2
2
0
Bravo to the Courts, FCC and the President
FCC's win cements Obama's internet legacy
Posted from politico.comPosted in these groups: 
Internet
Computer Networking
Internet Computer Networking
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
PO2 Kevin LaCroix - You are correct as far as you go. It does so much more. Maj William W. "Bill" Price I am of the opinion that this is a very good thing for the US Internet. With the current system in the US, Internet Service Providers (ISP's) are treated as a "Natural Monopoly". What this means is that in a given area, there will be one, and at the most two, providers available to consumers. They are allowed to set prices, throttle bandwidth, not build to areas that do not have broadband if they do not want to, and prevent other companies from creating a competing service. This causes inflated prices for the consumer and poorer customer service. Customers are viewed as statistics not as the life blood of the company. This ruling is a start to changing all of this.
First off, by classifying ISP's as a utility, it does away with the "Natural Monopoly". This will create competition. Companies will have to compete to retain customers. This will cause a decrease in cost to the consumer and improve customer service. They will no longer be able to throttle anyone's connection to the internet. For example, Verizon and Comcast were slowing its customer's internet speed when they were using Netflix. This continued until Netflix payed them a bribe, I mean an access fee. Under the new rules, this would be illegal.
Right now, Comcast, Charter, AT&T, etc.. can block cities and individuals from creating their own ISP. Even in areas that the larger companies choose not to provide service, because it is "not cost effective". With the change in rules, they are no longer able to block these types of companies from forming. This will get broadband to more people and create more competition.
Competition is good for the industry. It drives innovation and gives the customers a vote with their wallet. For example, in my city in Thailand, I have a choice between 5 ISP's. Since moving here three years ago my internet speed has tripled and my bill has gone down by 25%. All because of competition.
I know it was long, I hope this helps.
First off, by classifying ISP's as a utility, it does away with the "Natural Monopoly". This will create competition. Companies will have to compete to retain customers. This will cause a decrease in cost to the consumer and improve customer service. They will no longer be able to throttle anyone's connection to the internet. For example, Verizon and Comcast were slowing its customer's internet speed when they were using Netflix. This continued until Netflix payed them a bribe, I mean an access fee. Under the new rules, this would be illegal.
Right now, Comcast, Charter, AT&T, etc.. can block cities and individuals from creating their own ISP. Even in areas that the larger companies choose not to provide service, because it is "not cost effective". With the change in rules, they are no longer able to block these types of companies from forming. This will get broadband to more people and create more competition.
Competition is good for the industry. It drives innovation and gives the customers a vote with their wallet. For example, in my city in Thailand, I have a choice between 5 ISP's. Since moving here three years ago my internet speed has tripled and my bill has gone down by 25%. All because of competition.
I know it was long, I hope this helps.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
U.S. Appeals Court Upholds Net Neutrality Rules In Full
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected a lawsuit by telecom, cable and wireless industry associations against new rules that expanded federal oversight of Internet service providers.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google