States win right to ban municipal broadband

[Trik'Stari]

Facepalm time boys and girls.

 

Quote

The Federal Communications Commission has lost in an attempt to preempt state laws that restrict the growth of municipal broadband networks.

 

The FCC in February 2015 voted to block laws in North Carolina and Tennessee that prevent municipal broadband providers from expanding outside their territories. The FCC, led by Chairman Tom Wheeler, claimed it could preempt the laws because Congress authorizes the commission to promote telecom competition by removing barriers to investment.

 

But this was a risky legal argument, as the FCC has no specific authority to overturn state laws. Officials in both states appealed the FCC decision, and today a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled in favor of the states (full text).

"The FCC order essentially serves to re-allocate decision-making power between the states and their municipalities," judges wrote. "This is shown by the fact that no federal statute or FCC regulation requires the municipalities to expand or otherwise to act in contravention of the preempted state statutory provisions. This preemption by the FCC of the allocation of power between a state and its subdivisions requires at least a clear statement in the authorizing federal legislation. The FCC relies upon Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 for the authority to preempt in this case, but that statute falls far short of such a clear statement. The preemption order must accordingly be reversed."

 

The decision was essentially unanimous, with judges John Rogers, Joseph Hood, and Helene White all voting to reverse the FCC's order. White concurred in part and dissented in part, writing a separate opinion to address a few issues not covered in the majority opinion.

 

The loss is a big one for Wheeler. The FCC voted through his net neutrality rules and the muni broadband decision on the same day; he called it “the proudest day of my public policy life.” The FCC's net neutrality decision was upheld by a federal appeals court, but a win on the state law preemption would have allowed Wheeler to make a bigger impact on boosting broadband competition in the United States.

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/

 

This is one of those few cases, where I am entirely FOR the federal government having the power to overrule the state governments. Why? Because these state governments are largely passing these laws at the behest of their corporate backers.

 

Seriously. We need a major push to get non-tech literate people to understand why we need to force the ISP's to actually compete. We need a major push to prevent ISP's from owning ANY "news" entities, etc.

 

Thoughts, questions, comments?

[Scruffy90]

7 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Facepalm time boys and girls.

 

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/

 

This is one of those few cases, where I am entirely FOR the federal government having the power to overrule the state governments. Why? Because these state governments are largely passing these laws at the behest of their corporate backers.

 

Seriously. We need a major push to get non-tech literate people to understand why we need to force the ISP's to actually compete. We need a major push to prevent ISP's from owning ANY "news" entities, etc.

 

Thoughts, questions, comments?

Trying to get the general public to understand anything is impossible. 

 

[PlayStation 2]

Tennessee, huh. That means Alabama isn't far from getting this passed, and if that happens, fuck me.

[Trik'Stari]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Tennessee, huh. That means Alabama isn't far from getting this passed, and if that happens, fuck me.

At this rate, with all the idiocy going on right now, everyone in the US is fucked.

 

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation. Once global warming hits, it will probably be liveable.

[Scruffy90]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Tennessee, huh. That means Alabama isn't far from getting this passed, and if that happens, fuck me.

Probably the entire south east.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, Trik'Stari said:

At this rate, with all the idiocy going on right now, everyone in the US is fucked.

 

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation.

That or some unclaimed island.

[TheGhzGuy]

9 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Facepalm time boys and girls.

 

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/

 

This is one of those few cases, where I am entirely FOR the federal government having the power to overrule the state governments. Why? Because these state governments are largely passing these laws at the behest of their corporate backers.

 

Seriously. We need a major push to get non-tech literate people to understand why we need to force the ISP's to actually compete. We need a major push to prevent ISP's from owning ANY "news" entities, etc.

 

Thoughts, questions, comments?

As someone who is politically active, especially with internet rights, I think one of the first ways of addressing this problem is making sure the public understands, as you said. What I want to figure out is where people start to get confused. Knowing that, we can explain things to them and help them understand. 

[Scruffy90]

2 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

At this rate, with all the idiocy going on right now, everyone in the US is fucked.

 

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation. Once global warming hits, it will probably be liveable.

We were at the point of no return a long time ago. I'm down for a nerd only nation though. 

[Scruffy90]

1 minute ago, TheGhzGuy said:

As someone who is politically active, especially with internet rights, I think one of the first ways of addressing this problem is making sure the public understands, as you said. What I want to figure out is where people start to get confused. Knowing that, we can explain things to them and help them understand. 

The big issue is that the general public doesnt care and they see everything in black and white, or in the US' case, Democrat and Republican (a fucking shame if you ask me). Also there is a huge portion of the population that simply doesnt want to hear it. 

[CtrlAltELITE]

6 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

At this rate, with all the idiocy going on right now, everyone in the US is fucked.

 

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation. Once global warming hits, it will probably be liveable.

Ice cooled server farms everywhere! If yall need a mechanical design technician give me a shout :D.

[Nineshadow]

Oh well, the judges did make a fair point...kinda nitpicking but fair nonetheless. That's how the system works I guess.

 

But really, why is there a law that restricts the growth of municipal broadband networks in the first place? I don't even...other than "interests", I have no explanation.

[TheGhzGuy]

1 minute ago, Scruffy90 said:

The big issue is that the general public doesnt care and they see everything in black and white, or in the US' case, Democrat and Republican (a fucking shame if you ask me). Also there is a huge portion of the population that simply doesnt want to hear it. 

Part of me agrees with that. The other part of me wants to see what happens when you feed someone information and give them options. I also have to agree that it is sad that everything is a two party system. I wonder why they just want to ignore it lol (I'm kinda interested in psychology, so I love to know the "why" behind everything)

[themctipers]

18 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Facepalm time boys and girls.

 

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/08/in-blow-to-muni-broadband-fcc-loses-bid-to-overturn-state-laws/

 

This is one of those few cases, where I am entirely FOR the federal government having the power to overrule the state governments. Why? Because these state governments are largely passing these laws at the behest of their corporate backers.

 

Seriously. We need a major push to get non-tech literate people to understand why we need to force the ISP's to actually compete. We need a major push to prevent ISP's from owning ANY "news" entities, etc.

 

Thoughts, questions, comments?

In my area Rogers ofers anyone who joins to get 100/10 (200/10 from speed test) for $100/mo with tv and phone

atleast from what I know..

 

also, there's a huge monopoly in my area with bell..  

[Trik'Stari]

9 minutes ago, TheGhzGuy said:

As someone who is politically active, especially with internet rights, I think one of the first ways of addressing this problem is making sure the public understands, as you said. What I want to figure out is where people start to get confused. Knowing that, we can explain things to them and help them understand. 

They wake up confused and not giving a shit. All you really need to do is convince them that they will get a better service for their money and you've won.

 

6 minutes ago, Scruffy90 said:

The big issue is that the general public doesnt care and they see everything in black and white, or in the US' case, Democrat and Republican (a fucking shame if you ask me). Also there is a huge portion of the population that simply doesnt want to hear it. 

One of the founders categorically stated that a two party system would be the demise of this country.

 

2 minutes ago, Nineshadow said:

Oh well, the judges did make a fair point...kinda nitpicking but fair nonetheless. That's how the system works I guess.

 

But really, why is there a law that restricts the growth of municipal broadband networks in the first place? I don't even...other than "interests", I have no explanation.

They did, but still. There needs to be a precedent for "while this does not meet with the law, it's still better for the nation if it happens"

[Sakkura]

It looks like essentially the right decision. It's just too bad it'll cause problems.

 

Congress needs to pass a law about this, that's pretty much what the ruling means. It's fair enough to rule that the FCC can't just make stuff up, even when it's with the best intentions.

[TheGhzGuy]

Just now, Trik'Stari said:

They wake up confused and not giving a shit. All you really need to do is convince them that they will get a better service for their money and you've won.

 

One of the founders categorically stated that a two party system would be the demise of this country.

 

They did, but still. There needs to be a precedent for "while this does not meet with the law, it's still better for the nation if it happens"

Thanks for giving me my strategy.

[Trik'Stari]

3 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

It looks like essentially the right decision. It's just too bad it'll cause problems.

 

Congress needs to pass a law about this, that's pretty much what the ruling means. It's fair enough to rule that the FCC can't just make stuff up, even when it's with the best intentions.

Congress already tried.

 

It was entirely in the ISP's favor, it was "bi-partisan", and it entirely nullified the FCC's attempts to impose net neutrality. It was called the "Internet Freedom Act", and it received a HUGE backlash from the public. Which is why congress is going to look at it again, in November of this year.

 

You know, during the election when NOBODY IS PAYING ATTENTION.

[Coaxialgamer]

16 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

That or some unclaimed island.

Considering the amount of nerds here i think Antarctica should have enough space for us all /jk

 

[Nineshadow]

3 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

They did, but still. There needs to be a precedent for "while this does not meet with the law, it's still better for the nation if it happens"

Eh...they can do anything in the name of "national security" anyway so...

 

Doubt it's going to happen.

[Mark77]

Its a problem because cities should not be taxing their citizens, to take business risks for which they have no expertise.

 

Do you *really* want the government controlling your Internet connection?  Lol.  Good lord.

[TrigrH]

Quote

26 minutes ago, Scruffy90 said:

snip

22 minutes ago, TheGhzGuy said:

snipeh

 

Plz don't quote the entire article

23 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation. Once global warming hits, it will probably be liveable.

Wouldn't be surprised if the planning is already in place

[themctipers]

Just now, TrigrH said:

Plz don't quote the entire article

 

Wouldn't be surprised if the planning is already in place

was on mobile, impossible to delete shit inside the quote without deleting the quote.

[handymanshandle]

18 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

At this rate, with all the idiocy going on right now, everyone in the US is fucked.

 

Time to move to Antarctica and start a nerd nation. Once global warming hits, it will probably be liveable.

I live in Minnesota, it wouldn't be that much of an adjustment for us /s

 

But yeah it's incredibly dumb that the Court of Appeals turned its back on the consumers in those states. I mean states rights are almost always more important but when it comes to whether a state can fuck over consumers or not is where states rights should end.

 

This is one of the largest reasons I like the idea of the EU is that it's very pro-consumer however that comes at a bit of a cost and I can understand why some people over there don't want to be a part of it and would rather it abolished.

[Trik'Stari]

11 minutes ago, Mark77 said:

Its a problem because cities should not be taxing their citizens, to take business risks for which they have no expertise.

 

Do you *really* want the government controlling your Internet connection?  Lol.  Good lord.

Yes. I do. Because they are accountable.

 

Meanwhile, we have ISP's pushing bandwidth and datacaps, and some of the worst speeds in the world. Our internet infrastructure is a complete fucking joke compared to other "first world" nations. We have the equivalent of a third world country, in internet speeds and prices.

 

So yes, I am fine with the government installing municipal broadband. Because the so called "free market" is only hiking up prices, making service worse, and refusing to compete with one another. I get disconnected multiple times a night, due to what my ISP claims is "bandwidth exhaustion" even though I live in a rural area, and they allegedly just installed their own fucking fiber line to the nearest internet backbone. I've filed THREE FCC complaints in the last year. The first time they sent someone out to check, and it turns out they had somehow switched us back down from 10/1 to 3/1, the second time they sent someone to check the equipment and it was fine, the third time I got a letter saying that our area was suffering from bandwidth exhaustion, and that it would be fixed in April or May of this year.

 

Here it is, AUGUST, and it hasn't stopped happening. So yes, let the government have a shot. At least we can hold them accountable for fucking up. More so than corporations who care for nothing other than profit margin.

[Trik'Stari]

2 minutes ago, wcreek said:

I live in Minnesota, it wouldn't be that much of an adjustment for us /s

 

But yeah it's incredibly dumb that the Court of Appeals turned its back on the consumers in those states. I mean states rights are almost always more important but when it comes to whether a state can fuck over consumers or not is where states rights should end.

 

This is one of the largest reasons I like the idea of the EU is that it's very pro-consumer however that comes at a bit of a cost and I can understand why some people over there don't want to be a part of it and would rather it abolished.

We need to integrate the idea of being Pro-Consumer, with the idea of being "free market" and anti-globalist.