Viet Nam Human Rights » Analysis-Comment » home » The United States issues a historic regulations on Internet

The United States issues a historic regulations on Internet

7/3/15

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has approved a historic measure to manage Internet more closely. The new rules are now causing intense debate in the United States.

The new rules are based on the principle of "net neutrality" that provides fair chances on the Internet speed and accessing to Websites.

The problem here is whether the American network providers (Comcast or Time Warner Cable) can discriminate the content running on the system of their Internet service. The FCC's answer is: No!

The FCC had voted, affirmed the authority of the government to the Internet. The US media said that the rules are "historic" on managing the Internet.

According to CNN, until summer, the rules of the new FCC will formally be applied. However, in the new presidency of the United States, if there is a Republican lawmaker be elected, these rules could be changed.

So, in near future there is no change. But the decision of the FCC has caused a stir in public opinion. CNN said that the FCC has given itself a high power, which enables internet providers - including cellular carriers - to kill the freedom of the Internet

by blocking or throttling traffic or giving priority to Web services in exchange for payment.

In fact, this phenomenon has occurred before. Such as, Verizon had blocked bandwidth of Google Wallet, AT&T had blocked apps for sharing video; Comcast had slowed the services for share files likes BitTorrent, the telephone company Madison River had blocked calls through the Internet by Vonage. The FCC has used the old principles to solve this problem. In other words, the FCC’s new rules on the management of Internet has nothing new.

That makes some people feel anxious about the FCC’s decision to reaffirm "the neutrality of the Internet". To reinforce the equality of the rules, the FCC will manage the service providers by forcing them into the terms of the Telecommunications Act 1934. The telecommunications companies said these provisions are inconsistent with the services that they offer. They do not believe in the FCC’s promises that the FCC applied only a small part of such provision and shall not control the speed of the Internet or raise taxes.
However, as a normal Internet user, what do these things mean? According to the famous comedian John Oliver, the US’s Internet packages are expensive, inconsistent and users have very little choice. Obviously, the service provider is the "bad guys".

But in the last hearing, most respected people had supported the FCC's new rules. The Etsy’s CEO Chad Dickerson thanked the FCC for "protecting the Internet as an economic engine." Famous technology specialist Tim Berners-Lee said, these rules ensure modern businesses have opportunities as he had when he created the World Wide Web 26 years ago.

And President Obama, after the vote, had posted on Twitter that "the FCC's decision today will protect creativity and generate equal field for new business generation".

There are still many different views on this issue. However, the internet provider and the websites both have one thing in common. They are preventing or blocking competition that is unfair and should be considered illegal. For technical reasons, the network provider should control the traffic. The stream video need faster speed than email, this improve the Internet user's experience.

Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation organization Foundation, an organization's technology policy adviser, said that this debate is increasingly out of control. "All debates have become false choice: to give the internet providers rights to do whatever they want or make regulations burden and complicated.”

It appears that there is no perfect choice./.

Chia sẻ bài viết ^^

All comments [ 11 ]

John Smith 7/3/15 20:15

The new rules pass with flying colors

Gentle Moon 7/3/15 20:16

Since it was first announced, the FCC’s plan has been met with widespread criticism and has dragged the issue of Net neutrality, or the idea of an open Internet, to a mainstream audience once again