streaming company, how can I compete when ISPs are going to charge me to reach speeds my customers are ALREADY paying for?

Net Neutrality is forbidding the discrimination of network packets based on what they are. What does this mean? This means that Comcast can’t slow down my Netflix in favor of Hulu. ISPs are being relegated to a simple pipe. I pay them for internet, they give me internet. They don’t say what I can and cannot do with it.

ISPs are being reclassified as common carriers (NOT UTILITIES). There will be no tariffs, no extra taxes, no fees. The FCC’s order specifically forebears those specific sections of the Act. Do you know what would make them change it? A whole new round of rulemaking!

Over 1 million Americans submitted comments to the FCC about this issue. Overwhelming support for net neutrality. The 300+ pages of the order? 8 pages were the actual verbiage of the Order. The rest? The million comments and other wordings that aren’t actually part of the order.

I literally can think of no reasons why any sane person would be against this order. As Chairman Wheeler said, “This is no more an attack on the internet than the first amendment is to free speech.”