Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 9th Jun 2006 11:22 UTC, submitted by Dylan
The US House of Representatives definitively rejected the concept of Net neutrality on Thursday, dealing a bitter blow to Internet companies like Amazon.com, eBay and Google that had engaged in a last-minute lobbying campaign to support it. By a 269-152 vote that fell largely along party lines, the House Republican leadership mustered enough votes to reject a Democrat-backed amendment that would have enshrined stiff Net neutrality regulations into federal law and prevented broadband providers from treating some Internet sites differently from others.
Thread beginning with comment 131837
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]:Good thing this idiocy was rejected
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 9th Jun 2006 12:38
in reply to "RE:Good thing this idiocy was rejected"
Member since:2005-07-23
RE[3]:Good thing this idiocy was rejected
by bentman78 on Fri 9th Jun 2006 12:47
in reply to "RE[2]:Good thing this idiocy was rejected"
Member since:2005-11-15
you're right...I don't. Let's think about this for a second though. The government isn't involved right now anyway, but the ISP's now are. How is that any different? If it's not one asshat it's another.
Either way this is bad for us...I can't see my bottom line getting lower, just my costs going up.
If I were google/amazon, I'd block access from ISP's trying to extort money. Then let a flood of customer calls into their call center change their minds.
Member since:
2005-11-15
I would normally agree with you, but with the current monopoly the telcos have, there is no market. In some places where broadband penetration isn't high, they have one choice, and if that choice prioritizes packets and starts blocking access to sites then what? That doesn't sound free or independent at all.
I personally have choices where I am at, but many do not. What also worries be is this seems like my costs are going to go up. My monthly bill for the internet may stay the same, but my webhosting bills will go up, sites will start charging fees to access premium content because they have to pay the telcos extra fees, small busnieses and independents can't afford the fees and I'm stuck with slow access to their sites, all trhe while I pay 52 dollars a month in internet access.
I pay a lot of money to stay connected, I don't want anyone saying what site I can access quickly and what I cannot. That includes the government.