Net neutrality rules nixed by appeals court

Net neutrality rules nixed by appeals court

Summary: Verizon won a court challenge to Net neutrality rules, which will be kicked back to the FCC.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Government, Telcos
12

Broadband companies will be able to charge tech giants more for fast connections needed to deliver services such as video after Verizon won a court showdown against the Federal Communications Commission.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. sent the rules back to the FCC. The FCC could rewrite the rules in a way that would pass a court test.

Verizon challenged the FCC's Net neutrality regulations that required broadband providers treat all traffic equally. Verizon has said that it would charge bandwidth hogs more since they take up more of its network. Multiple outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg and Reuters reported the news. 

The crux of the appeals court ruling was that the FCC didn't have authority since it didn't classify broadband providers as a common-service carrier. Instead, broadband providers were deemed information service providers. A common carrier classification is what applies to telephone lines.

For the FCC, one option could be to reclassify broadband providers.

Add it up and the Net neutrality debate is going to kick up again and all the political issues that come with it will tag along.

Related:

Topics: Government, Telcos

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

12 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Call me cynical

    I wonder how much "campaign" money the telcos spread around Washington to get their way.
    MajorlyCool
    • Probably as much as

      Their opponents did? Socialism has proven to be a Failure in the past, what makes you think it will succeed now?
      I hate trolls also
  • Net neutrality rules nixed by appeals court

    The FCC needs to reclassify broadband providers like Verizon and also force them into making their 4G networks available to Pre-Paid Subscribers.
    Evisscerator
    • And they should also

      Triple the costs, which is the only logical outcome. All those "Obama phones" do not need 4G internet access. When a welfare mom, has Three Dozen Phones, there is a problem.
      I hate trolls also
  • Wow

    The teabaggers even infect technical sites with their nonsense.
    harry_dyke
    • The "teabaggers" are the only ones with brains in sites such as this,

      but you wouldn't know anything about smarts or intelligence or brains, would you?
      adornoe
      • Apparently...

        ...you don't believe there is such a thing as an honest difference of opinion. You're hardly alone, but self-proclaimed Tea Partiers like yourself seem to be more prone to such an attitude than are many others.
        John L. Ries
    • says

      Wheeler is socialist
      2000423403
  • A little logic please.

    Netflix is pushing video using a lot of bandwidth. They have already paid for that bandwidth when they setup their connection with their own ISP.
    Verizon customers are streaming videos from Netflix using lots of bandwidth. They have already paid for that usage when they setup their connection.
    Verizon thinks it can charge for bandwidth usage the same idiotic way they charge all mobile usage. Their customers pay for incoming and outgoing call and texts alike.

    For the life of me I can't come up with any other scenario that an industry is able to charge twice for the same product.
    harrim47
  • I mean, seriously...

    There's a lot to be lost with this court decision, really. Check out this short mockumentary for info about the basic issues of Net Neutrality: http://www.theinternetmustgo.com
    AndSoAndSuch
    • Have you actually read it?

      And have you possibly read the relevant portions of the US Code and cited prior decisions in order to determine whether or not you agree?

      Or are you just assuming that because you're in favor of the rules that were struck down that they must have been legal? Personally, I haven't done any of that, so I'll give the Court the benefit of the doubt (it's not like I'm familiar with the laws governing the FCC).
      John L. Ries
      • The problem with your belief is

        You don't understand the right of freedoms for information. This started in 2008 when the FCC voted for throttling bandwidth and allows the ISP to create a monopoly. For instance Time Warner and comcast trade areas and the consumers have no choice. Now with stifling the internet now companies ( corporations ) can not only shut small business out by buying their bandwidth and force the consumers to pay for it, but also claim it has illegal content and shut down the site for months until they prove it was an untrue allegation. All of these bills are related. Leave the internet alone.
        2000423403