In today's political climate, it's not often that both sides of the congressional aisle spew their vitriol at one issue. And then this Net Neutrality thing took center stage last Tuesday.
"Net Neutrality" is both vague and intriguing. People love the Net. It has been a highly influential, innovative and inventive communication and profit generating tool for over twenty years. People like, in theory, neutrality. It suggests impartiality; a level playing field for consumers and corporations. Put the two terms together and you get, again theoretically, an "everybody wins", open yet protected Internet.
That's what makes Tuesday's Pro-Net Neutrality ruling so disconcerting. It doesn't go far enough in protecting the rights of users from Internet and mobile giants like Time Warner and AT&T. Transparency regulations are blurred. Content blocking rules differ along fixed, wireless and mobile lines. But the most striking faux pas of this ruling is the potential to implement a paid prioritization system, which would enable broadband providers to charge consumers in order to access certain programs and applications. And though the FCC on Wednesday came out strongly against paid priority citing language in the ruling to prevent such a measure, only time will tell if loopholes in the ruling will free communications corporations up.
The same can be said about the FCC's Net Neutrality regulations as a whole. With plenty of fist slamming being done on both sides, it's likely we haven't heard the last of this. Stay logged in.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario