I agreeto Idea Third Way...? How about just OBEY the law...
Voting is Disabled

0 votes

I disagree



This idea is active.
Best Practices/Big Ideas »

Third Way...? How about just OBEY the law...

Third way? Ha How about beginning to apply the law passed June 19, 1934. On Page 8 in paragraph (51) WIRE COMMUNICATIONS was required to be regulated just like other communications.

I have attempted to have the Supreme Court order the FCC to regulate COMMUNICATIONS BY WIRE that are being called "Internet or IP Services" simply for a disguise. The United States' "Open Internet" has been illegal due to trafficking in pornography since created. The Comcast Dilemma? A Third Way? I demanded that the FCC call the Internet WIRE COMMUNICATIONS as explicitly defined on page 8 in paragraph (51) of the Communications Act of 1934. The way has been there but ignored by horny guys hoping to protect their abilities to masturbate while surfing for PORN anywhere in the world.

Submitted by Curtis Neeley 3 years ago

Vote Activity

  1. Disagreed
    3 years ago
  2. Agreed
    3 years ago


Comments (2)

  1. I disagreed with this idea, but I think the disagreement deserves comment.

    First point is, why a third way? Because the FCC does acknowledge that broadband companies are also cable TV or telephone companies, offering by-subscription TV program distribution service. This service is like a private club. Do you expect the government to dictate what a private club can and can't offer to its members?

    So, if you really want the FCC to regulate these wired services like a utility, does that mean that a company that offers cable TV must not also offer Internet broadband access? I think such a suggestion would be counterproductive, certainly from a historical perspective. It was, after all, only through the ingenuity of cable companies that "broadband" was even possible, at first anyway. They expoited the wealth of wideband infrastructure they had already installed for TV distribution service, at great cost, to offer a brand new capability to their clients. Way beyond what people could achieve with the Internet dialup services of the day.

    I'm certainly no fan of the walled-in, proprietary nature of cable systems (which I do not use), but I find it hard to deny that fast access to the Internet for the majority of Americans was made available by these companies AND with minimal government involvement, minimal or no government urging or supervision, and minimal government regulation. And I am willing to bet that the vast majority of Internet users DO NOT want heavy government regulation of the Internet, because my bet is, people believe that the success of the Internet was possible BECAUSE OF this minimal regulation. Not in spite of.

    So, this "third way" is designed to preserve the proprietary nature of TV program distribution or other services from cable companies and telcos, while at the same time waffling about the Internet broadband access part of their service offerings. In spite of the success, there will exist pockets of population where the lightly regulated broadband "information service" is going to be difficult to install economically. So by regulating broadband, the government can have users pay into the universal service fund, to defray the cost of providing broadband to everyone. If people think that heavy regulation will get them faster service for less money, they only need to compare their current broadband access scheme with their wired telephone service. Yes, a minority of the population would probably get broadband service for less, and the rest will have to pay for that.

    3 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed
  2. Curtis Neeley Idea Submitter

    "So, if you really want the FCC to regulate these wired services like a utility, does that mean that a company that offers cable TV must not also offer Internet broadband access?"

    Yes, I have DEMANDED that wire communications be regulated as already required by law. There is absolutely no chance that "broadband", "WIRE COMMUNICATION". "information services" or any other crafty alias now used for "Internet" will remain unregulated.

    The Internet will be regulated EXACTLY like ALREADY required by law. tick tocktick tocktick tocktick tock

    3 years ago
    0 Agreed
    0 Disagreed