FCC to vote on rule that will charge consumers to hear grievances

[Danny101]

I would propose that the complainant is charged $100 if the complaint is found to be illegitimate. Then if it's legit, then the company is fined and the complainant pays nothing. Makes the complainant mind their P's and Q's. My position is that internet is a utility and should be regulated as such. ISP's complain about network congestion. Well companies like Network and Hulu that reach certain data and bandwidth thresholds, I could go along with them being charged extra. For companies that are under that threshold can escape the extra expense. ISP's should not be allowed to block sites. I see nothing wrong with a tiered speed approach. I don't need a whole lot of speed nor should I have to pay for more than I need. I don't give a damn about 4k. Honestly, I don't need more than 720p. 480p is plenty most of the time. The ISP's again do not have a First Admendment right to block websites. I say that in response to Trump's latest Supreme Court pick who thinks so.

 

[Bubbajim]

I would propose that the complainant is charged $100 if the complaint is found to be illegitimate. Then if it's legit, then the company is fined and the complainant pays nothing. Makes the complainant mind their P's and Q's.

What's the point of an investigation and arbitration service if the outcome is already known? How do you define an 'illegitimate' complaint? What if someone's been treated incredibly unfairly and underhandedly, but the company's conduct is just inside the letter of the law - would the person complaining about that be charged for their illegitimate complaint?

The whole point of schemes like these is to keep huge, rich, powerful entities in check so that the average citizen doesn't get screwed. If the FCC is having such money woes, start a levy or a case charge on the businesses, not a charge on the people it's meant to protect and represent.

Here in the UK (and other EU countries) we have 'Alternative Dispute Resolution' services, like Ombudsman schemes or other regulatory bodies. The system isn't perfect, but it works, and doesn't screw the common citizen for daring to complain about shoddy service or malpractice.

 

[Berty Boy]

Baaaaahhh only sheeple will worry about this **** ..... why im on a path to become suis juris and govern my own affairs

 

[wiyosaya]

LOL - seemed pretty unlikely a while back that Pai could make it much worse; however, I would expect that Pai will find ways to improve on the agency's sucking in the time that he remains commissioner.

It does precipitate the question, if all these women, as individuals, can cause studio moguls, new casters, comedians, and hoards of less high profile men can have their jobs taken away, at the mere whisper of essentially unsubstantiated charges of "sexual harassment", why can't a whole country full of people sick of getting d!cked by Pai, get rid of him?

It would seem a barrage of tweets to Trump himself would get the ball rolling.

After all, it seems he buckled on the separation of children at the border, by popular demand.

Given his history of buckling, he would probably agree after some pressure and then come back and say something like, it's all locker room antics, who cares!

 

[wiyosaya]

I would propose that the complainant is charged $100 if the complaint is found to be illegitimate. Then if it's legit, then the company is fined and the complainant pays nothing. Makes the complainant mind their P's and Q's. My position is that internet is a utility and should be regulated as such. ISP's complain about network congestion. Well companies like Network and Hulu that reach certain data and bandwidth thresholds, I could go along with them being charged extra. For companies that are under that threshold can escape the extra expense. ISP's should not be allowed to block sites. I see nothing wrong with a tiered speed approach. I don't need a whole lot of speed nor should I have to pay for more than I need. I don't give a damn about 4k. Honestly, I don't need more than 720p. 480p is plenty most of the time. The ISP's again do not have a First Admendment right to block websites. I say that in response to Trump's latest Supreme Court pick who thinks so.

Claims of First Amendment violations do not apply to public/private companies, so they can block any web site they want. This is also well-known and easy to research.

 

[OutlawCecil]

Oh, I get it. This works like global warming. It’s not that the internet is dead, it’s that it will be dead in 10 years if we don’t act immediately with Tough Regulations(TM).

Spoken like somebody who thinks people governing themselves makes a good society. Anarchy FTW!

 

[Wizwill]

Dear Ajit,

You work for the citizens of the United States of America. Our taxes pay your salary.

Sincerely,
Everyone

The US Treasury sends this guy a check but I'd bet his real income comes from the vested interests he is a lapdog for.

 

[agb81]

So when ISP charge us more to use Netflix and other streaming service due to the end of net neutrality we will now have to pay to complain about it....

You might be right.

I think the issue here is that the fee equals the amount of money an ISP can charge you before you decide to issue a complaint to FCC. And that sucks.

Basically those $250 are fees that an ISPs could pull out their *** "safely" before someone stands up against them.

 

[stewi0001]

The US Treasury sends this guy a check but I'd bet his real income comes from the vested interests he is a lapdog for.

I would not be surpised

 

[Danny101]

Claims of First Amendment violations do not apply to public/private companies, so they can block any web site they want. This is also well-known and easy to research.

To allow ISP's to block websites would violate the websites free speech. Now I submit to the point that nefarious websites can pop up and need to be blocked, so maybe their needs to be some kind of authentication within zones so as long as a website went through that, then it can't be block. The internet is a necessity for certain transactions being that corps are requiring it often for applications and even payroll. That in my view makes internet access a public utility and should be regulated. If companies remove the internet requirement to operate and a person can manage without it then I will rescind. Like I said, some jobs cannot be applied for unless one is on-line.

 

[JamesSWD]

Ashit Pie kills the internet by killing net neutrality and now he kills any chance of justice by killing people's ability to be heard by an agency created to regulate and advocate in favor of the consumer. This man needs to be removed from his position asap.

He killed the Internet? Really? Then how are you reading this article and commenting?

(shaking head)

 

[GirlDownunder]

Thank Trump, for the dismantling of the net-neutrality law:

"Passing the plan is a major victory for Pai, a Donald Trump appointee and former Verizon lawyer who has been a long-term critic of the net neutrality rules brought in under Barack Obama in 2015."

Trump is a wrecking ball with no real brains, being used by Putin. Trump's been destroying & cheating good people ever since he was handed his first millions from daddy:

"Fred Trump died in 1999 with an estimated net wealth between $250 million and $300 million according to a New York Times article at the time of death. While the specific amount Trump inherited from his father has not been revealed, a January 2016 article from the New York Times shows that Trump's will divided $20 million after taxes among his living children including Donald. Further, in 2003, it was reported that Donald and his siblings sold a portion of their father’s real estate holdings for around half a billion dollars. In addition to this inheritance, Trump’s father helped the mogul financially throughout his lifetime by giving him loans and access to trust funds, and establishing a wealth of real estate and political connections for his son."

If only Trump had been born without money...We'd never have heard of him or Pai.

 

[JamesSWD]

Thank Trump, for the dismantling of the net-neutrality law:

"Passing the plan is a major victory for Pai, a Donald Trump appointee and former Verizon lawyer who has been a long-term critic of the net neutrality rules brought in under Barack Obama in 2015."

Trump is a wrecking ball with no real brains, being used by Putin. Trump's been destroying & cheating good people ever since he was handed his first millions from daddy:

"Fred Trump died in 1999 with an estimated net wealth between $250 million and $300 million according to a New York Times article at the time of death. While the specific amount Trump inherited from his father has not been revealed, a January 2016 article from the New York Times shows that Trump's will divided $20 million after taxes among his living children including Donald. Further, in 2003, it was reported that Donald and his siblings sold a portion of their father’s real estate holdings for around half a billion dollars. In addition to this inheritance, Trump’s father helped the mogul financially throughout his lifetime by giving him loans and access to trust funds, and establishing a wealth of real estate and political connections for his son."

If only Trump had been born without money...We'd never have heard of him or Pai.

1) Trump was a successful billionaire before his parents died.
2) <looking out window> Yep...Internet still there.
3) Get your TDS under control.

 

[GirlDownunder]

James,

You're one of those who've apparently never heard of the "frog in the pot", I'm taking it-- going by your comments here.

Perhaps you've heard of the expression, "death by a thousand cuts"?

You might not agree that things, re: net neutrality, are in a downward spiral and have a right to say that-- but you do NOT have a right to condescend to others here.

PS: it's becoming harder to shock the American people as they are becoming less able to react to their loss of civil rights and liberty. You seem to be a supporter of a treasonous president. We'll see how that works out. A four hour "private" meeting with Putin. If you can't see how bad that is, no one can help you. Btw, TDS is a sane reaction to your country's downfall. If only it could stay contained within your own borders.

 

[Danny101]

The U.S. has been on a downfall for a long time. Ever since Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act.

 

[GirlDownunder]

The U.S. has been on a downfall for a long time. Ever since Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act.

I'd say it was more Nixon and end of the gold standard, followed by Reagan's BS-trickle-down lie which has never been slapped back as it ought to have been. That, and deregulation of banks, were the biggest downfalls, imho. It allowed the top-tier-sociopaths to begin their OCD-acquisition of everything. For them, there's never enough. They'll be sliding into an end-of-the-world crevice and will still be straining to reach a final coin in the dirt. Oh, and say hello to POTUS Putin for me....looks like I called that one right, unfortunately.