FCC votes to ban termination fees for cable and satellite services

ThePantser , 6 months ago

Can it extend to ISPs too? Please. And automakers, and any company?

db2 , 6 months ago

Which influential politician had to pay a fee and got salty? I’ll only believe it wasn’t that if they make it retroactive from 1980 onward.

markr , 6 months ago

So I assume the fascist knobs will initiate a law suit to block this.

foggy , 6 months ago

It’d be nice if they did more.

Same with the FTC.

hark , 6 months ago

This is great but also decades late.

Viking_Hippie , 6 months ago

That’s how it goes with a government of one party who only wants bad things and one that wants some good things but extremely slowly so it doesn’t upset their owner donors too much.

Lophostemon , 6 months ago

Bravo!

RalphFurley , 6 months ago

Fuck Ajit Pai

aeronmelon , 6 months ago

And the oversized Reese’s coffee mug he rode in on.

Cornelius_Wangenheim , 6 months ago

Or better yet, with it.

NotBadAndYou , 6 months ago

I’m in favor of this, but how did it pass when “two out of four commissioners voted against the measure”?

killeronthecorner , 6 months ago

Should say two out of five. A third Democrat was approved earlier this year

Ghostalmedia , 6 months ago

I like having a FCC that is actually working for the public, and not lobbyists. This is nice.

The Trump / Ajit Pai days sucked.

foggy , 6 months ago

Ajit Pai was appointed as commissioner of the FCC by Obama, on the recommendation of Mitch McConnell.

It’s a weird pill to swallow.

Pai was commissioner until 2017 when Trump gave him a promotion to Chairman.

He did plenty of damage to the US as commissioner, but it wasn’t until 2017 that he lead the effort on taking away net neutrality.

Spiralvortexisalie , 6 months ago

As George Carlin got cheers for, and I regularly receive jeers for, it is a big club and we are not in it. The Establishment loves these identity politics, because it is always someone else being the bad guy, not you know, all the bad guys on stage actively being horrible people, thats only something the other side does, not our benevolent side.

youngGoku , 6 months ago

net neutrality

Would that have protected Firefox users from YouTube’s throttling speeds of anyone using the Firefox client?

foggy , 6 months ago

Kinda but more like on ISPs. Like google paying Comcast to serve their content faster than, say, my website.

And Like, throttling your connection below what you pay for. Artificial Fast lanes for data. Stuff like that.

Here’s a gpt summary since we the humans don’t think much anymore:

The repeal of net neutrality raised several key issues:

1. Potential for Content Discrimination: Without net neutrality, ISPs could favor certain websites or services through higher speeds or better access, potentially leading to a skewed online ecosystem favoring larger, established companies.
2. Threat to Free Speech: ISPs could potentially block or throttle access to specific content, which raises concerns about censorship and the free flow of information.
3. Impact on Competition: Smaller businesses and startups might find it harder to compete if they can’t afford the costs for prioritization, which larger companies can easily pay. This could stifle innovation and market diversity.
4. Increased Costs for Consumers: There were concerns that ISPs could introduce tiered pricing models, charging extra for access to certain websites or faster speeds, potentially leading to increased internet costs for consumers.
5. Quality of Service: ISPs might provide faster connections to paying websites, while non-paying sites could suffer from slower speeds, affecting the user experience.
6. Digital Divide Concerns: The repeal could exacerbate the digital divide. People in rural or economically disadvantaged areas might face limited access to a full range of internet services compared to those in more affluent areas.

roofuskit , 6 months ago

That’s how it works. The opposing party picks their commissioners and the president appointments them.