4 ms·

Not again. How long is this going to be happening back and forth. Opponents of net neutrality are monopoly freaks. Net neutrality should be enforced on competit

by shmerl 2y ago

Not again. How long is this going to be happening back and forth. Opponents of net neutrality are monopoly freaks. Net neutrality should be enforced on competition law grounds.

ttyprintk 2y ago
Odds are low that Biden can affect the Supreme Court. I think the next back-and-forth is 2027.
Dalewyn 2y ago
>How long is this going to be happening back and forth. It will keep happening until the legislature either writes it into law or refuses. The executive should not be legislating in the first place outside of emergencies requiring immediate action.
JSteph22 2y ago
>Opponents of net neutrality are monopoly freaks. There are plenty of antitrust laws already on the books. Having the DOJ enforce them would be the correct route, as opposed to creating additional, unnecessary NN regulation which would effectively cement the ISP monopolies.
- shmerl 2y ago
  I agree in theory, but in practice, anti-trust laws only become more and more toothless with time so this isn't getting any better. I don't agree about cementing monopolies, it's the opposite. Net neutrality beats anti-competitive practices back, because as above, regular competition law got almost useless and not applied to solve these issues de-facto. If competition law enforcement will improve - there won't be a need for separate net neutrality rules. Problem is that opponents of net neutrality don't want competition law enforcement either, so they want to have their anti-competitive cake and eat it unchecked.
blasphemers 2y ago
The net-neutrality rules that were just overturned would have actually allowed the FCC to grant regional monopolies. It's almost like FCC was created in part to maintain ATT's relationship with the government.
- shmerl 2y ago
  Did they change the rules from before? Otherwise it makes zero sense. AT&T and Co. proponents like to throw 1984 style of "ignorance is power" arguments around though, so it's not even funny.

by shmerl 2y ago

Not again. How long is this going to be happening back and forth. Opponents of net neutrality are monopoly freaks. Net neutrality should be enforced on competition law grounds.

ttyprintk 2y ago

Odds are low that Biden can affect the Supreme Court. I think the next back-and-forth is 2027.

Dalewyn 2y ago

>How long is this going to be happening back and forth. It will keep happening until the legislature either writes it into law or refuses. The executive should not be legislating in the first place outside of emergencies requiring immediate action.

JSteph22 2y ago

>Opponents of net neutrality are monopoly freaks. There are plenty of antitrust laws already on the books. Having the DOJ enforce them would be the correct route, as opposed to creating additional, unnecessary NN regulation which would effectively cement the ISP monopolies.

shmerl 2y ago
I agree in theory, but in practice, anti-trust laws only become more and more toothless with time so this isn't getting any better. I don't agree about cementing monopolies, it's the opposite. Net neutrality beats anti-competitive practices back, because as above, regular competition law got almost useless and not applied to solve these issues de-facto. If competition law enforcement will improve - there won't be a need for separate net neutrality rules. Problem is that opponents of net neutrality don't want competition law enforcement either, so they want to have their anti-competitive cake and eat it unchecked.

blasphemers 2y ago

The net-neutrality rules that were just overturned would have actually allowed the FCC to grant regional monopolies. It's almost like FCC was created in part to maintain ATT's relationship with the government.

shmerl 2y ago
Did they change the rules from before? Otherwise it makes zero sense. AT&T and Co. proponents like to throw 1984 style of "ignorance is power" arguments around though, so it's not even funny.