|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
Celebration (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:20 AM Original message |
Court Strikes at 'Net Neutrality' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
beac (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:37 AM Response to Original message |
1. Crap. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hawkeye-X (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:38 AM Response to Original message |
2. Well, it's time to enact NN legislation |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
groundloop (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:40 AM Response to Original message |
3. Well then, the House and Senate will just have to... (OH HELL !!!) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
underpants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:47 AM Response to Original message |
4. Comcast...... nuff said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:49 AM Response to Original message |
5. Legislation from the bench sucks ass! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MousePlayingDaffodil (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:54 AM Response to Reply #5 |
6. I'm not sure that this decision represents . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:02 PM Response to Reply #6 |
34. Congress COULD do that, but WILL it? See Reply #3. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MousePlayingDaffodil (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:07 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. Whether Congress will do so, I have no idea . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:26 PM Response to Reply #36 |
45. I suspect Congress may well shy away from it, or enact some half measure, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 09:57 PM Response to Reply #6 |
72. reasonable minds could disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MousePlayingDaffodil (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:31 PM Response to Reply #72 |
74. I'm afraid I'm not sure what you are saying here . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 07:17 AM Response to Reply #74 |
77. Didn't I say |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MousePlayingDaffodil (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:44 AM Response to Reply #77 |
85. Well, as I said . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:45 AM Response to Reply #85 |
86. Sorry, should have just said pertinent reading materials. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 01:16 PM Response to Reply #5 |
11. how is this "legislation from the bench"? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:03 PM Response to Reply #11 |
35. See Reply #3. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
24601 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 10:01 PM Response to Reply #5 |
73. Like when "The Bench" reigns in executive branch Terrorist Surveillance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Doctor_J (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 11:09 AM Response to Original message |
7. DC Circuit is 10-4 fascists vs. real judges. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KamaAina (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 11:38 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Ask Bill Clinton about three-judge panels from the DC Circuit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 01:21 PM Response to Reply #7 |
12. so you think Judge Tatel is a fascist? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
starroute (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 12:29 PM Response to Original message |
9. Who were the judges in the case? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MousePlayingDaffodil (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 12:55 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. The three judges on the panel were . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
conspirator (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 01:34 PM Response to Original message |
13. This is the line in the sand. If we allow this we might as well let them put chains in our legs nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Original message |
14. US court rules against FCC on `net neutrality' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BanzaiBonnie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
15. If the FCC has no authority, then who does |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #15 |
17. That's a really good question. This issue is one of those big ones |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 09:37 PM Response to Reply #17 |
70. I'm paying attention. I'm paying very close attention. Very, very close attention |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #15 |
20. Congress. They need to pass a statute. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #20 |
33. Exactly! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #15 |
28. Actually the court is correct, they currently do not have that authority |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:29 PM Response to Reply #28 |
37. It simply cannot be that cut and dried. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:32 PM Response to Reply #37 |
47. In a nutshell |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 07:17 AM Response to Reply #47 |
76. "Was it "cut and dried"? Not exactly...." Which is what my post said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ananda (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
16. So what.. did Comcast buy the court? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #16 |
31. no. the court followed the law. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:32 PM Response to Reply #31 |
38. Meh. Court decisions usually indicate one bias or another. Otherwise, why are there so many 5-4 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:41 PM Response to Reply #38 |
50. even assuming that the judges were "biased" that doesn't mean they were "bought" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:21 AM Response to Reply #50 |
80. Again, I know what you were responding to. And, again, I saw something in your post on which I |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 11:23 AM Response to Reply #80 |
94. What evidence do you have that Judge Tatel is a "corporatist" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ButterflyBlood (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:52 AM Response to Reply #38 |
87. Actually most SCOTUS decisions are unanimous |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 09:18 AM Response to Reply #87 |
89. So not the point of my post. And I never said most SCOTUS decisions were |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
whats_a_zip (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 03:20 PM Response to Reply #31 |
95. Then the law is wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bennyboy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
18. OH GOD NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #18 |
19. You can say that again. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lbrtbell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #18 |
24. It's high time people rally against Comcast |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tsuki (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
21. Shouldn't that read, "Activist US court"? I don't mind recycling old talking points. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #21 |
32. But it wasn't . The current law just does not support this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Plucketeer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
22. Ah - the benefits of corporate control! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
23. K&R n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onehandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
25. I hope this part is true. Read this near the end of the article ---> |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. Thanks for catching that critical point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lazarus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:38 PM Response to Reply #25 |
27. very nice catch |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #25 |
29. Free Press is wrong about that scenario |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #29 |
30. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:34 AM Response to Reply #30 |
83. The same is likely to be true of any legislation on this, though. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:31 AM Response to Reply #29 |
82. Legislation would be fought hard and long, too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 09:35 AM Response to Reply #82 |
91. you are right about that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 11:11 AM Response to Reply #82 |
93. It indeed would be, but it is the only viable long term answer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Doctor_J (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:48 PM Response to Reply #25 |
40. However |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 09:43 PM Response to Reply #25 |
71. And we all know what happens when appeal is made to SCOTUS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 03:46 PM Response to Original message |
39. Is this a victory for free speech on the net or no? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
activa8tr (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:17 PM Response to Reply #39 |
43. The FCC is arguing in FAVOR of Net Neutrality ! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. "A federal appeals court struck down the FCC's efforts to enforce its "net neutrality" principles" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:46 PM Response to Reply #44 |
51. its not "anti-FCC" or anti--net neutrality. its a ruling that the FCC lacked the authority |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DuaneBidoux (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:02 PM Response to Original message |
41. we are beginning to reap the results of steady right wing appointments under Republicans. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:12 PM Response to Reply #41 |
42. How so? The author of the opinion was named to the court by Bill Clinton |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:29 PM Response to Reply #42 |
46. Clinton governed center right. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:35 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. the post I responded to suggested the judges were repub appointments |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 07:32 AM Response to Reply #49 |
78. I know what you were responding to. I was responding to your statement that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 07:33 AM Response to Reply #49 |
79. Self delete. Dupe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 04:33 PM Response to Original message |
48. Well, we could start hammering our Reps and Senators, but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lakerstan (599 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Original message |
52. Federal appeals court rules for Comcast and against FCC on 'net neutrality' case |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Joanne98 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. DAMN! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ixion (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
54. A sad ruling for the internet... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Joanne98 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
55. Fucking Comcast! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BumRushDaShow (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
56. Ugh. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gilpo (601 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
57. Need to get Congress to give them the authority, then don't we? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #57 |
61. Indeed that is the only option |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
58. MOTHERFUCKERS! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Enthusiast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
59. Fascism! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #59 |
62. You are aware that the entire network is private property? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Enthusiast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #62 |
65. So what is you point? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProgressiveProfessor (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #65 |
69. That the court was correct, the FCC does not CURRENTLY have the authority to enforce Net Neutrality |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
high density (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
60. Time for Congress to give FCC the proper authority then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jamastiene (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
63. RIP Freedom on the internet. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #52 |
64. Congress is working on giving the FCC clearer authority per this article |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grand Taurean (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #64 |
66. About time. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karynnj (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #66 |
67. Markey and Kerry have been working on this for years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Apr-06-10 05:14 PM Response to Reply #67 |
68. actually, the reason various members of Congress have been working on this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:40 AM Response to Reply #68 |
84. In your opinion. The Kerry quote in Reply 64 says otherwise. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 09:32 AM Response to Reply #84 |
90. actually Kerry's statement is completely consistent with my post |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
No Elephants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:29 AM Response to Reply #67 |
81. The fact that they have been working on it for years reinforces my Reply # 45. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 12:08 AM Response to Original message |
75. This is a big battle that must be won. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jefferson23 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 08:56 AM Response to Original message |
88. See Democracy Now interview, the transcript is not yet available but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Romulox (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Apr-07-10 09:41 AM Response to Original message |
92. If "net neutrality" is similiar in concept to how cable tv is run, I DON'T WANT IT. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu Oct 17th 2024, 11:03 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC