Tag Archives: Net Neutrality

End Net Neutrality

Source: American Institute for Economic Research
by Sheldon Richman

“On its face, net neutrality seems like a good idea. Most internet users certainly want easy, open access — at a low price if any price at all — to all that this amazing constellation of services has to offer. But appearances can deceive.” (12/07/17)


Net Neutrality: The media lies — then polls on the results of their lies

Seton Motley

Source: Heartland Institute
by Seton Motley

“Nothing in human history has grown bigger, better and/or faster than the Net — in no small part because the government was doing nothing to ‘help.’ Of course, the Obama Administration couldn’t stand something so freely doing so well. So they — without benefit of Congress — ‘reclassified’ the Web to under Title II. Title II is a classification — from the 1934 Telecommunications Act. Get that? Nineteen thirty-four. Title II was created to regulate landline telephones. Get that? Landline telephones. This for the Internet makes zero legal or technological sense. But for the Obama FCC — it made political sense. Because under Title II — there are mountain ranges of regulations and taxes to impose. The Trump FCC is this month rightly, reasonably undoing this titanic stupidity. And ever since, the ‘news’ media has been subjecting us to their case of collective vapors. We last week chronicled more than two dozen ‘news’ stories — in which Titles I & II and/or reclassification are never, ever mentioned.” (12/06/17)


Everybody is wrong about Net Neutrality

Source: The American Spectator
by Jon Cassidy

“There are all sorts of claims being made, from the dishonest to the hysterical, but if you want to know what the law is actually supposed to do, and why repeal will be just fine, it’s worth looking at what its advocates are trying to make it do. One of the main things they’re doing is filing lawsuits to prevent special offers like the one AT&T gives its customers: DirecTV streamed to your phone that doesn’t even count against your wireless data caps. The so-called consumer advocates want to take that away. The one thing we’re all told about net neutrality is that it’s meant to keep internet service providers from discriminating between websites, speeding access to some and throttling it to others. In theory, according to the ubiquitous fans of net neutrality, evil ISPs would charge content providers more to provide fast access to their sites, while also charging customers more, for reasons that are never made exactly clear. The truth is that ISPs have been doing the exact opposite …” (11/29/17)


FCC: Stand strong and implement sound Internet policy

Source: Heartland Institute
by Bartlett Cleland

“The Federal Communications Commission just released its plan to restore internet freedom, which will bring back the historical light-touch framework that for twenty years instilled regulatory certainty and propelled over a trillion dollars in investments in better broadband services for consumers. Those investments surged even when the broader economy was limping along, even enabling economic productivity across the economy. During the Obama administration, this pro-consumer, pro-investment approach was interrupted by the imposition of the so-called ‘Open Internet Order,’ a dramatic move to regulate the internet with Title II rules in the same archaic way as the monopoly-era rotary phone system. Such regulation harmed consumers as investment decreased and innovation waned. Eliminating the Title II rules will reverse this troubling trend. Instead of that heavy-handed regulation, the open internet should be preserved.” (11/28/17)


Net Neutrality: Government can’t know the “correct” price for Internet service

Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Nicholas Freiling

“The motives of net neutrality advocates differ. But the common thread among them is a general belief that internet service providers (ISPs) face no serious competition, and therefore overcharge both their supply-side (i.e., Netflix) and demand-side (internet users) customers and generally treat customers poorly. In other words, ISPs have ‘natural monopolies’ that allow them to rake in profits without improving service to customers or dealing with different customer-types in an equitable manner. … For convoluted reasons, regulators believe [“Net Neutrality”] will ensure internet service is distributed equitably among all who are willing to pay the going rate — no more up-charging big bandwidth-eaters (like Netflix), even at mutually-agreeable prices. Underlying this perspective is the belief that we can decipher, in some way, the level of service that ought to be offered on the ISP market.” (11/28/17)


FCC expected to announce plans to ax corporate welfare for Big Data (aka “Net Neutrality”) this week

Source: The Week

“The Trump administration’s Federal Communications Commission is expected to announce its plans to begin dismantling of the Obama-era net neutrality rules this week, with an official rollback anticipated following a mid-December meeting, The Wall Street Journal reports. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai vowed last winter that he would take ‘a weed whacker’ to the regulations. Pai argues that the rules — which prevent internet service providers like Comcast and AT&T from tinkering with the speed of certain websites and applications — are preventing innovation in the industry.” (11/20/17)


Net Neutrality is stupid policy, has never been popular — and needs to finally go away

Seton Motley

Source: Heartland Institute
by Seton Motley

“Once upon a time, the Left actually tried to impose Net Neutrality the Constitutionally correct way — via Congressional legislation, rather than in bureaucrat fiat fashion. In 2010, there was put forward a pro-Net Neutrality petition — on to which 95 Democrat Congressional candidates signed. All 95 lost — and the effort raised a whopping $300. So how did Net Neutrality get a decade-and-a-half’s worth of legs — with this decided lack of interest amongst We the People? It helps when titanic, media-driving Silicon Valley companies like Google and Facebook, Netflix and Amazon spend tens of millions of dollars pushing the Net Neutrality rock up the Hill. Big Left Coin buys lots of sound and fury — no matter how much nothing it actually signifies. And why did the Silicon Valley Giants spend these millions? Because Net Neutrality is the government mandating that the Silicon Valley Giants receive billions of dollars worth of free bandwidth from the ISPs. Their coin — was a cronyism down payment.” (10/17/17)


To save corporate welfare for Big Data, Senator wants Ajit Pai out at FCC

Source: Ars Technica

“The Democratic opposition to Ajit Pai’s re-confirmation was launched today by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), who accused the Federal Communications Commission chairman of abandoning the public interest. Cantwell criticized Pai’s in-progress attempt to eliminate net neutrality rules and said he has taken other actions that hurt Americans. … A Senate vote to give Pai another five-year term on the FCC is scheduled for Monday. Republicans hold the Senate majority and support Pai’s agenda of deregulating the broadband industry, so he is almost certain to be re-confirmed.” (09/27/17)


Net Neutrality proven titanically stupid — by Net Neutrality’s proponents

Seton Motley

Source: Heartland Institute
by Seton Motley

“Net Neutrality is the titanically stupid insistence that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) treat each and every thing on the Internet exactly the same. For instance, emails from Nigerian princes — deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall — well that’s just too bad. You didn’t want to read those Nigerian prince emails anyway. And, of course, every single Net Neutrality advocate engages in exactly the sort of business practices and avails himself of the exact same Constitutional freedoms — which he wants to have the government ban for ISPs.” (08/29/17)


They keep using that phrase, “Net Neutrality.” I do not think it means what they think it means.

by Thomas L Knapp

“If Verizon had reduced its speeds only for particular content — say, Netflix, YouTube and Amazon Prime Video only got 10Mbs speeds while Bing, Gmail, and the Hamster Dance got 20Mbs speeds — well, that would be a violation of ‘Net Neutrality.’ But simply moving all data from all sources in the same way and presumptively at the same speeds is precisely what ‘Net Neutrality’ calls for. And if that means that someone streaming Rogue One in high definition gets a choppy picture? Well, that’s how it goes …. suck it, ‘Net Neutrality’ megalomaniacs. You demanded it, you got it.” (08/10/17)