Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
No, they support what we have "now"... which is not having a net neutrality law because we already have several laws that regulate different aspects of the Internet, already making it neutral and safe to grow. Giving us, net neutrality.
Adding a Net Neutrality law, the actual law they are trying to pass. Will hand the rights to regulate to the FCC. Lots of people seem to think, this will 'add more security' to our already good system.
That's the big thing, the law isn't clean and clear, we already have laws that regulate. Two times now it has been kicked back.
Thinking it's making it safe of regulation is stupid, when you are handing the control the FCC.
|
So you're saying they don't support net neutrality legislation? So the sites and coalitions they helped fund and create were all wrong?
http://www.openinternetcoalition.com/
http://www.savetheinternet.com/
What we have now is extremely muddy and can be viewed many different ways. We are currently at the mercy of the FCC to determine how they want to interpret net neutrality and whether it is relevant.
What Obama and all the other web properties want is net neutrality in writing and guaranteed. An act that states there is no leeway here, all packets are treated equally. These companies all supported the previous bills that have been put in front of Congress. The same ones you claim would be bad for the internet.
So like I said, you may believe that they don't want any legislation and that it would be bad, but their opinions are much different. They all clearly feel something needs to be done, they all feel this is important to the internet and business, and they all feel Obama is the right choice.
However you look at it, McCain is on the ass end of this argument. There are no major web properties that support his stance.