Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st Sep 2009 19:16 UTC
Internet & Networking Julius Genachowski, Chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission, today laid out plans to enforce net neutrality upon the internet. While the FCC is a US-only entity, fact of the matter is that "control" over the internet lies within the US, so whatever the FCC decides, it will affect the rest of the world.
Thread beginning with comment 385363
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Excellent news.
by SReilly on Mon 21st Sep 2009 23:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Excellent news."
Member since:

Those who consume more pay more. I don't download that much torrent files or view long duration video's on the web. So I hope my bill goes down and people who hog the network pay more. That would make more sense. Just like for Electricity.

I see where you're coming from and I agree with your sentiment, as far as saving money for you is concerned, but I'm paying for a flat rate internet connection. That basically means I have a no size limit download agreement with my ISP. Network "quality of service" is not something I agreed on when I signed the contract, yet I notice more and more that my connection is severely faster for the first 15 to 30 seconds, then the QoS kicks in and my downloads drop. The amount they drop by depends on the time of day but they always drop. That in itself is already bad enough. For my ISP to start dictating at what speed I use various applications is intolerable.

IMHO - This is going to go to court and am not sure if the FCC could prevail. They sold a large chunck of bandwidth for $$$$ and explicitly stated that much of it will not be subject to such regulation. I guess many of the carriers will be asking for a refund.

Yeah, I doubt they are going down without a fight. The problem is the FCC had their heads up their ass when they let that particular Genie out of the bottle. To suddenly do a 180 is going to cost them in more than just money.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Excellent news.
by wirespot on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 06:53 in reply to "RE[2]: Excellent news."
wirespot Member since:

Network "quality of service" is not something I agreed on when I signed the contract,[...]

Are you sure? Because AFAIK all ISPs put a clause that describes quality of service in their contracts. It's usually mandated by law. Now, it may not be in any terms you'd recognize. It's probably something like "these services comply with class X as defined by Whoever". And when you look it up you discover that "class X" means the crappiest possible kind of connection there is, and you're basically paying for wishful thinking.

If they didn't have any such clause in their contracts then yeah, you'd be entitled to get on their case entirely on the merits of their advertising. You can probably still do that, in countries which have strong consumer protection laws and enforcing state-mandated bodies which act in their interest at no cost for them. Which is the case for many EU countries.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Excellent news.
by SReilly on Tue 22nd Sep 2009 14:52 in reply to "RE[3]: Excellent news."
SReilly Member since:

I'm pretty sure. You see, I signed my contract before they implemented QoS and as they are the remnants of a state monopoly, they tend to do things their way and tell customers after.

Now, I could give them hell over it but I'm moving to London in a month and I really couldn't be bothered. Frankly, one of the reasons why I'm moving in the first place is to finally get to a place with good customer choice. Luxembourg has a 400k population, with 1/4th living in Luxembourg city. This place is a price fixers dream!

Reply Parent Score: 2