3 ms·
My biggest problem with that caveat is that its really just a foot in the door for further regulation by the federal government, none of which has anything to d
by wnevets 12y ago
My biggest problem with that caveat is that its really just a foot in the door for further regulation by the federal government, none of which has anything to do with network neutrality.
Network neutrality by definition is about all packets being treated equally regardless of the source or destination.
- EpicEng 12y agoIt's not though because it changes nothing. The government can already stop traffic via a court order. Besides, the FCC is not a legislative body. A set of rules which allowed, for example, unimpeded access to child pornography would never be allowed, nor should it. Net neutrality can exist alongside the laws which govern what is and is not ok to do on the internet.
- wnevets 12y agoDoes the FCC currently have rules that allow the blocking of "illegal" traffic?
- dragonwriter 12y agoThe FCC currently has no rules on blocking, so providers can freely block legal and illegal traffic. (The FCC adopted non-blocking rules for lawful content and applications in the previous Open Internet Order that was struck down by the courts.)
- EpicEng 12y agoIt's not though because it changes nothing. The government can already stop traffic via a court order. Besides, the FCC is not a legislative body. A set of rules which allowed, for example, unimpeded access to child pornography would never be allowed, nor should it. Net neutrality can exist alongside the laws which govern what is and is not ok to do on the internet.