Watch the Open Commission Meeting
Get FCC Updates
Syndicate
Subscribe to Blog Posts
Subscribe to Blog Comments
|

Categories Category: From the Chairman
Category: Rule-Making
Category: Policy
Category: Events

Archives Archives for December 2010
Archives for September 2010
Archives for August 2010
Archives for May 2010
Archives for April 2010
Archives for March 2010
Archives for February 2010
Archives for January 2010
Archives for December 2009
Archives for November 2009
Archives for October 2009

Chairman Genachowski: Thoughts on the October Commission Meeting

October 23rd, 2009 by Gray Brooks

After yesterday’s Open Meeting, Chairman Julius Genachowski recorded some reflections on what happened.  Check out his thoughts below and see the Open Meeting page for the recorded video, the full text of the NPRM, and any other information.

  1. Kyle says:

    Sounds like the people at the FCC have a head on their shoulders. Great job. Don’t back down. The millions of people in america who use the internet are counting on you – weather they know it or not.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  2. Guest says:

    This is a simple issue. ISPs should not prioritize data packets based on source. Anything else compromises the principles described in the video. I’m all for regulation that would make this law.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  3. Erich Vieth says:

    I’d like to know how much the telecoms have paid Vivolorosso so that he would claim, in direct opposition to the recent FCC pronouncements, that the FCC is attempting to “restrict” the Internet. In truth, the net neutrality movement seeks only to regulate the on-ramps to the Internet–the telecoms. The movement seeks to insure that all users have equal access to the Internet, regardless of content or type of use. I’ve been following the net neutrality movement for years, and I’ve never heard of a net neutrality advocate who who has proposed to regulate the Internet.

    BTW, I’m using my real name here, but I notice that lots of critics of the FCC are not. I would suggest that all of those who hurl invectives and tell untruths about the purpose of net neutrality start doing the same. Let’s see you state your real names so that we can trace your connections to the telecoms. And at a minimum, please start responding to what the FCC is actually proposing. No more straw man attacks.

    Signed,
    Erich Vieth
    http://dangerousintersection.org/

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  4. Guest says:

    Normally I don’t consider the government capable of dealing with technology issues, but the FCCs approach to network neutrality is nuanced, well-researched, and thoughtful. The only thing I think we need is some clarification, perhaps with a list of specific practices, of what makes a network management practice ‘reasonable’ versus ‘unreasonable.’

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  5. averagedude says:

    The question here is whether or not I want my ISP controlling my bandwidth or the government. Both say they’re doing it to keep the internet free and unrestricted, but only one of them is motivated by profit. No thanks, ISP’s

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  6. Guest says:

    please support Net Neutrality, if you don’t understand computers or computing, please find someone under 25 years of age to explain it you, it’s imperative that the network remain open, thank you.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  7. Felicity says:

    Net neutrality is the only way to maintain freedom of speech and of the press and prevent ISP’s from blocking any information which goes against their interests. I support net neutrality because I support the freedom of PEOPLE, not of corporations.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  8. journalsquared says:

    Detractors of these rules love to call white black and say 2 + 2 = 5.

    Big Content has been trying for years to stifle access by throttling certain traffic, filtering content by forging TCP reset packets, hijacking content such as 404 errors in order to display their own ads, stifling competition by squeezing out smaller ISPs, and have advanced the idea of a tiered Internet where access the content is limited based on how much you the customer is willing to pay. Net neutrality policies promote competition and protect the free flow of information on the Internet; the only things these policies restrict are Big Content’s monopolistic fantasies.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 5.0/5 (13 votes cast)
  9. Vivolorosso says:

    I couldn’t watch past the 1 minute mark. I was literally sick to my stomach. So this tool comes on, tells us how great the internet has been while free. Tells us that it has been an extraordinary platform for a free flow of ideas and creativity.

    But now he’s saying in order for the internet to stay free and open, the FCC needs to restrict it. Please Mr. Corporate Tool, you’ll be hurting a lot of people with these “freedoms” just to help your friends in the telecommunications industry.

    Of course the FCC won’t regulate it, your ISP buddies will be doing it. Quit trying to confuse people you scum.

    VA:F [1.6.5_908]
    Rating: 1.6/5 (18 votes cast)
    • Sam says:

      I think you have completely misunderstood Net Neutrality. The whole purpose of Net Neutrality is so that places like Hulu, which competes with your cable company, and Vonage, competes with your phone company, don’t get sabotaged by your ISP to thwart free competition. These are new ideas just now hitting the internet, which means this hasn’t been a huge enough problem until now.

      There are legitimate DETAILS to be worked out over how to prioritize traffic in a vendor-neutral way. For instance, when you dial 911 on your Vonage phone, that’s probably more important than your neighbor watching Hulu. These are details that are not being addressed in the current model any better than they are by Net Neutrality.

      I urge you!.. Don’t let your computer illiterate representative in congress steal this debate away from the people that know what they are talking about. This is not a political issue, it is a technical and business issue. In my opinion, no one in the world is more equipped to understand and address this issue more than the FCC. They have dealt with issues very similar to these in the past. I’m going to send a note to my congressman to stay out of this, and let the FCC do the job it was appointed to do.

      FYI: The FCC has rolling out communication to the masses as one of it’s biggest achievements in their regulation of the cable television industry’s monopoly. For a long time, you only had one way to get your TV, and the FCC regulators kept that way affordable while balancing the business needs of the industry to ensure a pretty much universal roll-out. Along the way, they have also helped the industry become a competitive one (prohibiting rental owners from preventing you from getting satellite TV). This is the FCCs way of ensure that competition continues to spread onto the internet.

      VA:F [1.6.5_908]
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • Brian Kennedy says:

      Who’s talking about restricting the Internet? You’re really just going off on your own private, wild tangent here. Net neutrality is no different than the laws we have restricting actions which would prevent free speech. We need laws to preserve freedom in the physical world, and we need laws to preserve freedom in the digital world. A system with out any laws isn’t ‘free’ its anarchy and a system in which the guy with the biggest muscle sets the rules. On the Internet, the guys with the biggest muscles are the telecommunication companies. Think about it, do you have a choice of more than one cable Internet service provider in your area? Many people do not: they live under a monopoly, and in such a system laws are needed to protect them from the corporations that otherwise have complete control over the resources they need to live and work.

      Net neutrality protects the right of all people to transmit data freely on the Internet.

      VA:F [1.6.5_908]
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • Guest says:

      “But now he’s saying in order for the internet to stay free and open, the FCC needs to restrict it.”

      This reminds me of surfing on a 2400 baud dial-up connection.

      Let’s see. The big media companies and ISPs support absolutely no regulation, but Google, Facebook, and their ilk, whose livelihoods depend on open access to the internet, support FCC regulation. Doesn’t that tell you anything?

      But you must be a lobbyist, so that’s why logic makes no sense and misinformation is your forte.

      You’re the tool.

      VA:F [1.6.5_908]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • BoS says:

      So you rather have your websites on packages instead of free open internet? Good job at being stupid

      VA:F [1.6.5_908]
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)