Several news sites are reporting on India's support of net neutrality including the BBC, Fortune, The Hindu, and Ars Technica, to name a few. At question was Facebook's attempt at zero-rating their own 'free' basics service. Zero-rating schemes are where certain services are not counted against data caps while others do, essentially creating a tiered Internet and increasing the barriers for certain sites or services.
According to the decision, discriminiatory tariffs are disallowed, paving the way for continued access for all. The decision does not prohibit providing free or limited free net access, provided it can be used to access any content, not just pre-approve sites.
Related Stories
The Federal Communications Commission has scheduled an April 25 vote to restore net neutrality rules similar to the ones introduced during the Obama era and repealed under former President Trump.
"After the prior administration abdicated authority over broadband services, the FCC has been handcuffed from acting to fully secure broadband networks, protect consumer data, and ensure the Internet remains fast, open, and fair," FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said today. "A return to the FCC's overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open Internet."
[...]
In a filing with the FCC, Turner wrote that "ISPs have been incredibly bullish about the future of their businesses precisely because of the network investments they are making" and that the companies rarely, if ever, mention the impact of FCC regulation during calls with investors."We believe that the ISPs' own words to their shareholders, and to industry analysts through channels governed by the SEC, should be afforded significantly more weight than evidence-free tropes, vague threats, dubious aggregate capital expenditure tallies, or nonsensical math jargon foisted on the Commission this docket or elsewhere," Turner wrote.
(Score: 2) by CortoMaltese on Monday February 08 2016, @11:02PM
I don't know why but even this great piece of news makes me distrust the reasons behind the ruling, maybe everything is not lost.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Gravis on Tuesday February 09 2016, @12:04AM
i guess facebook didn't pay off enough officials in India because they actually did something to uphold the law! (sorry, India, you have a serious corruption problem)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09 2016, @12:18AM
Facebook probably screwed themselves by making such a public full-court press. Daylight kills corruption.
Facebook was drinking so much of their own kool-aid that they thought they actually they could convince the general population so they ran full page ads in newspapers, big ass billboards, etc. But once there was any significant public opposition they couldn't resort to bribes or any other forms of soft power because it would have been really obvious and despite all its flaws, India is the largest democracy in the world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09 2016, @06:15AM
Hooray! I'm so glad to hear sanity prevailed and India wasn't suckered into this trap. Take that, Failbook!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09 2016, @12:12PM
You know, I don't have any problems with India.
Unlike some of the other large Asian powerhouse nations, they don't seem to be dominated by some horrific evil empire-style mix of greedy communism, genocidal human rights abuses, and military dictatorships.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09 2016, @02:41PM
I guess that's why Microsoft outsourced their pre-emptive customer support services there.
(Score: 1) by tizan on Tuesday February 09 2016, @04:30PM
India has a big corruption issue but some of the Judges allows for hope ! So I would say let's not smear everybody in India