SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Fnord666
President Trump's Supreme Court nominee argued last year that net neutrality rules violate the First Amendment rights of Internet service providers by preventing them from "exercising editorial control" over Internet content.
Trump's pick is Brett Kavanaugh, a judge on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The DC Circuit twice upheld the net neutrality rules passed by the Federal Communications Commission under former Chairman Tom Wheeler, despite Kavanaugh's dissent. (In another tech-related case, Kavanaugh ruled that the National Security Agency's bulk collection of telephone metadata is legal.)
While current FCC Chairman Ajit Pai eliminated the net neutrality rules, Kavanaugh could help restrict the FCC's authority to regulate Internet providers as a member of the Supreme Court. Broadband industry lobby groups have continued to seek Supreme Court review of the legality of Wheeler's net neutrality rules even after Pai's repeal.
[...] Consumers generally expect ISPs to deliver Internet content in un-altered form. But Kavanaugh argued that ISPs are like cable TV operators—since cable TV companies can choose not to carry certain channels, Internet providers should be able to choose not to allow access to a certain website, he wrote.
"Internet service providers may not necessarily generate much content of their own, but they may decide what content they will transmit, just as cable operators decide what content they will transmit," Kavanaugh wrote. "Deciding whether and how to transmit ESPN and deciding whether and how to transmit ESPN.com are not meaningfully different for First Amendment purposes."
Kavanaugh's argument did not address the business differences between cable TV and Internet service.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 15 2018, @06:35AM (5 children)
Ah yes, ignore the massive control the oligarchy has over every aspect of your life and believe in some small grassroots campaign! Oh right, they tried that and municipal broadband was struck down over and over. And people such as yourself applauded as you thought a government agency providing a public service was *GASP* socialism! and would bring about the end times.
Fuck you ya jackass, you don't deserve to even post on this site under the guise of a libertarian. You are no libertarian, and if you truly think you are one then you are truly fucking stupid. Like really dumb, you can't get beyond the most simple premises of your ideology.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday July 15 2018, @06:48AM (2 children)
You troll so enthusiastically but so weakly. It makes me sad for you.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 15 2018, @07:36AM
Well at least it made you sad if not ashamed to be yourself. We'll keep trying but I don't see much hope for you.
I get what is going on, you're riding the outrage wave and trying to spin your own politics inside justified anger. You are the worst but apparently there are enough dissatisfied people around here that will rally to anyone willing to "tell it like it is". You are the Trump if SoylentNews, be proud in your douchery.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 15 2018, @02:27PM
You're quite possibly the most ignorant person in the internet if you think that was trolling. Those of us that have the intelligence of actual adults know perfectly well that what you're pushing doesn't work, never has and never will. People are not rational actors and market forces depend upon customers having multiple options, the time to research those options and the ability to switch to a different option that varies from the other available options.
In short, definitely not when it comes to the internet. I only have 1 option for wired broad band because the building I live in only has 1 option. Moving just to get another ISP is absolutely ridiculous.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 15 2018, @05:21PM
For someone who actually trolls with a good % of your posts it is amusing that you apparently dont quite have the definition locked down. It is ok though, nobidy expects much from a jackass. You will never get that gold jacket! Ya jackass
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 15 2018, @07:05PM
Well, a socialist revolution must have a grassroots origin. However, as you seem to imply, we must always be cautious of how the oligarchy will subvert grassroots movements using COINTELPRO techniques. Examples of successful COINTELPRO deployments include Occupy Wall Street and the TEA Party (be sure to understand the early history and involvement of small l libertarians, the kind of believe all immigrants should be welcomed without arbitrary constructs the create classes of illegal immigration ["big government"], before knee-jerking).
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) may in fact be such a COINTELPRO effort deployed against the growing awareness of the inherent contradictions of capitalism and growing sympathy for socialism. (This supports the theory of massive control on the part of the oligarchy.)
Above all else, we need a grassroots movement to at least update our voting system to ensure its democratic execution. This is a goal that the Libertarian Party and the Green Party seem to support, and I would hope that as a practical matter, the Socialist Equality Party would also support. Once we have reasserted democracy, then we will be in a position of power to begin to really fix things.