Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Senators opposing net neutrality rake in more campaign cash
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 66344705" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>Here are some very basic argument against it:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_against_net_neutrality" target="_blank">Net neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></p><p></p><p>As I said, there are pros and cons, here are the list of pros:</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_for_net_neutrality" target="_blank">Net neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You put a government regulatory body in place to police this procedure, the opportunity for the government improperly use data is going to be a temptation for them...given the government's questionable ties to the recording industry as well as the tendency of some judges to allow "accidental discovery" in terms of evidence, it's reasonable to have some concerns pertaining to whether or not this new access to data would be used in attempts to incriminate people without proper procedure.</p><p></p><p>As it stands right now, we have a Federal District Court Judge who was a former lawyer and lobbyist for the RIAA (Beryl Howell) who has already made some questionable decisions in cases pertaining to music piracy...some so questionable that the appeals court has had to overturn them...however, can we trust the appeals court to do this every time that a judge makes a questionable call in favor of the recording industry?</p><p></p><p>From recent articles, it's pretty clear that while the RIAA supports neutrality, they support their own flavor of "neutrality" in which the FCC monitors data. If they had their way, Net Neutrality would be put in place, but with the FCC acting as a regulatory body to monitor who's doing what. Right now, ISPs are the only ones who can monitor (if they so choose) and they have the luxury of saying "Sorry RIAA, we're not wasting man power to help you try to sue a bunch of 16 year old kids for downloading some music", if the RIAA lobbyists have their way, Neutrality will be put in place, but with the FCC monitoring what people are doing.</p><p></p><p>Essentially, the RIAA getting what they want (usage of federal resources to bust people on their behalf) under the guise of support for Net Neutrality.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 66344705, member: 123415"] Here are some very basic argument against it: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_against_net_neutrality]Net neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url] As I said, there are pros and cons, here are the list of pros: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_for_net_neutrality]Net neutrality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url] You put a government regulatory body in place to police this procedure, the opportunity for the government improperly use data is going to be a temptation for them...given the government's questionable ties to the recording industry as well as the tendency of some judges to allow "accidental discovery" in terms of evidence, it's reasonable to have some concerns pertaining to whether or not this new access to data would be used in attempts to incriminate people without proper procedure. As it stands right now, we have a Federal District Court Judge who was a former lawyer and lobbyist for the RIAA (Beryl Howell) who has already made some questionable decisions in cases pertaining to music piracy...some so questionable that the appeals court has had to overturn them...however, can we trust the appeals court to do this every time that a judge makes a questionable call in favor of the recording industry? From recent articles, it's pretty clear that while the RIAA supports neutrality, they support their own flavor of "neutrality" in which the FCC monitors data. If they had their way, Net Neutrality would be put in place, but with the FCC acting as a regulatory body to monitor who's doing what. Right now, ISPs are the only ones who can monitor (if they so choose) and they have the luxury of saying "Sorry RIAA, we're not wasting man power to help you try to sue a bunch of 16 year old kids for downloading some music", if the RIAA lobbyists have their way, Neutrality will be put in place, but with the FCC monitoring what people are doing. Essentially, the RIAA getting what they want (usage of federal resources to bust people on their behalf) under the guise of support for Net Neutrality. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Senators opposing net neutrality rake in more campaign cash
Top
Bottom