Net Neutrality Passes And *Nobody* Is Happy With It!

With a 3 to 2 vote before today, the FCC has put its stamp of approval on Net Neutrality. The funny thing is that it seems both "sides" of the debate are upset. On one hand you’ve got the detractors who say it’s nothing however an "unholy scheme" designed to bring the Internet pursuant to this agreement the unnecessary control of the government. A bit dramatic, yet OK. In exchange you’ve got Net Neutrality proponents who say the new rules don’t go far enough to protect consumers from abuse.

What the detractors have to say

We’re already familiar with what the detractors have to say: this is a government takeover, and we’re all one step closer to a Hugo Chavez-style takeover over the media. Or, less hysterically, the Internet isn’t "broken," so why should the FCC—which may not even have the legal authority for evoke Net Neutrality—waste time trying to "fix" it?

We are deeply disappointed that the chairman chose to ignore the overwhelming public support for real Net Neutrality, instead moving forward with industry-written rules that will for the first time in Internet history allow discrimination online. This proceeding was a squandered possibility to enact clear, meaningful rules to safeguard the Internet's level playing field and protect consumers.

The new rules are riddled with loopholes

The new rules are riddled with loopholes, evidence that the chairman sought approval from AT&T instead of listening to the millions of Americans who asked for real Net Neutrality. These rules don’t do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination. No longer can you get to the same Internet via your mobile device as you can via your laptop. The rules pave the way for AT&T to block your access to third-party applications and to require you to use its own preferred applications.

The new now not-but-properly-defined "managed service" exemption may amount to the first step down a slippery slope of non-neutral Internet service. The exemption should be carefully tailored to address only a small number of special categories of applications that cannot operate in accordance with the existing open framework.

Few days ago

Ars Technica discussed "managed services" in full a few days ago. All things considered, a "managed service" could be construed to mean things like VPNs, VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol), and video streaming. The problem with Net Neutrality, as it was just passed, pays no attention to these services whatsoever. It lets companies do whatever they want with last-mile traffic. If your local cable company, which just so happens to be the only Internet Service Provider in the area, decides to charge, I don’t know, $5 per month for the ability to make VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) call on its network, so then, it can!

This entire bill is evidently aimed at benefiting big business at the expense of The People. The end of an open and free Internet is but only moments away…