Obama endorses net neutrality, asks the FCC to classify internet as a utility

[Scorpus]

The President of the United States, Barack Obama, has made a statement coming out in support of net neutrality, asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reclassify internet service as a utility. This reclassification would recognize that "the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life".

Asking the FCC to reclassify internet service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act does not necessarily mean that they will listen. As an independent body, the President can't force the FCC to make the changes, although publicly supporting net neutrality is a major step in the right direction.

Choosing to classify internet service as a utility, like water or electricity, means that internet service providers would not be able to restrict internet traffic based on source, destination or type. That's to say: all internet traffic should be treated equally, and ISPs shouldn't favor traffic from any service or source.

Obama has outlined a plan for net neutrality that includes four "simple, common-sense steps": no blocking of any content or service so long as it's legal; no throttling of content based on its type or ISP preferences; increased transparency across internet delivery networks; and no paid prioritization of content or services.

The President also asks that mobile internet services be subject to net neutrality rules, albeit with some exceptions that allow ISPs to throttle if their networks become inundated with traffic.

These rules would give all Americans equal access to internet content without ISPs deciding which content is more important. While this is something internet users have been requesting for years now, ISPs aren't too happy about giving up their control of one of the most important utilities today.

Despite Obama's statement, the FCC has indicated there is still work to be done to establish a suitable set of net neutrality rules. They will "incorporate the President’s submission into the record of the Open Internet proceeding" and encourage citizens to continue submitting their ideas.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/58776-obama-endorses-net-neutrality.html

 

[Scshadow]

So Obama has finally gotten word that his approval rating is truly abysmal. I guess its just a coincidence that its been less then a week since his party got smashed in an election. I mean, net neutrality has been an important subject all year. This "support" for net neutrality is easily 6 months late from being an honest cause. But, if it helps to keep net neutrality alive, I guess I'll take it.

 

[Burty117]

I hope Net Neutrality becomes a thing. Surely if Obama is pushing Net Neutrality ISP's must realize they are doomed?

 

[Guest]

If it is considered as utility then it will be covered under free subsidized county payment check where this people get state or federal check under section 8. So when we all will be paying a dearly price to enjoy internet lots of people wills be getting it for free to it does have it's side effects.

 

[Guest]

Dammit FCC, you didn't build that. The internet didn't get invented on it's own.

 

[Guest]

• 
  FCC set to vote on net neutrality rules today
  Dec 21, 2010

rofl

 

[NonApplicable]

So Obama has finally gotten word that his approval rating is truly abysmal. I guess its just a coincidence that its been less then a week since his party got smashed in an election. I mean, net neutrality has been an important subject all year. This "support" for net neutrality is easily 6 months late from being an honest cause. But, if it helps to keep net neutrality alive, I guess I'll take it.

You truly entertain me
- Congress has a lower approval rating than any other congress in history.
- Smashed by whom? A select few states were ignorant and went for big business Republicans.

I could careless if Obama waited to the last day of his presidency to bring up Net Neutrality. The fact it is making headlines is very important. A majority of the public don't even know what net neutrality is, let alone to its importance.

 

[Guest]

Yay, taxes for Internet usage!

 

[Guest]

What are you talking about?

 

[Guest]

Yay, taxes for Internet usage!

Exactly.... but to many posting here don't see that.

 

[BadThad]

So Obama has finally gotten word that his approval rating is truly abysmal. I guess its just a coincidence that its been less then a week since his party got smashed in an election. I mean, net neutrality has been an important subject all year. This "support" for net neutrality is easily 6 months late from being an honest cause. But, if it helps to keep net neutrality alive, I guess I'll take it.

You truly entertain me
- Congress has a lower approval rating than any other congress in history.
- Smashed by whom? A select few states were ignorant and went for big business Republicans.

I could careless if Obama waited to the last day of his presidency to bring up Net Neutrality. The fact it is making headlines is very important. A majority of the public don't even know what net neutrality is, let alone to its importance.

- Lower approval rating - due to Harry Reid blocking everything.
- The ignorant, uninformed voters stayed home because Oblamo wasn't running and most probably didn't realize it was time to vote.

 

[Guest]

NonApplicable said:
"You truly entertain me

- Congress has a lower approval rating than any other congress in history.

- Smashed by whom? A select few states were ignorant and went for big business Republicans."

1. Congress does have an awful approval rating. That has a lot to do with the fact that the Senate, with Harry Ried, shielded anything from ever reaching the presidents desk. Every budget, every bill that came out of the House was either stripped of efficacy, loaded with pork, or swatted down before it ever got to the president.

2. The Republicans gained control of the Senate by taking 22 or 36 seats up for election. They took 24 of the 36 gubernatorial elections, with Maryland, Illinois, and Massachusetts being included in those. The Democrats were spanked this year. The Republicans that won all ran on issues of Amnesty and ACA and won handily.

 

[Guest]

"Lower approval rating - due to Harry Reid blocking everything."

Right because the republicans were the only ones willing to cooperate? LOL

Try not cooperating just for the sole purpose of making the president look bad at the expense of the people that elected them.

Or maybe those voters stayed home because the last time they tried to vote, REPUBLICANS purposely made it incredibly more difficult to VOTE AT ALL. Thanks to republicans, in my county alone there was only 1 or 2 places to vote. People spent over 4 hours in line to cast a vote.

Once you block out voters, THEN you block "everything."

But in your eyes that's still somehow Obama's fault.

 

[Guest]

Would you prefer to pay taxes on the internet or have privatization and prioritization rule it? Personally, I'd rather pay taxes to have it work the way the People see fit rather than how a corporation would like to have it work for it's own intents.

 

[Greg S]

Would you prefer to pay taxes on the internet or have privatization and prioritization rule it? Personally, I'd rather pay taxes to have it work the way the People see fit rather than how a corporation would like to have it work for it's own intents.

I'll take my chances and pay the companies. At least that way I could choose to stop paying them.

 

[Scshadow]

So Obama has finally gotten word that his approval rating is truly abysmal. I guess its just a coincidence that its been less then a week since his party got smashed in an election. I mean, net neutrality has been an important subject all year. This "support" for net neutrality is easily 6 months late from being an honest cause. But, if it helps to keep net neutrality alive, I guess I'll take it.

You truly entertain me
- Congress has a lower approval rating than any other congress in history.
- Smashed by whom? A select few states were ignorant and went for big business Republicans.

I could careless if Obama waited to the last day of his presidency to bring up Net Neutrality. The fact it is making headlines is very important. A majority of the public don't even know what net neutrality is, let alone to its importance.

You truly entertain me. Funny how you bring up Congress' approval rating. I don't expect it will change any time soon but it should be noted that democrats just lost control of the Senate as a result of both low approval rating for congress and the president. You know... its crazy how much the democrats spend in campaigning (in a losing effort) and yet its still the rich republicans which are the oppressors. How is it the democrats can have their cake and eat it too? Nonetheless, if you choose to ignore the obvious about the elections last week, there is nothing I can do about it. And yes, any publicity on Net Neutrality is welcomed but I presume you meant to say you couldn't care less because if you could care less, then you currently care more then the least you could possibly care. But obviously you should care because the world does not wait on Obama to make up his mind about something. His support would've been much more genuine and useful many months ago when Net Neutrality was making the news already. This is not actually likely to reach an audience that isn't already invested and informed about Net Neutrality.

 

[davislane1]

Debating politics with techies is like discussing philosophy with subjectivists: rhetoric > dialectic.

As for Net Neutrality... only a fool would support the classification of the Internet as a basic utility. It seems NN proponents subscribe to the best case scenario of new regulations making the Internet Equal and Better for All™, without (1) examining the regulation of other basic utilities and (2) the implications of the language of new regs – a curiously scarce detail.

I also find it amusing that, given how much progressive-minded commenters lament the current state and regulation of other public utilities (and the various corporate monopolies thereof), somehow believe that subjecting the Internet to the exact same regulation and oversight is somehow going to improve the service.

 

[Guest]

Too many! couldn't help it

 

[cmbjive]

So Obama has finally gotten word that his approval rating is truly abysmal. I guess its just a coincidence that its been less then a week since his party got smashed in an election. I mean, net neutrality has been an important subject all year. This "support" for net neutrality is easily 6 months late from being an honest cause. But, if it helps to keep net neutrality alive, I guess I'll take it.

You truly entertain me
- Congress has a lower approval rating than any other congress in history.
- Smashed by whom? A select few states were ignorant and went for big business Republicans.

I could careless if Obama waited to the last day of his presidency to bring up Net Neutrality. The fact it is making headlines is very important. A majority of the public don't even know what net neutrality is, let alone to its importance.

Went for big business Republicans? That must explain why Obama is pressing for something that Google, AOL, Yahoo, Netflix, and whole host of other big businesses support.

And I love how the states are ignorant when they vote for the GOP, but are noble when they vote for Democrats. Gotta love the double-standard of the Left.

 

[cmbjive]

Would you prefer to pay taxes on the internet or have privatization and prioritization rule it? Personally, I'd rather pay taxes to have it work the way the People see fit rather than how a corporation would like to have it work for it's own intents.

Why do you want to pay taxes for something that you have no trouble using now without government interference? I never understand the logic of the Left.

 

[cmbjive]

Debating politics with techies is like discussing philosophy with subjectivists: rhetoric > dialectic.

As for Net Neutrality... only a fool would support the classification of the Internet as a basic utility. It seems NN proponents subscribe to the best case scenario of new regulations making the Internet Equal and Better for All™, without (1) examining the regulation of other basic utilities and (2) the implications of the language of new regs – a curiously scarce detail.

I also find it amusing that, given how much progressive-minded commenters lament the current state and regulation of other public utilities (and the various corporate monopolies thereof), somehow believe that subjecting the Internet to the exact same regulation and oversight is somehow going to improve the service.

People seem to think how they get their water, electricity, and phone is a better way than how they currently get their internet because they seem to think they will pay less money if the government gets involved.

 

[Guest]

Just ask yourself this.... Why do you believe Obama?

This is the sam person who told you you could KEEP your Healthcare insurance and your Doctor.

The guy is a lying Sack of Shitaki

 

[davislane1]

Just ask yourself this.... Why do you believe Obama?

This is the sam person who told you you could KEEP your Healthcare insurance and your Doctor.

The guy is a lying Sack of Shitaki

Don't forget the part about new coverage being cheaper.

 

[sdms96825]

I look at this glass as half-empty. There will be higher taxes for the rest of us plus higher fees in order for internet access to be provided to EVERYONE. For example, if your income is $10,000 or less you will be provided with free high-speed internet (and probably a new high-end laptop to access it). Guess who ends up paying for all that? That's how this government works (or doesn't).

 

[MoeJoe]

Just ask yourself this.... Why do you believe Obama?

This is the sam person who told you you could KEEP your Healthcare insurance and your Doctor.

The guy is a lying Sack of Shitaki

It's become fairly apparent that a large percentage of the U.S. [voting] population love to be lied to and sold on unrealistic Hope and Change fantasies. Easier to let someone else make hard decisions and easier to take other people's money. Sad and pathetic.

 

[Hexic]

Would you prefer to pay taxes on the internet or have privatization and prioritization rule it? Personally, I'd rather pay taxes to have it work the way the People see fit rather than how a corporation would like to have it work for it's own intents.

I'll take my chances and pay the companies. At least that way I could choose to stop paying them.

Staying on topic - this is exactly what I was thinking. This is why government involvement matters. The feds are too big to fail. If quality internet was to (hypothetically) start abysmally lacking, can we count on government efficiency and tact to solve the problem not only in a timely manner, but correctly?

The answer is no. Look at the launch of healthcare.gov. Pathetic would be a compliment, that was such a terrible flop.