FCC Chairman's Proposal Will Radically Change The Rules Of The Internet

The FCC is making news again today as Chairman Wheeler submitted a draft that, if approved by the FCC commissioners on February 26, will revolutionize the Internet in the United States.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

Seth Colaner previously served as News Director at Tom's Hardware. He covered technology news, focusing on keyboards, virtual reality, and wearables.

  • Xenophage
    I'm sure this won't suck, because central planning by the federal government has worked so well in every other area of the economy.
    Reply
  • maverickmage
    After years of being taken through the dryers by the ISPs, it's nice to see the FCC try and do something... anything... to break to status quo.
    Reply
  • Unolocogringo
    Hopefully this will pass. But their will be big money from big businesses' trying to block it.
    Republican donors do not want it to be passed as it will cut into their profit margins and donations.
    Reply
  • TheSkaBoss
    If my city-provided internet is as good of quality as my city-provided water, I'm going to kill myself.

    "This puts the responsibility of providing Internet service to the various city and state governments (as well as ostensibly the federal government) and away from a retail position under control of cable, phone, and wireless providers."
    Reply
  • TheSkaBoss
    "Hopefully this will pass. But their will be big money from big businesses' trying to block it.
    Republican donors do not want it to be passed as it will cut into their profit margins and donations. "

    You're right, the company's have been lobbying for a few years now...

    "The President’s re-election campaign and groups tied to it have been the largest single recipients of the company’s aid, the study found, taking in nearly $224,000."

    http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/09/05/new-study-highlights-verizons-53-million-campaign-donations-and-lobbying
    Reply
  • Reepca
    So if I got this right (doubtful), the proposal essentially seeks to regulate ISPs more for the benefit of the consumer. Which is great and all, if it does what it says - ISPs have been generally hated as lazy extortionists for awhile now.

    The part I have mixed feelings about is "This puts the responsibility of providing Internet service to the various city and state governments (as well as ostensibly the federal government) ". The issue with mandating certain public services is that it gets paid for by those who use it as well as by those who do not, as well as the possibility of driving services based in the free market to extinction (the idea of the only internet available being controlled by the federal government is not appealing in the slightest).

    I have trouble seeing ISPs out-compete "free internet" that everyone, via taxes, is forced to buy. Only in niche cases where lots of bandwidth or security/privacy is needed could I see them surviving, which may be just as well. I guess for me it really comes down to how much it would cost to develop/maintain these public networks - if it's low enough, I could see it being reasonable for taxes to pay for it, even if I dislike the principle of someone having to pay for what they don't use.

    EDIT: If taxpayer money isn't used to help municipal-ISP out-compete the alternative (and municipal-ISP is subject to the same challenges and requirements as private ISPs), then I can't really see an issue with it. Less like public schools, more like public garbage disposal/electricity/water. You pay for it, it keeps itself going, it's a healthy part of the free market, hooray.
    Reply
  • house70
    Hopefully this will be the beginning of the end for the cartel-style ruling on ISP's part.
    Reply
  • gudomlig
    I hope this survives in some form. I live in chattanooga and i get 100mps service for less money than i was getting 5mbs service from comcast plus best customer support you could hope for. Affordable, awesome high speed isn't that freakin difficult and the only reason companies like comcast charge you an arm and a leg for crappy service is because they can...we need new internet laws to help change that.
    Reply
  • TheSecondPower
    So they want to encourage more competitive practices and maintain a free and open internet, while at the same time making cities and state governments into ISPs? How are you encouraging freedom and competition by putting internet service into the hands of the government? Competition only occurs when two or more private companies can compete.
    Reply
  • junkeymonkey
    its a shame as with all the rest they claim they do rulal area folks like me that have no cable access or dsl and still as of today the year 2014 in the united states world richest most powerful nation all we got is 56k dial up or satellite or cell phone style and that's still not up to 4g around here yet

    so I will assume this pertains only to city folks or areas that got all the best service and will now get that upgraded ???
    Reply