[mythtv-users] [Mostly OT] Comcast/net neutrality ruling - NY Times Online

[Marc Chamberlin]

On 4/9/2010 12:25 PM, Tom Dexter wrote:
> When the government grants a monopoly, which is sometimes
> >  necessary in cases where competition is impractical, then it has an
> >  obligation to regulate it so that the consumers don't get screwed.
> >  Clearly the government has failed in this obligation with regard to
> >  cable TV.
Thought I would chip in a  bit because a statement such as this could be 
misleading... When one looks at the FCC and the reason it came into 
existence as a regulatory agency, it was during a time in which most 
electronic communication was taking place using a limited public 
resource - the RF spectrum of transmission over the public airways. In 
this environment it is very easy to understand why the public has an 
interest in seeing that this resource be regulated. The FCC was tasked 
to regulate this resource to make sure our nation complied with 
international treaties such as WARC and to insure that the spectrum was 
used in a fashion best suited for the public good. The extent and 
meaning of this so called "pubic good" has been debated, extended and 
restricted over the years by various administrations, congresses and the 
courts and never been really nailed down. Just follow the role of the 
FCC in what is commonly known as "Part 15 compliance" as an example of 
how this definition of "public good" has been funded and tweaked over 
the years...

But the real basis for having the FCC has been the regulation of the 
usage of a limited public resource. In this particular court ruling, in 
my own eyes and in the opinion of many others, the court has badly 
error-ed in not recognizing that cable companies, like OTA (over the 
air) communications, are in fact using public resources in order to 
deliver their programming and internet content. Cable companies have 
long been trying to argue that since they own the cable, they should not 
be subjected to regulation by the FCC. This is an attempt on their part 
to obfuscate and end run the FCC's ability to regulate them. But it is 
not the cable itself, which the cable companies rightfully own as they 
bore the cost of laying it down, but in the usage of public lands (city 
streets, highways etc which is one of the limited resources that 
requires regulation and oversight) through which the cable companies 
have been granted exclusive/monopolistic access, that brings the public 
interest back into the picture. I should also mention that even for 
cable companies, OTA transmission is still involve when it comes to 
ground to satellite, or microwave tower to tower communication. And 
because the public interest is still involved, the FCC should continue 
to regulate and control the content of what the cable and telephone 
companies transmit over THEIR cables through PUBLIC lands, or OTA 
to/from satellites and towers on the public's behalf.

So while cable and other internet service providers might be complaining 
about some users using excessive bandwidth, and having to provide 
servers and routers etc to handle such traffic, that really is no 
different than TV and radio stations having to supply their own hardware 
to transmit with. TV and radio stations can decide to a large part what 
content they want to provide their users, but at the same time they have 
always been tasked with providing a certain amount of public interest 
services as well, in exchange for their exclusive grant to use a 
particular frequency(ies). In this same sense, I see no difference in 
the FCC's requirement to maintain net neutrality as the price that cable 
companies must pay, to benefit the public interest, in exchange for 
their usage of public resources. It is up to the FCC and Congress, not 
the cable and telephone companies, that the task of deciding what is 
fair usage of these internet resources, should fall. And it should be 
the FCC's responsibility and prerogative to decide what is acceptable 
usage and whether for example programs like BitTorrent and other file 
sharing operations should be allowed or not. It is the FCC's charter to 
protect and regulate the usage of public resources and Congress to 
decide exactly what laws are necessary. For the court to say that a 
private cable company has the right to decide how public resources can 
be used, and the FCC doesn't, is very dangerous and unprecedented and we 
citizens should be raising a real stink about it!  IMHO that is...

     Marc..




-- 
Marc Chamberlin
  www.marcchamberlin.com

  A man said unto the universe - "Sir I Exist!"
  "However" replied the universe
  "I do not see where that creates in me a sense of
  an obligation" S Crane.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6464 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20100410/6e4bdcb5/attachment.bin>