5 ms·
What the court is saying is that, if the FCC refuses to classify broadband providers as common carriers, then, because they neither receive the same protections
by mjmahone17 13y ago
What the court is saying is that, if the FCC refuses to classify broadband providers as common carriers, then, because they neither receive the same protections as common carriers nor have the same responsibilities, they can't be regulated as if they were common carriers.
The FCC could change their rules to treat broadband suppliers as common carriers. However, that's something that big-name broadband providers don't seem to want, as it would reduce their freedom of operations.
- ilyanep 13y agoWhat are the other ramifications of being classified as a common carrier?
- Steko 13y agoCongress specifically forbade the FCC from applying common carrier regulation to what the Telecommunications Act of 1996 calls "information services."
- hgsigala 13y agoBut what mjmahone17 is saying is that the FCC should label broadband providers (in my view: both wired and wireless) as common carriers which would undo the "information services" label put on them in 2002 (http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2002/nrcb0201.html http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2002/n...)
- dasil003 13y agoIt's terrifying enough to think of congress today deciding the fate of the internet, much less the congress of 1996.
- SG- 13y agoWell, at least the Internet in the US. Other countries have their own laws and regulations.
- rayiner 13y agoThe Congress of 1996 did more or less what technologists wanted at the time: told the FCC to not regulate the internet.
- BrainInAJar 13y agoI'm excited to see what kind of crazy side-effects the stuff we the technologists of today are demanding (like net-neutrality) have
- stox 13y agoAny good idea you have today can be made into a bad idea later. See Alfred Nobel.
- jstelly 13y agoNo liability for how third parties using your network (e.g. for libel or violating copyrights). There may be other regulations that limit or eliminate this liability though.
- eck 13y agoSo, right now, if someone detonates a bomb with a cell phone, Verizon/AT&T is basically a co-conspirator? You'd think they'd want to be a common carrier, at least if it weren't for the US's general lack of enthusiasm for holding corporations responsible for anything.
- jasomill 13y agoUm, no. That common carriers aren't liable for something doesn't imply non-common carriers are liable. Moreover, IANAL, but I can't imagine common carriers are exempt from prosecution for criminal conspiracy.
- rayiner 13y agoAn extremely vast, outdated, and oppressive regulatory regime applicable to common carriers.