TR Member Perks!

Obama Endorses Net Neutrality

Don Parsons / November 10, 2014 at 9:59 AM / Technology News

After months of worrying and FCC posturing, including protests and a leaked hybrid plan, President Obama released a clear statement today on Net Neutrality. 

His statement was clear and lacking in any room for debate in what he meant – he was standing up for Net Neutrality. In particular he requested for Title II Reclassification in the telecommunications act. This is the same area that telephones and other basic communications rights fall under. Essentially, it requires them to act in the common good as the carrier and not use things like throttling or allowing people to purchase ‘preferential service’ on their network.
From his statement he outlines 4 clear points that stand out and we’ll quote them here:

• No blocking. If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. That way, every player — not just those commercially affiliated with an ISP — gets a fair shot at your business.
• No throttling. Nor should ISPs be able to intentionally slow down some content or speed up others — through a process often called “throttling” — based on the type of service or your ISP’s preferences.
• Increased transparency. The connection between consumers and ISPs — the so-called “last mile” — is not the only place some sites might get special treatment. So, I am also asking the FCC to make full use of the transparency authorities the court recently upheld, and if necessary to apply net neutrality rules to points of interconnection between the ISP and the rest of the Internet.
• No paid prioritization. Simply put: No service should be stuck in a “slow lane” because it does not pay a fee. That kind of gatekeeping would undermine the level playing field essential to the Internet’s growth. So, as I have before, I am asking for an explicit ban on paid prioritization and any other restriction that has a similar effect.

With the president publicly backing these changes and pushing them to the FCC and ‘politely requesting’ the independent body adopt them it almost certainly will. The head of the FCC, is a former Obama campaign worker as well as cable man and can almost certainly read the writing on the wall if he were to go against the loudly spoken presidential wish.

You can see Obama speak on it below or read the full statement here.

Don Parsons

News Editor

I've been a gamer for years of various types starting with the Sega Genesis and Shining Force when I was young. If I'm not playing video games, I'm often roleplaying, reading, writing, or pondering things brought up by speculative fiction.

  • Fritzster

    America has been without net neutrality so far, and the internet has flourished.

  • Gasbandit

    I’m not what you’d call an Obama supporter by any stretch, but the fact of the matter is that internet access is de facto infrastructure, and too many large companies are engaging in too many anticompetitive practices – indeed, the very nature of building infrastructure (for example, laying the physical network architecture) is already anathema to competition. So if competition isn’t possible, then strict, transparent regulation is needed. It’s time to make Comcast close up the nipple flaps for the last time.

  • coboney

    No Fritzster thats not true. Up until january this year it was more or less around until the court said that the FCC had set it up wrong and therefore it wasn’t legal. It was less encompassing then Type 2 Re-classification but still protected against a lot of abuse.

    Without this – internet providers would pick and choose which websites could flourish based on more or less legalized bribes to put them in the fast lane and independent sites would fall by the wayside as they would get put in the slowest lane possible.

  • Thomas Nelson

    Thanks, Obama.

  • Ryan Juel

    For once, the joke is actually genuine! 😛

  • Well thats good to hear.

  • EuroMIX

    Internet competition should be based on offering a more competitive service to your rivals, not by buying favours for promoted access.

  • leganos

    And with Net Neutrality. the big providers can still pick and choose which websites flourish, but now with government protection, or at the behest of government bureaucrats.

  • leganos

    The government controls more of the internet and people cheer. Sad

  • coboney

    There are some things they can do. They can’t though make the internet move slower to or from that site.

  • leganos

    I never said they would make the internet run slower. Just as you said internet providers would put certain websites in fast lanes based on legalized bribery without Net Neutrality, I’m saying that such actions will still happen with Net Neutrality, only now ISP’s now have the backing of the government to do so. In the case of bigger providers, like Comcast, they will benefit even more than most because of their lobbying presence, and how cozy they seem with the current administration and the previous.

  • coboney

    No. The very concept of Net Neutrality goes beyond any one country and deals with the internet not having those restrictions.

    In the USA’s case the Title 2 Reclassification would put it into Common Carrier area like phone lines. The government is not allowing them to set up fast lanes and slow lanes under Obama’s suggestion to the FCC. Now the FCC may not follow that and would be breaking the concepts of Net Neutrality if they decide to force their way through with the Hybrid model that they keep discussing which is a piece of complete shit and a mess.

  • destroy_all_monsters

    I have to wonder about the timing on this. Why now? It should have been reclassified years ago as a common carrier. Because it is the last chance to get it in front of a less republican controlled congress?

  • Feels good that this came out just as a certain feminist started lobbying cross-internet blocking options. Thanks Obama, you’re not the best president but you’re faaaaaar from the worst.

  • Zanard Bell

    The internet operating based on government speed.

    Well, this will end well. /s

  • Saturnrules

    What a disaster. You people think bringing the federal gov into internet regulation with the FCC is a good thing? You are fucking nuts! The federal gov IS NOT YOUR FRIEND!!!

  • Saturnrules

    He’s easily in the top 5 worst ever.

  • Condorito Jones

    Damage control but useful damage control.

  • Benjamin Peters

    It’s not control. Net Neutrality is laying down rules for how its managed.

    Now, if it becomes a utility, than yes, that would be government control. But considering how there are already people in towns and cities fighting to make it a utility out of sheer frustration and anger at how ISPs are running the show, then I think they ISPs are more to blame for that than the government being a boogieman.

  • Benjamin Peters

    I haven’t had a problem with my water, electricity, and sewage running at the speed of government.