Ford, Visa, UPS, and Bank of America Quietly Unite in Net Neutrality Fight

Terry Olaes

Terry Olaes

I Used to be the [H] News Guy
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
4,646
A corporate alliance consisting of reps from Ford Motor, Visa, UPS, Bank of America, and others have been quietly but firmly urging the FCC to reclassify broadband service under Title II. The alliance is known as the "Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users Committee" and keeps a low profile despite being being over 30 years old and containing some very powerful members. According to the AHTUC filing (which is conveniently linked in the article), their concern is double-dipping by ISPs.

“Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet” was the subject under discussion, according to the FCC disclosures, and Ad Hoc Telecom members argued that Internet providers have “terminating access monopolies.” That bit of telecom jargon means that a company trying to reach a customer has to go through the Internet providers first. Widespread concerns that Internet providers will exploit that power is the entire justification for net neutrality rules.
Click to expand...
 
Now that corporate "citizens" with actual "voting" powers are involved, maybe there's some hope? I dunno, Wheeler's telco shill background makes me doubt it still.
 
So sad that it doesn't really matter what 90% of the population wants, we have to wait for Ford, UPS, and the Banks to chime in... after all, they know what is best for the greater good. :rolleyes: So yeah, appreciate the support and all, but it should be irrelevant what their opinions are, as businesses should only be expected to act in self-interest and that doesn't always jive with whats in the interest of the general public.
 
So basically everyone wants this change in governance with the exception of the people who currently control access and a few nit wits that just hate all forms governance.

I think this is a situation where the lobbyists need to make the decision, this is too important for the people to handle.
 
Ugh... Just listen to the ---real people--- and reclassify. No need to listen to large corporations... Ever.
 
MisterHipster said:
Ugh... Just listen to the ---real people--- and reclassify. No need to listen to large corporations... Ever.
Click to expand...

Mostly agree, but this may be one of those rare instances where the interests of most corporations with their budgets and lobbyists may be actually be aligned with the common man.

It's nice to see some companies fight back against the telecom industry. If the interests are aligned, might as well take advantage of that.
 
That's what it boils down to imo. How many people wish the same fate for the internet as cable TV, commercial radio and all other mediums that are unprotected as utilities?
 
Well, you can tell this is a thread full of people who don't understand that reclassification would do the opposite of what the words net neutrality should actually mean. The current system is much closer than this utility garbagewould move us to.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Well, you can tell this is a thread full of people who don't understand that reclassification would do the opposite of what the words net neutrality should actually mean. The current system is much closer than this utility garbagewould move us to.
Click to expand...

Nope. You don't have a clue.

The Internet has been open and free treating traffic more or less equally since its inception, until the last couple of years when abuses started to rear their ugly heads. This - however- - was solely by chance. There was nothing in place to prevent abuses.

Reclassification as a utility under Title II gives FCC the authority to put rules in place that prevent the monopolistic cable companies from abusing their powers, and destroying the internet we have known and loved for the last 20 years.

If we had a truly competitive marketplace, it probably wouldn't be necessary. If the marketplace were truly competitive, customers could switch providers if the providers treated data in ways they were unhappy with, but the truth is, the cable companies have acted as cartels, and carved out territories where they don't compete with each other to avoid this very situation, allowing them to charge monopolistic service rates, for services of 3rd world quality, and lately they ahve figured out that this power, gives them the ability to milk the system even more by profiling and treating different packets differently.

This is why Title II reclassification and regulation is absolutely crucial to the survival of the Internet we know and love, or it will turn into a system where providers can slow down and exclude anyone they don't like, including competing products, and companies or anyone who just doesn't want to pay their toll.

You've simply got it completely backwards.
 
I don't know about ford.. but the financial companies can clearly envision a future were their bytes are viewed as a gold mine and priced as such in the very important 'finance' lanes and connections.
They know, because they make a living charging for money and related transactions (other things too of course).. so they know the risk is there while its possible for ISP to be monetizing bytes with ever greater flexibility.
Here is what is going to happen: Exceptions for 'critical infrastructure' companies.. voila.. no one cares about the customer again.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041233498 said:
Nope. You don't have a clue.

The Internet has been open and free treating traffic more or less equally since its inception, until the last couple of years when abuses started to rear their ugly heads. This - however- - was solely by chance. There was nothing in place to prevent abuses.

Reclassification as a utility under Title II gives FCC the authority to put rules in place that prevent the monopolistic cable companies from abusing their powers, and destroying the internet we have known and loved for the last 20 years.

If we had a truly competitive marketplace, it probably wouldn't be necessary. If the marketplace were truly competitive, customers could switch providers if the providers treated data in ways they were unhappy with, but the truth is, the cable companies have acted as cartels, and carved out territories where they don't compete with each other to avoid this very situation, allowing them to charge monopolistic service rates, for services of 3rd world quality, and lately they ahve figured out that this power, gives them the ability to milk the system even more by profiling and treating different packets differently.

This is why Title II reclassification and regulation is absolutely crucial to the survival of the Internet we know and love, or it will turn into a system where providers can slow down and exclude anyone they don't like, including competing products, and companies or anyone who just doesn't want to pay their toll.

You've simply got it completely backwards.
Click to expand...

You are correct.. Wanted to add: I think part if not the sole reason the all traffic was created equal at inception was because of technological limitations.. I understand packet sniffing software is a relatively new development.
I agree title II is the only way to force this back.. oh they will be sniffing.. but if they cant do anything about, then yes it is like it was, as I understand it anyway.
 
JeffDC said:
That's what it boils down to imo. How many people wish the same fate for the internet as cable TV, commercial radio and all other mediums that are unprotected as utilities?
Click to expand...
Your relentless stumping for a true Bureaucracy that rules every aspect of life is just amazing. Nevermind the situation is a byproduct of government encouragement and enshrinement of the monopolies and that heavy layers of regulation have always encouraged and never discouraged corruption.
 
jpm100 said:
Your relentless stumping for a true Bureaucracy that rules every aspect of life is just amazing.
Click to expand...
Who is stumping for that? Is a straw man the best you can muster? BTW I'm libertarian (small L) on nearly all issues. Not this one.

jpm100 said:
Nevermind the situation is a byproduct of government encouragement and enshrinement of the monopolies and that heavy layers of regulation have always encouraged and never discouraged corruption.
Click to expand...
Our two choices are to allow greed to destroy the internet, or recognize it for what it is -- the world's most essential communications utility -- and provide it with the same basic protections our telephone network has been operating under for 80 years. These protections are the only reason we are not required to listen to commercials before we dial a telephone.
 
I really really hope Internet doesn't become a utility. I'd hate to lose my high speed internet and be forced to use a different provider at who knows the cost or speed.
 
Greatone123 said:
I really really hope Internet doesn't become a utility. I'd hate to lose my high speed internet and be forced to use a different provider at who knows the cost or speed.
Click to expand...

And what bat shit crazy teabilly have you been speaking to that has somehow convinced you this will happen?

The tea party: The unwitting pawns of the megarich, who obfuscate the issues and get their pawn army to vote against their self interest...
 
If it becomes a utility won't it be the same as electricity? water? sewer? or any other utility I already have?
 
Greatone123 said:
If it becomes a utility won't it be the same as electricity? water? sewer? or any other utility I already have?
Click to expand...
If you had any semblance of a clue about this issue, you would know who's already pushing to eliminate your high speed internet. Google "fast lane" and get back to us.
 
yeah I get that, honestly a friend of mine who has similar interests and reads a lot more news than I do mentioned the "utility" thing to me. Then I come in here and see everyone with the opposite opinion.

I figured that if I threw out the comment someone might call me out saying I was totally wrong. Possibly even explaining why I was wrong. At this point I would be happy that I was wrong, tell him he was wrong, and then I'll tell all the people that I know that are even less informed then me about it.

I guess I could of just lead with a question about if it becomes a utility won't it be the same as electricity, water, sewage, so on. I work at night, I haven't slept since early yesterday.
 
Greatone123 said:
yeah I get that, honestly a friend of mine who has similar interests and reads a lot more news than I do mentioned the "utility" thing to me. Then I come in here and see everyone with the opposite opinion.

I figured that if I threw out the comment someone might call me out saying I was totally wrong. Possibly even explaining why I was wrong. At this point I would be happy that I was wrong, tell him he was wrong, and then I'll tell all the people that I know that are even less informed then me about it.

I guess I could of just lead with a question about if it becomes a utility won't it be the same as electricity, water, sewage, so on. I work at night, I haven't slept since early yesterday.
Click to expand...

OK, well, let';s start with the fact that there is a very big both obvious, and legal difference between utility and utility.

When we talk Title II conversion for Internet service, we aren't talking electric, gas, etc. We are talking more like phone service.

You can - in many markets subscribe to phone service, from different competitors. Title II doesn't in and of itself prevent this. All it does is allow the federal government to enforce rules such as "all peoples calls must be treated equally" etc. etc.

Converting Internet service to Title II won't somehow magically turn the market into a state sanctioned monopoly. If you are lucky enough to live in a market where there actually is competition for broadband, this would continue. Most americans are not this lucky though.

All together, an ISP operating under Title II would be very similar to an ISP not operating under Title II, except for that it would face tighter scrutiny of its business practices to make sure there are no abuses.

Anyone who has ever dealt with an ISP and their scummyness knowns there is no way in hell it could actually get worse. There is a reason ISP's and Wireless companies constantly top the "most hated companies" lists.

ISP's - of course - don't want this, as they want to milk the system for every penny it is worth, and not invest in infrastructure, etc.

What it all comes down to is, you can never trust a business. Any business. Their interests are always going to be shareholder value, and ever cent they milk out of you without giving you anything in return is another in the pockets of their shareholders.

The ONLY time businesses are a positive influence is in a market with competition. There is no competition in the ISP business. They are cartels that have carefully carved out territories and they don't cross into each others, as to not kill their cash cows.

This type of regulation is absolutely crucial in preventing these cartels from taking advantage of their monopolistic positions in most of the markets they serve.
 
So if you use it, you want change. If you provide it, you only want change if it means you can charge more for what you are providing.

It's easy for ISPs to want to charge premiums for premium usage because the bulk of your customer base (the residential user) will not fall in this category. It's the Netflixs and Amazons that will pay premiums and be forced to transfer their increased costs to their customer base.

If net neutrality plays out, ISPs will be forced to bear the brunt of the backlash of increased premiums. It also forces them to consider lost profits due to the potential price wars when non-entrenched ISPs are finally able to compete.
 
I certainly don't want to gamble on this, but perhaps if net neutrality/Title II of the ISPs doesn't go through, maybe it will force new players into the space. Doubtful, but if Comcast goes Netflix on other companies, I could see it happen.

Of course, I'd probably be dead before any of that bore fruit. Sigh.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041237101 said:
OK, well, let';s start with the fact that there is a very big both obvious, and legal difference between utility and utility.

When we talk Title II conversion for Internet service, we aren't talking electric, gas, etc. We are talking more like phone service.

You can - in many markets subscribe to phone service, from different competitors. Title II doesn't in and of itself prevent this. All it does is allow the federal government to enforce rules such as "all peoples calls must be treated equally" etc. etc.

Converting Internet service to Title II won't somehow magically turn the market into a state sanctioned monopoly. If you are lucky enough to live in a market where there actually is competition for broadband, this would continue. Most americans are not this lucky though.

All together, an ISP operating under Title II would be very similar to an ISP not operating under Title II, except for that it would face tighter scrutiny of its business practices to make sure there are no abuses.

Anyone who has ever dealt with an ISP and their scummyness knowns there is no way in hell it could actually get worse. There is a reason ISP's and Wireless companies constantly top the "most hated companies" lists.

ISP's - of course - don't want this, as they want to milk the system for every penny it is worth, and not invest in infrastructure, etc.

What it all comes down to is, you can never trust a business. Any business. Their interests are always going to be shareholder value, and ever cent they milk out of you without giving you anything in return is another in the pockets of their shareholders.

The ONLY time businesses are a positive influence is in a market with competition. There is no competition in the ISP business. They are cartels that have carefully carved out territories and they don't cross into each others, as to not kill their cash cows.

This type of regulation is absolutely crucial in preventing these cartels from taking advantage of their monopolistic positions in most of the markets they serve.
Click to expand...


Alright then... I'm only worried because internet is the only thing I get to choose, I don't get to choose any other of the utilities, they are provided by the city.
 
MisterHipster said:
Ugh... Just listen to the ---real people--- and reclassify. No need to listen to large corporations... Ever.
Click to expand...

in this case an enemy of my enemy is a friend applies.

otherwise i'd agree.

let them throw their money and weight at it, both of which we the people no longer have, but that is a boiling rage for another time.
 
My prediction if net neutrality goes forward is that all the plans to launch low orbit satellites will be halted, and by halted that means not approved by the FCC with its newly obtained powers so as to protect the status quo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top