5 ms·

what are some of the possible consequences of title 2?

• Zigurd 12y ago
  Pole access. That's a Good Thing.
• rhino369 12y ago
  Price controls Higher taxes on ISP service metered service drastic reduction in investment due to uncertainty pole attachment rates could go up since some towns charge more for title II services (for some dumb reason) The next republican run FCC ruling that not blocking porn is unreasonable The next FCC ruling that not blocking piracy is unreasonable All sorts of shit.
  • wtracy 12y ago
    metered service Might actually be a good thing. The next republican run FCC ruling that not blocking porn is unreasonable The next FCC ruling that not blocking piracy is unreasonable I thought Title II explicitly shielded carriers from responsibility for the content that went over their networks?
    • rhino369 12y ago
      Shielding them from responsibility doesn't mean it can't force them to take measures to prevent it.
      • organsnyder 12y ago
        Please cite a case where a Title II service has been required to take these sorts of measures in the past.
        • rhino369 12y ago
          Do Not Call List The Bush Era FCC was fining people for swearing on TV and Radio. Both parties support SOPA and 6 strikes. The FCC regulated phone sex lines in the 1980s.
          • organsnyder 12y ago
            > Do Not Call List I think most people are pleased with this. > The Bush Era FCC was fining people for swearing on TV and Radio. Not Title II. > Both parties support SOPA and 6 strikes. Can happen with or without Title II. > The FCC regulated phone sex lines in the 1980s. Not familiar with this one (and I'm not going to research this specific case while at work). Though again, the government could easily decide to regulate this regardless of whether ISPs are under Title II.
• maxsilver 12y ago
  Providers would be required to allow competitors on their networks. (Similar to how AT&T is required to let other phone companies sell you home phone service over 'AT&Ts' phone line). This opens up all sorts of good things: - Faster peak speeds - Lower latency - Better customer support / service - Lower prices - Stronger net neutrality protections (no throttling Netflix, for instance) Monopoly ISP's like Comcast / AT&T / Verizon will never do all of these things on their own -- there's no incentive for them to do so. But if Title II passes, it will make it legal for competitors to start up and reuse the existing infrastructure while new ISPs attempt to build their own, then all of these things will probably occur. Similar to how this all occurred with phone companies when Title II - like protections passed on phone lines.
  • adventured 12y ago
    Serious question - what's the incentive for new ISPs to build their own infrastructure? As a competitor that's the last thing I would do is build, given the extraordinary cost and political BS involved. I'd put all of my effort into riding existing infrastructure for as long as I could.
    • maxsilver 12y ago
      Well, my opinion is probably not popular, since very few companies appear to be rolling out fiber. But as someone who tried (and failed) to raise funds to start an ISP to build their own infrastructure, I would do it because it allows better return on investment. Title II will (presumably) make cable companies open their cable lines to other customers. This will let competitive companies offer 20-100mbps DOCIS 3.0 service. But that's not super compelling. (It's compelling -- very few people like dealing with Comcast and many might switch on that alone. But you'd be offering roughly the same product they sell) But fiber is the future, and is a huge competitive advantage. (10x performance for the same price). The first person to lay the fiber in a city doesn't just make money on their own network, they make money on all networks. Title II would make them open those lines up to competitors, but there's a lot of money to be made by getting cash from every subscriber -- even the ones who choose your competitors. There's no incentive for the second fiber ISP to lay fiber. But for the first one to get there, it's much like a land-grab-to-rent situation. Doing that now (before AT&T and Comcast do it) would be smart -- regardless of whether Title II passes or not.