Comcast Wins Net Neutrality Case

I wonder what type of 'gifts' the 3 judges are now in possession of to make such a ruling?

+1 by Wotak , the FCC is nothing but a collection of appointed bullies with no true democratic authority. meep them.

Errr Just read Wotak's comment. /Me thinks he is confused by the phrase 'net neutrality' and how it is something we want.

I can't open this link, doesn't fit through my tubes. :(

+1 by Wotak , the FCC is nothing but a collection of appointed bullies with no true democratic authority. meep them.

Errr Just read Wotak's comment. /Me thinks he is confused by the phrase 'net neutrality' and how it is something we want.

Er, look at the retard.

Just because I want net neutrality protected doesn't make the FCC worthy of protecting or regulating something it was never intended to have any authority over.

The FCC is a prime example of government bloat and is a direct adversary of our right to free speech. They are also full of meep.

From wiki: ''The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 as the successor to the Federal Radio Commission and is charged with regulating all non-federal government use of the radio spectrum (including radio and television broadcasting), and all interstate telecommunications (wire, satellite and cable) as well as all international communications that originate or terminate in the United States. It is an important factor in U.S. telecommunication policy. The FCC took over wire communication regulation from the Interstate Commerce Commission. The FCC's mandated jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. possessions. ''

This is why they were created, and yet they have basically delegated themselves as regulators of the content on these systems as well. Basically, they have decided that they are the authority over not only the radio and television mediums, but also it's content. They have dealt out millions in fines to ''offenders'' based on self created vulgarity rules that hold no actual authority in US law, nor have any of the rules been created, or voted into law by our US legal system. They also apply these rules as they see fit and only the FCC decides who will be fined for offensive or vulgar material, what that material is and how heavily the offender will be fined.

In recent years, examples of their ''regulation'' would include multiple millions in fines for Howard Stern for words like meep and meep being used on the air - while daytime TV host Oprah has held entire shows discussing oral/meep meep, in graphic detail, without a single fine or even a warning.

Not only is their ''regulation'' bullmeep, and obvious censorship, it is also focused only on artists and performers that they choose to focus on, rather than the medium as a whole.

The reason I disagree with the FCC having any authority over freedom of speech and information in general is because I do not recognize their authority to regulate content, speech or opinion. Especially in the manner they currently do, which is as they see fit.

I don't think the FCC deserves to hold any authority over the internet or it's content and I approve of this ruling because of that. It is because I want net neutrality and internet content protected under our freedom of speech that I do not want the FCC to have control over it.

On the other hand, I don't want Comcast to either, but that's not going to happen until there are enough large alternatives to access it.

I would like to see a US run broadband option that is regulated by law, rather than a bullmeep entity like the FCC - I would also like to see Google jump in and provide an unfiltered, high speed alternative.

So, meep Comcast - but meep the FCC more.

::facepalm::

slaps own face with meep. Ugh.

love your 'net, have it neutered

You just spent how long writing a high school essay on this guys 10 second witty remark. I say +1 for him baiting you so hard lol

We want net neutrality but neither the FCC or Comcast want to ensure that we have it. Both have their own reasons for wanting to control content and the FCC's is much less reasonable and would be far more controlling. If you can't understand this, then perhaps you should go back and finish high school.

I don't live in America, so I don't care. It is funnier still that you are now engaging me in your argument. *

What's funniest is that you comment at all while not caring because you live elsewhere. *

Wotak, how does regulating not include the content therein? You're right about them both being monsters but the FCC seems just another fairly ineffective govt. agency. The ridiculous censorships get ignored until some ol' churchy meep call 'em then they throw a fine and make some money, a penalty to save face. Comcast has all the power and control because there is no legitimate competition. I see them as worse here as they continue to get their way and cheat the public out of good, reasonably-priced basic services.

Dagwood - Comcast throttles bandwidth to known peer to peer and torrent connections. I can understand why they do this because it makes economic and legal sense for them to do it... although I think it sucks.

The FCC, if allowed to gain regulatory control over the internet, would use a much more invasive tact. They would fine sites for hosting content that they would classify as vulgar or whatnot. The same way they do with TV and radio programming. The FCC would censor happily censor our freedoms of speech and expression on the internet is allowed to get their claws into it. And they would make a lot of meeping money doing it.

This kind of hits on that topic a bit and reflects a few good reasons to fear FCC involvement with the internet. Long story short, Comcast is kind of a pain in the meep but the FCC is flat out meep rape with a football. They are not your our friends and are absolutely not interested in protecting net neutrality. This court ruling was a win for net neutrality, not a loss.

Well, well, whaddya know...

Two unemployed meepgots.

Arguing.

On the internet.

Again.

~adjustsmonocle~

*pokes other eye out

We're not arguing.