TR Member Perks!

It’s hard to imagine that one of the largest countries in the world and sole superpower could be so far behind in terms in Internet implementation. This is especially troubling when you take into consideration that the nation was one of the first to pioneer this new form of communication. In a 3-2 vote, the FCC has ruled in the favor of the community.

Reclassification under title II is an ongoing battle that have caused for some concern amongst critics and lobbyists alike. Title II reclassification classifies the Internet as a utility much in the way of your telephone is. Champions for net neutrality fight for an open internet, for things to remain as they are without fast lines. One of the biggest misconceptions is that net neutrality is for government controlled internet, this is not the case.

In a 5 page document online, the FCC outlines their stance on adopting strong, sustainable rules to protect the Internet. The rules of note are no blocking, no throttling and no paid prioritization. ISPs are not allowed to interrupt the service that you paid for, something angry customers are familiar with when their perfectly stable connection starts to resemble something from the dial-up era. Asides from reclassification, the red tape has been cut which prohibited states from starting up their own municipal broadband to compete with the same giants that serviced their region.

What does this mean? It means that municipalities are no longer bound by state laws, if their state had such ruling, in which the community could start up their own broadband service to compete with the big telecoms. For years, communities were at the mercy of these giants and had to deal with contracts to service a region. While this was great news for the provider in charge of a given area, it was bad news for consumers who were locked into a limited pool of ISP choices or none at all. For many Americans, this is the sad reality. Within the same state, it’s not unusual to have various providers, but for different regions that were not overlapped.

Perhaps the biggest push on why local communities should be allowed to have their own service is Chattanooga, TN. What happens when the giants spend more time lobbying and pocketing profits instead of upgrading their infrastructure? Local gigabit internet is what. For the battle of the internet, Chattanooga is often a cited source for inspiration on why this corporate stranglehold is bad for the development of the nation and it’s ability to compete more effectively in the global market. Some states are allowed to have local broadband, others were pressured in exchange for allowing the giants to have their way. For those citizens living in such areas, Google Fiber’s expansion was a glimmer of hope.

Net Neutrality is keeping the internet free from changes, to allow information to freely flow without limit. Commissioner Tom Wheeler has been adamant about this for some time now. While this is a victory for communities everywhere to perhaps start up their own gigabit network, the war is not over. CEOs from the likes of Verizon, AT&T and Comcast are not going to let this slip their grasp and will fight it off. Reclassifying broadband and lifting blocks for community broadband is a major step for American Internet. Check out the live feed from the FCC conference.

How do you feel about the decision by the FCC and do you support it?


Anthony Lee

Gamer since the NES era, computer nerd since 2001. Happily in a loving relationship with a happa who has been a gamer since the Sega Genesis era. Who says Sega does what Nintendon't?



  • BeetleGal3055

    Comcast can either start upgrading their network to compete, or they can take the Feds to court. I bet I know what they’re going to do.

  • A Practiced Observer

    About half of what I have seen so far in the Net neutrality regulations I like. However there is still most of it which neither myself nor nearly anyone else has seen and that is what has me apprehensive about this ordeal. Allowing municipal ISPs and outlawing throttling can be done in 30 pages or less and should not take 312 pages.

  • Typical

    Where do you live that Comcast’s network is bad? I have 60-80 Mbps on my 50 service regularly. The problem I have with them is they are a PITA to deal with, but the service when working isn’t bad… I just wish there were more choices.

  • BeetleGal3055

    I pay for the highest tier in my area and get roughly 20Mbps on a non-peak time. I’m not out in the sticks either. Comcast has given up trying to improve, and have entered into the twilight years of their company.

    It’s time for competition to kick them in the butt.

  • Ryan Juel

    Best speeds, sure. But their prices are extremely outrageous. I’m on Comcast right now, and as soon as I get the chance, I’m out. I will be gone so quick, and I will have no regrets.

  • Typical

    Maybe I’m just lucky, my bill is like 101$ after taxes for 50mbps, 80 channels and HBO.

  • Mitchell Pollock

    The reason it takes 312 pages, is so they can try to pre-empt every stupid loophole or 200 year old law the ISP’s might try to use to sink this. They want their monopolies to continue, at the cost of the customer. This is wrong obviously, so they’ve got 312 pages of legalese to try and stop the crooked bastards pulling a fast one!

  • Mitchell Pollock

    in the UK I pay about the same as you, and i get 100Mbps, 280+ channels, 50+HD channels, and phone with free evening and weekend calls. That’s what competition can get you. 🙂

  • Typical

    The thing is, there is competition in TV and that’s still the lowest price I found with hbo.

  • A Practiced Observer

    Pre-empt? more likely write in loopholes.

  • TeLin特林

    I’ve seen so many idiots out there claim this is giving people free internet…just ridiculous.

  • Azo Army

    Kinda like the Health Insurance Monopolies when it comes to Obamacare? (Obamacare is all about Corporatism) Anytime the Government gets involved I worry….

  • Azo Army

    The issue behind all this was that some internet service providers are running pay-to -play schemes with certain content providers. (i.e. Comcast) They slow down internet service to their customers when they’re watching Netflix on Comcast internet service, unless Netflix pays Comcast an extra fee to get in a fast lane. I understand that this is a bad thing.

    The part that has me scratching my head is that we’re now supposed to entrust those who run the largest and most corrupt pay-to-play schemes (politicians and their political appointees) with the power to regulate the entire internet in order to be the judges of “fair play” and “neutrality” in the hopes that they’ll eliminate these pay-to-play schemes. Well, to me that’s kinda like appointing Al Capone to Attorney General or the Fed Chairman, or making Stevie Wonder a chief cartographer….

  • Erthwjim

    Yeah HBO can really tack onto your bill.