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

61–70 of 205 posts

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#61

Post by jrs95 »

stcredzero wrote: post #51
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…

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 other words: Protecting Net Neutrality through the FCC is not politically stable. We have clear proof of that. Google just wants that because it's protecting its ow…

Their motto may as well just be “Be evil” now imo. It seems like they’re on the wrong side of basically every issue.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#62

Post by r00fus »

ekianjo wrote: post #53
drawkbox wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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. Google and Apple creating their own monopoly-like business in turn (locking you in their walled gardens as much as then can). It certainly looks like a pattern, with consumers not having much of a choice in the end.

Apple is not a monopoly any sense or legal definition. It's false equivalency to come them to cable providers.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#63

Post by drawkbox »

qaq wrote: post #58
drawkbox wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I think it's highly market specific. Moving to NoVa from MI I have now like 5 ISP options with very competitive pricing and variety of high speed option including Comcast Xfinity 2000 Mbps, Verizon FIOS etc.

Your local anecdote is nice but the VAST MAJORITY of the US only has 0 or 1 valid ISP with decent speeds if that at 25-100 Mbps[1][2].

Removing NN will also increase revenues for ISPs that currently are already or on their way to monopolies, which will create even more fake ISP competition.

Everyone saw what happened when Google Fiber was threatening, suddenly competition...

[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

#64

Post by dmoy »

zhjansbnas wrote: post #57
drawkbox wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check again, Google isn't the one most people are worried about. They are worried about Comcast, Cox, AT&T and the like that own ISPs/broadband, content and control your privacy on every site you go to with the ISP privacy bill they put through, which they moved to the FTC from the FCC so they could control it better. You don't have to go to Google, you are stuck with your ISP and the other fake competitive ISP that…

I found it pretty easy to switch ISPs, but it would be pretty hard for me to quit Google. Nobody expects my IP address to be static, and that’s the only thing I lose when I switch. I get that some people can’t switch. The ISPs suck, they are the most hated companies in the world and all. The suckage takes the form of “they don’t show up for the appointment on time” or “they raised my bill by $20” which produces a lot…

> I found it pretty easy to switch ISPs

I've been trying for two years to switch isp. I can't because there's only one choice. Every time I ask the other isp who is even in the general area for how much it would cost to wire my house, I get a "don't know, sorry' answer from them.

With my current isp their local infrastructure craps out (5-10% packet loss all the time) every year or so and I have to file an average of ~3 support tickets and wait a month for them to fix it. I'm 1-2 miles away from downtown Seattle.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#65

Post by maxlybbert »

zbraniecki wrote: post #25
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.

> 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 should tho. Mozilla is not free of mistakes, but they're recognized as such, and handled as such. Thanks to the non-profit status none of the bad decisions Mozilla made was a result of conflict of interests. source: I work for Mozilla

My original comment was ambiguous: (1) I didn’t predict Firefox OS, Rust, the current branding push (moz://a), cancelation of particular projects, the switch to Yahoo search and the recent switch back to Google, etc., and (2) I didn’t expect any of Mozilla’s political activity, including this lawsuit. Knowing that Mozilla qualifies as a nonprofit in the US doesn’t make its behavior any easier to predict.

I believe that Mozilla’s nonprofit status requires it to show “community support” in the form of donations from a lot of people, so the tax status does influence the foundation’s policies in some way (e.g., policies can’t upset too many donors), but I think that influence is pretty limited.

Mozilla has to make do with the same imperfect people as everyone else.

——

Even though I’m bad at it, I will make one prediction: suing the federal government is expensive. Obviously Mozilla will use the lawsuit as a fundraising opportunity. If the suit is successful, they will have another reason to be mentioned in history books. But if the suit fails, or if the fundraising doesn’t work out, this might end up as a very costly mistake.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#66

Post by YaxelPerez »

jrs95 wrote: post #61
stcredzero wrote: post #51

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 other words: Protecting Net Neutrality through the FCC is not politically stable. We have clear proof of that. Google just wants that because it's protecting its ow…

Their motto may as well just be “Be evil” now imo. It seems like they’re on the wrong side of basically every issue.

"Make money", perhaps?

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#67

Post by briffle »

zhjansbnas wrote: post #57
drawkbox wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check again, Google isn't the one most people are worried about. They are worried about Comcast, Cox, AT&T and the like that own ISPs/broadband, content and control your privacy on every site you go to with the ISP privacy bill they put through, which they moved to the FTC from the FCC so they could control it better. You don't have to go to Google, you are stuck with your ISP and the other fake competitive ISP that…

I found it pretty easy to switch ISPs, but it would be pretty hard for me to quit Google. Nobody expects my IP address to be static, and that’s the only thing I lose when I switch. I get that some people can’t switch. The ISPs suck, they are the most hated companies in the world and all. The suckage takes the form of “they don’t show up for the appointment on time” or “they raised my bill by $20” which produces a lot…

You are privileged to have a choice. Not all of us do. I have cable, or 10mb dsl (with low caps) And I love in the nicer, newer suburbs of a 200k metro area...

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#68

Post by ComputerGuru »

nitrogen wrote: post #44
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…

there's a lot of practical uses for more limited types of Internet plans being available in world of IoT, especially Can you clarify what you mean by this?

Not the parent poster, but for instance, but think having a dozen data loggers out in the field that only need to transfer a few 100k of data each day. No need for 4G or multi gigabyte packages plus hefty per-device line/access fee.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#69

Post by maxander »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #39
drawkbox wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Look up the definition of a "monopoly." Google is giant, sure, but it's not the only search provider, or email provider, or anything else that it does (aside from some random niche things.) And everyone has perfect freedom to switch from Google to another provider of these services, which isn't true for ISPs if only one company has fiber going to your house.

Re: Mozilla Files Suit Against FCC to Protect Net Neutrality

#70

Post by lr4444lr »

drawkbox wrote: post #32
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…

I agree with your statements (not sure though, about the partisanship issue of any particular agency). The FTC's enforcement (in concert with the DoJ's) is responsive, not prescriptive, except under the interpretation of anti-trust law, which to my understanding is very robust for checking what NN proponents are fearful of happening, if ISPs in fact should make those moves.

Defining ISPs as Common Carriers makes me more uneasy. Are there really no unintended consequences there? My understanding is that Common Carrier status connotes that there is a recognized definitive benefit to having the monopoly, as with railroads or telephone networks. It seems to enshrine as necessary the municipal and regional exclusivity contracts. Are you so sure there would be no potential risks to innovation and a bequeathing of great power to ISPs by having them declared utilities?

Post reply on HN