The Federal Communications Commission is moving ahead with proposed "Open Internet" rules, which would give federal regulators vast new powers, and ultimately lead to government control of the Internet. In the Matter of Preserving the Open Internet.
GN Docket No, 09-191, WC Docket No. 07-52.
You can read the complete proposal here: (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-93A1.pdf). In a nutshell, “Open Internet” is the left’s latest marketing language for what they used to call “net neutrality.” It is an outgrowth of the larger so-called media reform project of radical left-wing activists like Robert McChesney, the Free Press founder who explained his goal to SocialistProject.ca: “What we want to have in the U.S. and in every society is an Internet that is not private property, but a public utility.” “Open Internet” or “net neutrality” sounds simple – force phone and cable companies to treat every bit of information the same way – until you realize that modern networks are incredibly complex, with millions of lines of code in every router. Making sure services like VoIP, video conferencing, and telemedicine (not to mention the next great thing that hasn't been invented yet) get priority may be necessary to make the Internet work, but the government is considering regulations that will make it illegal to prioritize traffic.
In their initial comments, Free Press told the FCC that Internet providers must prove that there will never be a problem with Internet service, or submit to regulation. This is backward, and frankly un-American. The burden of proof should properly lie with the far left proponents of regulation like Free Press, which for a decade has been predicting a disaster for the Internet if the government did not regulate it. We need to remind the FCC that regulatory burdens should not be placed on Internet providers and users unless and until an actual problem emerges.
Free Press is arguing that the Internet – one of the most competitive, innovative, productive, and exciting industries in the country – should be regulated as if they were 1930’s-style government-protected monopolies. This backward-looking “Franklin D. Roosevelt” approach to the modern Internet would be hideously destructive, and must be stopped.
Heavy-handed regulation could destroy private investment in the Internet, in turn forcing taxpayers to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to keep the Internet functioning, bringing government ownership and control. Please fill out the form below to submit an official comment to the FCC docket on this proposed rulemaking.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment