Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 205 posts

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#31

Post by ocdtrekkie »

lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

This can only be fixed by the FTC, yes. But it's against Google's interests for antitrust law to come back into vogue, so they've put a lot of money into getting folks on board with the FCC, which doesn't have jurisdiction over Google, being in charge. In fact, the Title II classification that net neutrality supporters are so big on actually exempts ISPs from FTC regulation, preventing the government from breaking up their monopolies!

Net neutrality, as implemented, is really flawed in a lot of ways (there's a lot of practical uses for more limited types of Internet plans being available in world of IoT, especially), but this comment will be -4 shortly anyways. We shouldn't be regulating the Internet. We should be breaking up monopolies and fining companies for unfair business practices.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#32

Post by drawkbox »

lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

> ..isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restraint of trade doctrine

Assuming the FTC isn't a regulatory capture agency, it is. FTC does very little here, it was in the FTC before 2015 it went Title II and the FCC.

The FTC also can't make it a utility, the FCC can via Title II, thus the reason it ended up there from the FTC in 2015.

FTC was fighting against net neutrality from 2007-2011 to today [1].

> In June 2007, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) urged restraint with respect to new regulations proposed by net neutrality advocates, noting the "broadband industry is a relatively young and evolving one," and given no "significant market failure or demonstrated consumer harm from conduct by broadband providers" such regulations "may well have adverse effects on consumer welfare, despite the good intentions of their proponents." The FTC conclusions were questioned in Congress in September 2007, when Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate interstate commerce, trade and tourism subcommittee, told FTC Chairwoman Deborah Platt Majoras that he feared new services as groundbreaking as Google could not get started in a system with price discrimination.

The FTC is also a largely controlled agency by one party, I'll let you guess which one.

FTC's arguments up to 2011 were that no signs of abuse have emerged, that changed through 2015. One example is when Netflix/Comcast were already thottling them, Netflix even had to make fast.com because ISPs were 'fixing' their speed tests to lie.

FCC regulation, though I dislike the FCC as well, is the only place internet can be seen as a utility, which it is now and must be as so much is built on it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_S...

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#33

Post by stochastic_monk »

Larrikin wrote: post #17
maxlybbert wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sure there are many people working at Facebook, Google and Apple who also genuinely care about freedom and privacy, while there are developers working at Mozilla who are just as willing to sell out users as anyone. It is true that Mozilla’s a nonprofit, but that doesn’t mean a lot to me when I try to guess what they’ll do in the future.

I think his point was that instead of throwing your hands up in the air and declaring all options to be equally terrible, it might be better to support actors that are generally good.

False equivalence is the moral reasoning du jour, didn't you hear?

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#34

Post by wpietri »

lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

Communications and trade clearly overlap here, so I think we should pursue it from both angles.

But historically, the FCC has a long history of regulating all sort of communications, not just things with public RF. The Communications Act of 1934 made them the successor to the Federal Radio Commission, adding responsibility for telephone regulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Act_of_1934

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#35

Post by lr4444lr »

foota wrote: post #26
lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

The mission of the FCC according to wikipedia is to "make available so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, rapid, efficient, Nationwide, and world-wide wire and radio communication services with adequate facilities at reasonable charges." Net neutrality sounds consistent with this to me.

From what I read, the whole issue turns on the definition of broadband as a Common Carrier according to the suit from Mozilla, which is alleging that the FCC's decision falls under the Arbitrary and Capricious standard. But in the case cited for precedent, the telecoms didn't challenge the FCC's prior claim that Common Carrier applied. If they can successfully do that, then the FCC is free again to abdicate NN regulations. Again, I am not anti-NN. I just think the stronger legal justification, precedent, and evidence is going to be found in antitrust law.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#36

Post by ocdtrekkie »

maxlybbert wrote: post #9
benatkin wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please rethink your position. There are many people who genuinely care about freedom and privacy working at Mozilla, while at Facebook, Google, and Apple, developers are selling us out every day.

I’m sure there are many people working at Facebook, Google and Apple who also genuinely care about freedom and privacy, while there are developers working at Mozilla who are just as willing to sell out users as anyone. It is true that Mozilla’s a nonprofit, but that doesn’t mean a lot to me when I try to guess what they’ll do in the future.

It is hard, at this point, to claim that people working to advance the success of companies like Google and Facebook genuinely care about freedom and privacy. If they did, they would quit, and go work for competitors. The sort of talent these companies bring in have high incomes and are extremely sought after... it's not like they don't have a choice.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#37

Post by drawkbox »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #31
lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

This can only be fixed by the FTC, yes. But it's against Google's interests for antitrust law to come back into vogue, so they've put a lot of money into getting folks on board with the FCC, which doesn't have jurisdiction over Google, being in charge. In fact, the Title II classification that net neutrality supporters are so big on actually exempts ISPs from FTC regulation, preventing the government from breaking up…

> We should be breaking up monopolies and fining companies for unfair business practices.

Ultimately in a perfect world if the agencies did as their mission statements said that would work. Monopolies need to be broken up and it can lead to good things, even just threatening Microsoft in the 90s led to Google, Apple, etc emergence.

The problem is there has been zero sign that anyone is willing to go after monopolies, especially after the Great Recession even though it would probably help us get out of the next one easier with more breakups.

The local ISP monopolies are really against net neutrality, Google isn't the monopoly we need to be worrying about yet. ISPs/broadband have local monopolies built on fake competition on purpose.

The vast majority US only has 0 or 1 valid ISP with decent speeds if that at 25-100 Mbps[1][2].

ISPs are the biggest monopoly threat regarding open internet as they control the levers, not a company that operates on top of the internet in the market.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-br...

[2] https://consumerist.com/2014/03/07/heres-what-lack-of-broadb...

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#38

Post by betterunix2 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #24

Am I the only person who thinks this whole approach to Net Neutrality is wrongly pursued through the FCC? Hear me out: if the networks don't access a physically limited resource like the RF spectrum and there isn't any censorship issue at stake, if the issue is truly differential access and usage due to oligopolistic limitation, isn't it for the FTC to intervene and bust up throttling and content blocks under restrai…

It is hard to see how the FTC would be able to help if an ISP decides to block a peer-to-peer system that has no central service or business model.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#39

Post by ocdtrekkie »

drawkbox wrote: post #37
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can only be fixed by the FTC, yes. But it's against Google's interests for antitrust law to come back into vogue, so they've put a lot of money into getting folks on board with the FCC, which doesn't have jurisdiction over Google, being in charge. In fact, the Title II classification that net neutrality supporters are so big on actually exempts ISPs from FTC regulation, preventing the government from breaking up…

> We should be breaking up monopolies and fining companies for unfair business practices . Ultimately in a perfect world if the agencies did as their mission statements said that would work. Monopolies need to be broken up and it can lead to good things, even just threatening Microsoft in the 90s led to Google, Apple, etc emergence. The problem is there has been zero sign that anyone is willing to go after monopolies…

Google is a global monopoly with it's hands in literally everything. A significant percentage of all inter-human communication, whether voice, internet, email, or messaging goes through Google. Possibly a majority.

Regional/local monopolies are barely a concern worth mention in comparison. It's as if you're worried about the street dealer, and not worried about the head of the cartel.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#40

Post by satiespickles »

pqh wrote: post #10
tomger wrote: post #7

This is great! Though I wonder if there’s anything more we can do than call our representative like the article suggests.

My rep sent a canned, formal-language-adorned "get stuffed" in response.

I don't know. Something is going on in my locale.

I contacted my legislators about this a couple of times (maybe more?) first by email and then by phone. This was before Pai did the inevitable.

The staff who answered the call were variable in how aware they seemed to be about net neutrality. Some of them seemed to know what I was talking about, and others seemed clueless.

At the time, maybe a week or two later, I got a typical kind of response. I wouldn't say it was canned, but maybe something like that, explaining their position and so forth, which I knew. I've received many of these types of responses over the years on various issues (I'm not saying all the responses I've received have been like this, but a lot of them have been).

The thing that's strange is that the last couple of days, about the time the dems managed to gather their 50 votes, I started getting these emails from some of the same legislators explaining that they were crafting a response. These were legislators that already replied to me, a couple of months ago or so, and the vibe I got was that they wanted to reapproach the issue or something. I've received one of these letters, and the overall position hasn't changed, but it was more detailed and a little more defensive or something.

I'm not sure what's going on, but my gut impression is that the GOP legislators here are realizing they're on the minority end of this issue with regard to public opinion, and are trying to reapproach voters with a different PR spin, trying to do damage control and a "do-over" on an issue they weren't paying too much attention to before. They seem a little nervous about their position to me, even if they haven't changed it formally.

Post reply on HN