Federal Judge Puts Net Neutrality On Hold To Allow Lawsuits To Be Heard

While some can point to the pros of Net Neutrality, or, what they are calling “Open Internet” to make it sound better, at the end of the day it turns the Internet into a public utility. In other words, the government sets the rules and terms, just like they did with wired phone service. The minute it was de-regulated phone service capabilities exploded. Competition exploded. You could now buy whatever phone you wanted, instead of renting it from the phone company. All sorts of long distance carriers were competing for your business. Wireless phones have done all you’ve seen without treating them as a public utility. And so did the Internet

Net neutrality rules reinstatement temporarily halted by US appeals court

A U.S. appeals court said on Friday it was temporarily putting the Federal Communications Commission’s reinstatement of landmark net neutrality rules on hold until Aug. 5 as it considers legal challenges from the broadband industry.

The FCC voted in April along party lines to reassume regulatory oversight of broadband internet and reinstate open internet rules that were rescinded in 2017 under then-President Donald Trump.

Those rules were originally adopted in 2015, and were set to go back into effect on July 22 until the order from the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which said the delay was needed “to provide sufficient opportunity to consider the merits” of the request to halt the rules as the legal challenge proceeds.

The FCC did not immediately comment on Friday.

Net neutrality rules require internet service providers to treat internet data and users equally rather than restricting access, slowing speeds or blocking content for certain users. The rules also forbid special arrangements in which ISPs give improved network speeds or access to favored users.

At the end of the day, no matter how many pros are put out their for NN, it is unnecessary. It was never needed before Obama’s FCC passed it. No one in Congress voted for it, and something like NN should be legislation, not from a bunch of un-elected bureaucrats. The fact that hardcore Progressives, heavily invested in implementing massive government control of everything and everyone, want it should tell you what it is really all about. As NordVPN notes

Tiresome government regulation: Under net neutrality laws, the Federal Communications Commission must monitor the ISPs’ compliance with these rules. This includes submitting reports twice a year, which can become costly for ISPs of any size.

Do we really need the government heavily involved? There have been very few issues since everyone was able to access the Internet.

The internet can innovate without it: Many innovations took place in the absence of net neutrality regulations. Some net neutrality opponents also argue that there was a significant growth of the internet and relatively little wrongdoings without net neutrality. With heavy regulation, might services such as NordVPN be killed off?

Almost every innovation took place without NN. 20 years ago you couldn’t stream all your shows and videos and music via the Internet. Now you can do it, sadly, while you are standing in line waiting for your fast food meal, sitting at your table, or while sitting at a stop light as it goes green. As National Review notes

The years under the OIO (Open Internet Order, ie, Net Neutrality) demonstrate the opposite. That period saw the only drops in broadband investment in non-recessionary years. Average prices in broadband speeds started to significantly decline only after the net-neutrality rules were repealed. Getting more people online seems to have no corollary relationship to the net-neutrality rules. If the goal of the FCC is to close the digital divide, its efforts would be best served elsewhere.

But, see, the current Big Government weenies controlling the FCC want a “light touch”

Moreover, for some activists, net neutrality is the camel’s nose under the tent of public utility regulation. FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel stated she has no intention of regulating broadband rates, and while technically Title II is rate regulation, I believe her. But this promise lasts only as long as the agency forbears from applying the full panoply of Title II regulations. Several advocates—and President Biden—have already pointed to allegedly high broadband prices to justify greater government regulation. And one-time FCC nominee Gigi Sohn views net neutrality as not about traffic management but having a “cop on the beat” to police broadband industry practices. More broadly, Yale’s Law and Political Economy Project has marshaled an impressive group of academics dedicated to reviving public utility regulation across society, including broadband. Title II reclassification makes it easier for a future FCC to yield to these regulatory impulses.

There was already a light touch prior to NN and in the years since 2017 when Trump’s FCC killed it off. Let me put it this way: what if Trump decides he wants to be the dictator all the lefties say he will be and uses NN to clamp down on ISPs and providors and such and restrict Democrat leaning companies and blogs and websites, stopping condemnation of Trump?

Net Neutrality is government for government’s sake, and meant to control everything. It is evil disguised as nice.

The post Federal Judge Puts Net Neutrality On Hold To Allow Lawsuits To Be Heard appeared first on Pirate’s Cove.