[News] Ajit Pai wants to reverse BitTorrent decision

[StyM]

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/45041-a...rrent-decision

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who appears to have set a goal of sending the US internet into the dark ages, is digging up an old rule which stopped telcos from killing off BitTorrent.

Pai thinks it was a mistake for the FCC to try and stop Comcast from blocking BitTorrent in 2008, and thinks all of the regulatory actions the FCC took after that to give itself the authority to prevent blocking were wrong.

To do that he wants to turn back the clock to the legal framework that allowed Comcast to block BitTorrent.

For those who are too young to remember, the 2008 Comcast-BitTorrent Order allowed the Commission to directly enforce federal internet policy when the telcos significantly impeded consumers? ability to access the content and use the applications of their choice.

The FCC couldn?t stop Comcast from blocking BitTorrent in 2008, it changed the rules so it would have that power, and Pai wants to undo that change and give Comcast the power to block internet services like BitTorrent once again.

Pai claims that the FCC did not need those sorts of powers and Comcast blocking BitTorrent could have been challenged under antitrust and consumer protection laws on a case-by-case basis. However, there is a small problem here about who would actually make the complaint. Taking on Comcast is an expensive option and out of the pockets of most people.

To make matters worse, even if it did win, the precedents don?t have much weight. It will not take long for the general public and consumer rights groups to realise that taking on the telcos is too rich for their legal budgets. This is exactly the sort of thing that a government regulator should be doing.

[AliG]

I'm not for piracy, but I don't like where this is going. Pai is going to open a lot of doors to internet censorship that make me really uncomfortable.

[bluestang]

Well that's what happens you have a bunch of completely incompetent people in positions they should not be allowed to be in. It all starts at the top too!

[Hornet331]

I'm not for piracy, but I don't like where this is going. Pai is going to open a lot of doors to internet censorship that make me really uncomfortable.

Censorship is already there, look at the big portals like twitter, youtube and google as search engine. Having the wrong political opinion will get you removed, deplatforming you censoring your opinion.

[vario]

Well that's what happens you have a bunch of completely incompetent people in positions they should not be allowed to be in. It all starts at the top too!

You sure mr ajit is incompetent ? From what i read about the guy, he is very competent and good at his job. Its just that his job is not working for the people but various telecoms.

[AliG]

Censorship is already there, look at the big portals like twitter, youtube and google as search engine. Having the wrong political opinion will get you removed, deplatforming you censoring your opinion.

I don't think that's true; if anything people from all viewpoints cater to their specific audiences.

No one will complain about your opinion as long as it's respectful. It's those who can't even handle that bare level of responsibility that get removed.

[AliG]

You sure mr ajit is incompetent ? From what i read about the guy, he is very competent and good at his job. Its just that his job is not working for the people but various telecoms.

I agree, corrupt and ineffective are two different things. But he is definitely doing the opposite of what the FCC is supposed to do: ensure consumer protection from the telecom industry.

[drmrlordx]

Pai is an ex-Verizon hack. What do you expect? He wants the big ISPs to own the entire Internet, lock stock and barrel.

[zanzabar]

I'm not for piracy, but I don't like where this is going. Pai is going to open a lot of doors to internet censorship that make me really uncomfortable.

lots of things use bit torrent now that are not piracy, like steam, psn, live, and origin. comcast had also used the claim that they were blocking encrypted piracy and used that to block/lag games unless you paid for their top tier.

[NEOAethyr]

I download my linux distro's on torrent...

[Sparky]

I don't think that's true; if anything people from all viewpoints cater to their specific audiences.

No one will complain about your opinion as long as it's respectful. It's those who can't even handle that bare level of responsibility that get removed.

Not what I've seen. I've seen a number of cases where if you don't agree with X, you will get shut down or yelled down or something because, you know, you're a <insert terrible person label here>

Not always, not a rule, but still has happened more than it should. Particularly in places like universities etc.

Back on topic, this whole net neutrality thing is a big mess. Don't want the telcos screwing with stuff, don't want the government getting its hands in and opening the door for its own potential censorship either... Yuck. Ajit seems like a turd though from what I've seen so far.

[zanzabar]

Not what I've seen. I've seen a number of cases where if you don't agree with X, you will get shut down or yelled down or something because, you know, you're a <insert terrible person label here>

Not always, not a rule, but still has happened more than it should. Particularly in places like universities etc.

Back on topic, this whole net neutrality thing is a big mess. Don't want the telcos screwing with stuff, don't want the government getting its hands in and opening the door for its own potential censorship either... Yuck. Ajit seems like a turd though from what I've seen so far.

i dont want to shout you down, but net neutrality and title 2 for consumer facing ISP makes sure the internet stays as it was, and prevents the government from getting involved. without safe harbor protections (that will be lost without title 2) the DMCA will force ISPs to filter and block content. before the 2014 VZ suit they had that since they were not allowed to block or generate data, now without title 2 they will be forced to filter and will not have safe harbor if they do anything to the data stream (like say 4 to 6)

removing title 2 and net neutrality also will slow the adoption of ipv6, as it forces encryption and secures routs. the ISPs wanting this are also private companies so if ICAN ever gets involved they can revoke IP addresses for blocking or throttling.

in the mean time the only time net neutrality rules have come into play was 1) to stop time warner and comcast from bad routing UDP packets so games like LOL would not work, and 2) netflix was trying to force comcast to add peering for lvl3 after comcast illegally removed peering to stop a rival company. so far no one has made any argument that removing title 2 will help anyone but consumer facing ISP shareholders.


there is currently one large ISP in the US (spectrum) offering terrestrial broadband and they only do it since they are legally mandated from the charter/TW merger. with every large ISP implementing caps do you really think they can be trusted with this if they have a choice.

[Sparky]

At least TWC has a history of no caps on anything (and they've used it as a strong marketing point many times). But yeah, I don't really trust them. They screwed with Youtube traffic a few years back.

[zanzabar]

At least TWC has a history of no caps on anything (and they've used it as a strong marketing point many times). But yeah, I don't really trust them. They screwed with Youtube traffic a few years back.

they were one the first to try caps in low income areas, but they are legally barred from them until 2020ish now. we will see how far that goes since comcast was also banned from caps and anti competative network performance until 2018 from when they bought NBC but they still started back up on both fronts.