3 ms·
Of course Congress knew about the internet. The whole purpose of the act was to create a new regulatory regime for internet services that wouldn't suffer from t
by twoodfin 9y ago
Of course Congress knew about the internet. The whole purpose of the act was to create a new regulatory regime for internet services that wouldn't suffer from the legacy of Ma Bell, but also wouldn't allow telecom companies to rebrand traditional phone service in such a way as to escape longstanding access and service requirements. Hence the information/telecommunications distinction.
Facebook doesn't provide an information service, it's an endpoint of one.
- jimrandomh 9y agoThe definition of an information service is (41) INFORMATION SERVICE- The term `information service' means the offering of a capability for generating, acquiring, storing, transforming, processing, retrieving, utilizing, or making available information via telecommunications, and includes electronic publishing, but does not include any use of any such capability for the management, control, or operation of a telecommunications system or the management of a telecommunications service. Facebook stores, transforms, and makes available information, so it's an information service.
- qb45 9y ago> Facebook doesn't provide an information service, it's an endpoint of one. It provides information service at an endpoint of a telecommunication service. To me this bill reads rather like an attempt at codification of the "smart endpoints, dumb transport" principle and decoupling of "content" from ISPs. Consider: (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation; If you know something about the history of this bill which contradicts this interpretation please elaborate.