Internet Under FCC Title 2 May Have Adverse Effect of Internet Censorship According to Mark Cuban and Others

[459pm]

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/26/cuban-fcc-net-regs-will-spill-over-tv-as-you-know-it-is-over/

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102459578#.

 

 

 

Mark Cuban gives very interesting point of view on the FCC decision about title 2 and net neutrality. He claims that Net Neutrality is a great thing, but handing the FCC the power to make laws like this is very dangerous. He points out that the FCC attacked TV stations for years after Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show because of 'nipplegate' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XXXVIII_halftime_show_controversy] and they have a terrible record of censoring entertainment.

 

The more I investigate the FCC's track record, the more I find that while Net Neutrality needs to happen ASAP, using the FCC to do this was very brash and a scary action for anyone who enjoys an uncensored internet.

 

Cuban said: 

“the courts will rule the Internet for the next however many years. let’s just take it all the way through its logical conclusion. All bits are bits, all bits are equal. If all bits are equal, then let’s look at what a stream bit is an example. So when Henry and I do an interview, and it’s streamed lived on the Internet, there’s a camera, it goes through an encoder, it sends it out via server or some manner to the Internet, you click on Business Insider and you watch the stream, right? Now, let’s look at CNBC on Comcast. There’s cameras right in front of you, they go through a switcher, they go through an encoder, it’s put through a server, it goes to Comcast, and it’s streamed in a managed service environment to television. It’s the exact same thing. And if it’s the exact same thing technologically and all bits are equal, then why shouldn’t CNBC and all TV networks that are delivered on cable, and Telco, and fiber like Verizon, why shouldn’t they be part of the open Internet as well? And if they are and all bits are equal, now, let’s take it one step further. It’s the purview of the FCC now. The FCC, right? So, the FCC now has to apply their same standards to content, don’t they, that they do to television content because that’s where it is and there’s going to be certain citizens who think ‘well now, since all content is delivered over the Internet because all bits are bits, and it’s a fair, and open, and equal Internet — decency standards.’ And remember the FCC is the same agency that fought Nipplegate for eight years over a wardrobe malfunction.”

 

The video in the article is very much so worth watching. 

[Unhelpful]

In the long-run? It will. People will take advantage of it. That doesn't mean it isn't necessary right now.

[JAKEBAB]

Yea ive been thinking the same thing, wasn't there like 300+ pages hidden or something

[459pm]

Yea ive been thinking the same thing, wasn't there like 300+ pages hidden or something

Indeed. They've passed several bills and regulations like this and the Affordable Care Act without anyone even reading them. In fact, the political system is so messed up that when bills are being voted on, legislators make jokes like this: 

 

 

"We have to pass the bill to found out what's in it!" [ Skip to 0:30 ]

 

This guy wants to force legislatures to read bills and legislation and post them online:

 

[Guest Kloaked]

How else are we going to get it to where the ISP's won't screw everyone with a sandpaper condom?

It can't be worse with the FCC being able to regulate how open the Internet is. I'm good with Verizon, Comcast and friends not being able to do the shit that they wanted to.

[michael52399]

i agree with this. net neutrality is very important, but the way that it is being handled is not the right way of going about this.

 

A lot of this is a FCC power grab.   

 

90% of the time nothing good happens when the government make a 300+ page bill.

[459pm]

How else are we going to get it to where the ISP's won't screw everyone with a sandpaper condom?

It can't be worse with the FCC being able to regulate how open the Internet is. I'm good with Verizon, Comcast and friends not being able to do the shit that they wanted to.

 

The way the FCC did this actually wasn't legal, and the court cases that follow this ruling by the FCC will show that.

 

It could have been done with a simple bill through the house and senate.

 

It also probably could have been fixed by allowing services like google fiber to use existing underground pathways and thus increase competition for bad ISPs. 

 

Out of all the ways they could have kept Net Neutrality, they used the most sketchy, backdoor, and illegal way to do it, and it's going to bite us in the butt later. 

[dadasmithywinkle]

Meh, VPN's and such will bypass their B.S. (most likely). It is too bad that everyone got so caught up in wanting it passed that they didn't think about all of the implications, tho.

[SImoHayha]

Well if they do decide to do something fishy, we the people will stand against it for fair rights and what not.   Remember a nation is not without her people, so if the people hate the nation, then the nation is no more.

[Geekazoid]

How else are we going to get it to where the ISP's won't **** everyone with a sandpaper ******?

It can't be worse with the FCC being able to regulate how open the Internet is. I'm good with Verizon, Comcast and friends not being able to do the **** that they wanted to.

THE FCC HAS CENSORED THIS POST

[EChondo]

The way the FCC did this actually wasn't legal, and the court cases that follow this ruling by the FCC will show that.

 

It could have been done with a simple bill through the house and senate.

Please indulge me, how was this an illegal thing the FCC did? The FCC is the primary agency to handle THIS EXACT THING. Their agency was created for this exact purpose.

 

A bill going through the house and senate doesn't mean anything, because the FCC is the one that enforces this. The FCC are the ones that need to pass this and vote on it.

 

There is so much misinformation in this thread it is mind boggling. 

[Silent_Xaxal]

At this stage, we need to encourage support for those want to ensure that this entire debacle doesn't end up like some other bills (IE, Obamacare and any of the major initiatives of the past two administrations) where they lead to more powers for non-elected committees.  

 

Likewise, we need to stand up to this kind of bullshit ourselves. The last thing we need is a marketplace decided by the FCC and big corporations, which will cave in on itself faster than a cavern whose base is made out of popsicle sticks.

[Derangel]

The way the FCC did this actually wasn't legal, and the court cases that follow this ruling by the FCC will show that.

 

It could have been done with a simple bill through the house and senate.

 

It also probably could have been fixed by allowing services like google fiber to use existing underground pathways and thus increase competition for bad ISPs. 

 

Out of all the ways they could have kept Net Neutrality, they used the most sketchy, backdoor, and illegal way to do it, and it's going to bite us in the butt later. 

 

A simple bill? By the people who Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T pay off to get their way? A congress filled with old idiots who know fuck all about the internet and technology beyond what is fed to them by their backers? There is no chance in hell that congress will EVER pass a bill that actually protects consumer rights and isn't geared towards the companies that directly fill their pocket books.

 

The FCC has issues, a lot of them, but this is really the only way for them to enforce these rules. They tried the easy way before and were slapped down.

 

As for it being illegal, no it isn't. Whether or not they can defend their choices to the Supreme Court when the douchebags of the ISP industry sue them is something we'll have to wait and see.

[JAKEBAB]

Well if they do decide to do something fishy, we the people will stand against it for fair rights and what not.   Remember a nation is not without her people, so if the people hate the nation, then the nation is no more.

And that totally works E.g NSA spying...

[Derangel]

At this stage, we need to encourage support for those want to ensure that this entire debacle doesn't end up like some other bills (IE, Obamacare and any of the major initiatives of the past two administrations) where they lead to more powers for non-elected committees.  

 

Likewise, we need to stand up to this kind of bullshit ourselves. The last thing we need is a marketplace decided by the FCC and big corporations, which will cave in on itself faster than a cavern whose base is made out of popsicle sticks.

 

How exactly are consumers supposed to do anything when there is quite literally zero competition in most of the country? It's not like many people have the option to switch from one carrier to another when they're treated like shit. There is nothing the consumer can do. Giving ISPs free reign to do whatever they wanted it what created this huge mess in the first place. We need something solid in place to slap them down because there is fuck all any of us can do about it.

[Silent_Xaxal]

And that totally works E.g NSA spying...

 

It would if people started looking beyond protests, pacifism, and feel good mantras shouted on megaphones. Those work out so well......*Looks at the countries where the Arab Spring happened*

[JAKEBAB]

It would if people started looking beyond protests, pacifism, and feel good mantras shouted on megaphones. Those work out so well......*Looks at the countries where the Arab Spring happened*

What do u suggest people do then?

[Guest Kloaked]

THE FCC HAS CENSORED THIS POST

Don't care. Had fast Internet.

[mr moose]

A congress filled with old idiots who know fuck all about the internet and technology beyond what is fed to them by their backers?

 

Not that I want to entertain the entire debate, because quite frankly the US legal system is perplexing enough as it is, however  this notion that just because the people in government are old doesn't mean they have no idea about technology or it's place in the modern world to be quite obnoxious. Chances are they know a shit load more about the importance of technology and it's effects on the economy than you or anyone on this forum does.

[Silent_Xaxal]

How exactly are consumers supposed to do anything when there is quite literally zero competition in most of the country? It's not like many people have the option to switch from one carrier to another when they're treated like shit. There is nothing the consumer can do. Giving ISPs free reign to do whatever they wanted it what created this huge mess in the first place. We need something solid in place to slap them down because there is fuck all any of us can do about it.

While you do have valid concerns, that does not suddenly mean that a government agency has the right to pass regulation via a secret 332 page document. If they really wanted to change the rules to benefit consumers, then they wouldn't have needed more than the number of pages that the original titles 2 document would have had, only switching out Television with Internet (And even that one had issues). 

The OP's opening statement speaks in regards to future potential for censorship. To simply act as if this is just going to be about ISPs alone (Who STILL can influence the agency, mind you, because we know these kinds of "special interests" never go away, legislation or not), simply ignores the other issues that can come out of the current scenario. Which are not all good, contrary to what we'd all like to believe.

 

[Guest Kloaked]

Not that I want to entertain the entire debate, because quite frankly the US legal system is perplexing enough as it is, however this notion that just because the people in government are old doesn't mean they have no idea about technology or it's place in the modern world to be quite obnoxious. Chances are they know a shit load more about the importance of technology and it's effects on the economy than you or anyone on this forum does.

Moose please. We all know the people in the FCC don't know of what The Google is.

[Silent_Xaxal]

What do u suggest people do then?

 

I think the writing is in the sand, or in a bunch of books or thought processes that a lot of said people would have to willingly consume as if it's forbidden fruit. 

Gandhi's method is not the only method.

[mr moose]

Moose please. We all know the people in the FCC don't know of what The Google is.

 

Yes they do, it's that company that keeps telling them to introduce NN, because clearly their typewriters make more money from a free net.

[Geekazoid]

Don't care. Had fast Internet.

Good for you!

[Volbet]

As far as my understandning of US censorship laws, the FCC only conrol free-to-air TV and radio, so cable TV, satelite radio and the internet is beyond their power to censor.

There would have to be new legislation to allow the FCC to censor the internet.

 

Of course censorship is always possible, but it was also possible before Title II was passed. They just had to make new legisaltion.

Bad compersion is bad, but there are countries out there where most of the internet infrastructure is owned and serviced by the government, and they don't have any censorship.