General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsComcast Now Says It Will Not Sue FCC
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/26/comcast-we-will-sue-to-slow-the-web.html
Comcast Now Says It Will Not Sue FCC
The company says the FCC overreached by passing rules to stop Internet service providers from blocking sites and slowing traffic. The problem is, Comcasts admitted to doing just that.
Despite tens of millions of corporate dollars in last-minute lobbying, the Federal Communications Commission passed new rules Thursday reclassifying the Internet as a public utility and preventing Internet service providers from artificially slowing down the Web.
Now Comcast is calling inevitable lawsuits to nullify the rules a certainty, and the company says it will pressure legislators to draft a law that will override the FCCs decision.
snip//
Update 2/27/2015, 11:30 a.m.: Comcast Vice President of Government Communications Sena Fitzmaurice sought to clarify that the company will not sue the FCC, despite a statement from the companys Executive Vice President David L. Cohen yesterday saying the only certainty in the Open Internet Space is that we all face inevitable litigation.
AT&T and Verizon have publicly, vocally said they will sue. Comcast has not, she said. We havent seen the order, we dont know what is in it our reference to inevitable regulation is related to the very direct statements by others they will sue not that we will.
When asked to clarify if when Cohen refers to we all, he is not referring to Comcast or a trade organization of which Comcast is a part, Fitzmaurice said:
Comcast has not said it will sue {He} means all players in the marketplace.
Asked if we in this instance {as stated in yesterdays press release} does not mean ourselves and others, as in the dictionary definition, Fitzmaurice responded, Comcast will not sue. Full stop.
marym625
(17,997 posts)And throw their money at Congress
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)- the FCC hasn't released the actual rules yet.
See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026286256
Wella
(1,827 posts)Apparently a certain talk radio gasbag was telling everyone that in order to have a webpage, we will now all be required to have licenses.
When a government agency deliberately hides its major regulatory changes, all kinds of gossip gets out there.
dilby
(2,273 posts)I would totally support the requirement of a license to operate a website, I personally would only make it mandatory for sites that generate revenue. But would have no issue if they made it mandatory for all sites. It's about time we start to regulate the garbage going on the internet.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)Who exactly would decide what is garbage and what isn't?
dilby
(2,273 posts)Then move over to bullshit products and bullshit medicines. If they have figured out how to regulate what is broadcast on television and radio they can certainly do the same for the internet.
Egnever
(21,506 posts)And the internet is nothing like TV or radio.
dilby
(2,273 posts)N/t
Egnever
(21,506 posts)With contact info to be able to track down the owner.
For example here is the registration info for DU
WHOIS search results for EMOCRATICUNDERGROUND.COM(Registered)
Is this your
domain? GO
Add hosting, email and more.
Want to buy
this domain? GO
Get it with our Domain Buy service.
Domain Name: DEMOCRATICUNDERGROUND.COM
Registry Domain ID:
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.domain.com
Registrar URL: www.domain.com
Updated Date: 2012-06-15T07:08:04Z
Creation Date: 2000-12-05T19:00:37Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2015-12-05T19:00:37Z
Registrar: Domain.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 886
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: compliance@domain-inc.net
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.6027165396
Reseller: Dotster.com
Reseller: support@dotster-inc.com
Reseller: +1.8004015250
Domain Status: ok
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: David Allen
Registrant Organization: Democratic Underground, LLC
Registrant Street: PO Box 339
Registrant City: Kensington
Registrant State/Province: MD
Registrant Postal Code: 20895
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.2026672404
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax: +1.2022322208
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: skinner@democraticunderground.com
Registry Admin ID:
Admin Name: David Allen
Admin Organization: Democratic Underground, LLC
Admin Street: PO Box 339
Admin City: Kensington
Admin State/Province: MD
Admin Postal Code: 20895
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.2026672404
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax: +1.2022322208
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: skinner@democraticunderground.com
Registry Tech ID:
Tech Name: David Allen
Tech Organization: Democratic Underground, LLC
Tech Street: PO Box 339
Tech City: Kensington
Tech State/Province: MD
Tech Postal Code: 20895
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.2026672404
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax: +1.2022322208
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: skinner@democraticunderground.com
Name Server: NS1.DCA.NET
Name Server: NS2.DCA.NET
DNSSEC: Unsigned
URL of the ICANN WHOIS Data Problem Reporting System: http://wdprs.internic.net/
>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2012-06-15T07:08:04Z <<<
dilby
(2,273 posts)Possessing a domain name does not mean you actually have a website. Furthermore you can have someone else register a site for you or use false information. Requiring a federally regulated license is the way to go and should be required by any website that generates revenue. Whether through sales, advertisement, donations, whatever the case if you are making money it should be regulated and taxed.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:27 AM - Edit history (1)
... and then I'm disappointed to be proven wrong.
One last little spot of freedom and creativity... Can't have that...
dilby
(2,273 posts)Regulations do not just mean ensuring the public has access to the utility but that they are also safe from it. Imagine what our country would be like if the Government did not put safety standards on water, gas and electric. Licensing will be necessary to better regulate the internet, today the internet is the wild west where everything is out there and everything goes. Licensing would help to make sure people can feel safe when doing business with an online company and also reduce the fraud and illegal activities that are currently taking place.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)How would you suggest that a person maintain their anonymity, which is a cornerstone of the internet, and still fall under your licensing scheme?
What about the obvious fact that the internet is international?
This is why we can't have nice things....
dilby
(2,273 posts)I am not saying you need a license to browse the net, just one so that your site can be browsed. And there are plenty of sketchy ass miracle cure product websites hawking their snake oil to the public. Just like a business license, if your website license is revoked you are done hawking your shit online.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)It's for the same reason that your user name isn't your real first and last name and posted with your address...
It isn't anyone's business..
Egnever
(21,506 posts)They are not hiding anything. They are following standard procedures for publishing new rules. The full package will be released in a couple of weeks when they are done with all the formalities.
Everything is not a conspiracy.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Anyone want to bet that at least a few of those pages were written by Comcast lobbyists? Comcast must necessarily think the regs are going to increase their profits, or they would be obligated by duty to shareholders to sue.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)sent to the FCC.
onenote
(42,778 posts)that describes the legal and factual issues raised by the proposal to adopt network neutrality rules, reviews the comments received on all sides of the issues, describes the rules adopted, fulfills statutory requirements to analyze the impact of the rules on small businesses and under the Paperwork Reduction Act (among others). In all likelihood, the number of pages devoted to simply listing the commenters and reply commenters will be longer than the number of pages of actual rules.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6287824
In addition, according to the folks I've spoken to about it at the FCC, it will be about two weeks before the rules are published, which is not unusual where there is a divided vote.
winstars
(4,220 posts)Apparently the FCC and many other agencies ALWAYS publish the actual regs several AFTER they vote. One thing they still are waiting for are the comments from the 2 pug commissioners to possibly add to the regs.
The day of the vote, I must have read this "secret regs" and the "300 pages" meme in every third or fourth comment on many websites, all using the exact same language basically. I figured that Faux and Rushbo were screaming these words to the masses.
Its "the ACA 2000 pages" BS all over again. Apparently anything long is very very bad. A paragraph should do, why all of those WORDS.... They use this all the time now.
Stupid is good, smart is very very bad and probably progressive.
Home school good, university very bad. Harvard, freaking Harvard bad, Liberty U very good...
It all will be out shortly and then we all will know whats actually in the new regs.
Please OP, I am not attacking you for your post, I just think that the above is accurate.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)secret is a problem because it is inherently anti-democratic
long is a problem because "the devil is in the details" as they say - much easier to hide corruption in a long document than a short one, and this country has a five-alarm corruption issue
babylonsister
(171,099 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)The good news is that if the FCC promulgates a regulation the public doesn't like, we the people have recourses to get it changed. If Comcast or Verizon or some other internet provider promulgates a rule the public doesn't like and it makes a boatload of money for the provider, the public can just lump it.
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)Since their court filings would probably refer to the FCC Chairman as Cockbag Wheeler.