New rules on network neutrality brought disappointment

Advocates of network neutrality in the United States have long lobbied for legislation that will prevent ISPs to slow down or even block competing content. Now that the new rules are adopted, many of them challenging.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), independent U.S. government agency, which has similar duties as the local Croatian Agency for Post and Telecommunications, has approved the rules on network neutrality (net neutrality) that prevent Internet service providers (ISP - Internet Service Providers) to discriminate against legal content on the Internet. Advocates of network neutrality, the Republicans and the ISPs all, miraculously, disappointed in the legislation, says Mashable.

Specifically, advocates of network neutrality have long lobbied for legislation that will prevent ISPs to slow down or even block competing content. Many ISPs want to charge for content producers of fast delivery of their news, videos, pictures, etc., to make, or discriminate in favor of their own content and services offered, such as television, or IPTV services VoIP telephony. Imagine the internet as an example, two roads, a quicker, a second slower. ISPs will decide which road to miss your content from the web site, and it is the vision of what the Internet is not like anybody, except, of course, large corporations in the market.



According to information coming from the United States, so called. Open Internet Order, which has been watered down version of network neutrality (Net Neutrality), prevents the fixed broadband providers to block access to certain content and applications, however, these rules are different for wireless service providers (wireless) access services and are not quite so clear to those who would like advocating principles that preserve the free and open Internet.

Namely, end users should be able to decide for themselves which content and services they want without any interference by ISPs. While in theory this is so, according to Dan Gillmor for Salon.com, in practice it actually means that "new rules encouraged to devise new kinds of services that will do just that." Moreover, the discrimination would be explicitly allowed companies like AT & T and Verizon customers for the iPhone and iPad, which, among other things, the most important devices that allow users to access the internet.

Group Public Konowledge issued, therefore, release on his blog in which he warns that at every important point and controversial issue concerning the "openness of the Internet" and what that principle means - not a company to create "fast line" for the "priority" content, or exactly what wireless company they can and can not - the actual language of the rules muted, ambiguous or even contrary to the text of the implementing rules on Internet neutrality.

According to ArsTechnica.com, Republican FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell accused because the FCC saying that "this is the darkest days in the history of the FCC."

Politico writes that, after the FCC approved the rules, the Republican Party began to plan for their abolition, even if these rules are approved remains an open question whether the FCC authority to implement these laws. Specifically, in April this year a U.S. court ruled that the FCC should not stop giant Comcast in controlling user traffic over peer-to-per downloading.

Pioneers of the World Wide Web, such as Tim Berners-Lee, from the very beginning to argue that the Internet is a neutral network. Despite all telephone, cable and wireless giants were clearly expressed the wish that "regulated" the network and according to the rules that they make. However, it certainly is not in the interest of millions, of ordinary people who fight for their freedom on the Internet.