CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Federal Communications Commission: Difference between revisions
Federal Communications Commission (view source)
Revision as of 23:13, 21 December 2024
, 21 December 2024Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times"
m (Text replacement - "**" to "") |
m (Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times") |
||
| Line 453: | Line 453: | ||
In 2005, the FCC formally established the following principles: To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; Consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. However, broadband providers were permitted to engage in "reasonable network management."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jordan |first1=Scott |last2=Ghosh |first2=Arijit |title=How to determine whether a traffic management practice is reasonable |journal=SSRN |date=2009 |url=: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1999845 |access-date=2 June 2024}}</ref> | In 2005, the FCC formally established the following principles: To encourage broadband deployment and preserve and promote the open and interconnected nature of the public Internet, Consumers are entitled to access the lawful Internet content of their choice; Consumers are entitled to run applications and use services of their choice, subject to the needs of law enforcement; Consumers are entitled to connect their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network; Consumers are entitled to competition among network providers, application and service providers, and content providers. However, broadband providers were permitted to engage in "reasonable network management."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jordan |first1=Scott |last2=Ghosh |first2=Arijit |title=How to determine whether a traffic management practice is reasonable |journal=SSRN |date=2009 |url=: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1999845 |access-date=2 June 2024}}</ref> | ||
On August 1, 2008, the FCC formally voted 3-to-2 to uphold a complaint against [[Comcast]], the largest cable company in the US, ruling that it had illegally inhibited users of its high-speed Internet service from using [[file-sharing]] software. The FCC imposed no fine, but required Comcast to end such blocking in 2008. FCC chairman [[Kevin J. Martin]] said the order was meant to set a precedent that Internet providers, and indeed all communications companies, could not prevent customers from using their networks the way they see fit unless there is a good reason. In an interview Martin stated that "We are preserving the open character of the Internet" and "We are saying that network operators can't block people from getting access to any content and any applications." Martin's successor, [[Julius Genachowski]] has maintained that the FCC has no plans to regulate the internet, saying: "I've been clear repeatedly that we're not going to regulate the Internet."<ref>[http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/05/the-fcc-doesnt-need-to-be The FCC Doesn't Need to Be] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100407120655/http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/05/the-fcc-doesnt-need-to-be |date=April 7, 2010 }} by Peter Suderman, ''[[Reason Magazine|Reason]]''</ref> The Comcast case highlighted broader issues of whether new legislation is needed to force Internet providers to maintain [[net neutrality]], i.e. treat all uses of their networks equally. The legal complaint against [[Comcast]] related to [[BitTorrent (protocol)|BitTorrent]], software that is commonly used for downloading larger files.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/technology/02fcc.html |title=F.C.C. Vote Sets Precedent on Unfettered Web Usage |work= | On August 1, 2008, the FCC formally voted 3-to-2 to uphold a complaint against [[Comcast]], the largest cable company in the US, ruling that it had illegally inhibited users of its high-speed Internet service from using [[file-sharing]] software. The FCC imposed no fine, but required Comcast to end such blocking in 2008. FCC chairman [[Kevin J. Martin]] said the order was meant to set a precedent that Internet providers, and indeed all communications companies, could not prevent customers from using their networks the way they see fit unless there is a good reason. In an interview Martin stated that "We are preserving the open character of the Internet" and "We are saying that network operators can't block people from getting access to any content and any applications." Martin's successor, [[Julius Genachowski]] has maintained that the FCC has no plans to regulate the internet, saying: "I've been clear repeatedly that we're not going to regulate the Internet."<ref>[http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/05/the-fcc-doesnt-need-to-be The FCC Doesn't Need to Be] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100407120655/http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/05/the-fcc-doesnt-need-to-be |date=April 7, 2010 }} by Peter Suderman, ''[[Reason Magazine|Reason]]''</ref> The Comcast case highlighted broader issues of whether new legislation is needed to force Internet providers to maintain [[net neutrality]], i.e. treat all uses of their networks equally. The legal complaint against [[Comcast]] related to [[BitTorrent (protocol)|BitTorrent]], software that is commonly used for downloading larger files.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/technology/02fcc.html |title=F.C.C. Vote Sets Precedent on Unfettered Web Usage |work=The New York Times |first=Saul |last=Hansell |date=August 2, 2008 |access-date=February 21, 2017 |archive-date=October 4, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171004140445/http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/technology/02fcc.html |url-status=live }}</ref> | ||
In December 2010, the FCC revised the principles from the original Internet policy statement and adopted the Open Internet Order consisting of three rules<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.fcc.gov/rulemaking/09-191 |title=Preserving the Open Internet |work=fcc.gov |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140427204911/http://www.fcc.gov/rulemaking/09-191 |archive-date=April 27, 2014 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> regarding the Internet: '''Transparency'''. Fixed and mobile broadband providers must disclose the network management practices, performance characteristics, and terms and conditions of their broadband services; '''No blocking'''. Fixed broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices; mobile broadband providers may not block lawful websites, or block applications that compete with their voice or video telephony services; and '''No unreasonable discrimination'''. | In December 2010, the FCC revised the principles from the original Internet policy statement and adopted the Open Internet Order consisting of three rules<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.fcc.gov/rulemaking/09-191 |title=Preserving the Open Internet |work=fcc.gov |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140427204911/http://www.fcc.gov/rulemaking/09-191 |archive-date=April 27, 2014 |df=mdy-all}}</ref> regarding the Internet: '''Transparency'''. Fixed and mobile broadband providers must disclose the network management practices, performance characteristics, and terms and conditions of their broadband services; '''No blocking'''. Fixed broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices; mobile broadband providers may not block lawful websites, or block applications that compete with their voice or video telephony services; and '''No unreasonable discrimination'''. | ||