Mozilla accuses FCC of abdicating its role, ignoring comments in net neutrality lawsuit Mozilla has filed its legal brief against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), accusing the telecoms regulator of abdicating its role, ignoring public comments and failing to understand how the internet actually works. The lawsuit is one of several ranged against the FCC for its controversial decision to tear up …
The Nine Seniles in their much lamented Chevron decision said the courts should defer to the agency's interpretation of the law unless it is totally off the rails. They abdicated judicial oversight of the administrative state. If Chevron is applied Mozilla loses. But if it gets to the Seniles they might wake up from the naps and pay attention this time and overturn Chevron, not very likely.
The Nine Seniles have no clue about tech as they're basically old lawyers and judges. They will look at the laws and previous judgments and ignore any evidence as they don't understand it. Much like the CongressCritters who make laws without understanding any of the tech even the simplest things.
More like:
its somewhat controversial decision to de-regulate by removing alleged 'net neutrality' rules put into place for political reasons by the previous administration.
Fixed it for ya.
'Teh Intarwebs' worked fine without these 'existing' (read: added) rules prior to 2009, so why appear to lose all sanity over their removal?
The sun continues to rise. The birds continue to sing. Paychecks appear on payday (and in the USA, with more 'take home' money in them). People are hiring, so you're no longer 'stuck' in your dead-end job with no upward mobility. Overall, things seem to be at LEAST as good as they were, if not even better. Why complain about it?
"so why appear to lose all sanity over their removal?"
Why do protest the removal of regulations?
Because as history has shown time and time again whenever regulations are removed these Megacorporations will do everything in their power to maximize their profits, remove any freedom of choice by destroying competition and/or swallowing smaller start-ups under their umbrella in mergers, throw massive amounts of cash at corrupt politicians to remove even more regulations to further their agenda and the customer be damned.
Take a look at what happened when the Telecommunication Act of 1996 was signed that was supposed to:
"provide for a pro-competitive, de-regulatory national policy framework designed to accelerate rapidly private sector deployment of advanced information technologies and services to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to competition"
Instead, the Telecommunications act of 1996 did the exact opposite, a drastic decline in the number of radio stations, long distance phone companies and television/cable companies and allowed for all the mergers to evolve into to what we have now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996
The new rules were put into place after several documented instances of ISPs slowing or blocking content for economic or political reasons, and as more ISPs are entering into "preferred" relationships with video streaming platforms.
'Teh Intarwebs' worked fine without these 'existing' (read: added) rules prior to 2009, so why appear to lose all sanity over their removal?
Because actually it was shown that the interwebs did NOT work fine. As already said, there are documented cases of ISPs being caught out abusing their position of power - knowing full well that the customer (in the majority of cases) had the choice of like it or lump it.
it was VERY clear that there was no working market and so these rules were needed. Had there been a properly functioning market then the rules would not be needed as the ISPs screwing over customers would lose customers until the fixed their ways or went bust - but there wasn't.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
