GRRR! Time-Warner Tells FCC to "Shutup about Net Neutrality"...SIGN the petition!

[Triana]

"Now is not the time... to engage in a debate about the need for net neutrality obligations," Time Warner Cable tells the FCC. But why not, other than the fact that TWC is taking a beating over bandwidth caps?

Time Warner Cable tells FCC to shut up about net neutrality

Responding to the outcry over its proposed regimen of price-gouging bandwidth caps, Time Warner Cable says that it's anxious to explain its intentions to the public. "We appreciate the feedback we've received," Time Warner Chief Operating Officer Landel Hobbs wrote in a blog entry last week. "We'll look forward to more dialogue as we progress in these trials." Hobbs is referring to test market tryouts that could leave consumers paying access rates of six dollars a month per gigabyte of data. In fact, TWC is laying out a "lower priced option" that would have "lighter Internet users" forking over 15 bucks a billing period for a single gig.

But apparently the company doesn't want said dialogue to go too far, telling the Federal Communications Commission that the agency should watch its words as it advises the government on how to spend the recovery plan's broadband stimulus money.

"Now is not the time, nor is this the appropriate proceeding, to engage in a debate about the need for net neutrality obligations," two TWC lawyers warned the FCC on Monday. The discussion should stay strictly focused on broadband deployment, the company insists. "Debates in this proceeding about new net neutrality regulations would only divert attention from these important goals, delaying the distribution of funds while generating considerable contention when the Commission should instead be fostering a spirit of collaboration."

Golly gosh, an observer might wonder, when exactly would be the right time to have a discussion over at the FCC about bandwidth cap plans that potentially ding consumers for accessing non-cable provider video content?

MORE...


http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2009/04/time-warner-cable-to-fcc-shut-up-about-net-neutrality.ars

SIGN THE PETITION TO YOUR REPS AT THE LINK BELOW!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5454264&mesg_id=5454264

[RandomThoughts]

1. Warned the FCC? So who runs america, the elected officials of the people

Or the elected CEO's of the shareholders.

break up their company based on media consolidation law, or anti trust law, or just because the whole point of a government agency that advocates for the people, being warned by a corporation thats only goal is to make money for a few shareholders, or maybe a goal of maintaining a high control over information sources, is plain wrong.

[Triana]

2. Exactly! The nerve of those b@$tards!

The FCC ought to tell them where to put their d@mned tiered pricing. This is freaking outrageous.

[robinlynne]

3. how about free interet for the country, period? Especially if we the people are

funding bandwidth in the stimulus package....
again.

[Triana]

5. Yes. We pay for it in the stimulus. Then we pay for it AGAIN when we get their "service"

(more like WE "service" them, actually).

This is SO WRONG on so many levels. And the one you mentioned is yet another one.

[onenote]

10. and free electricity too?

since we're going to fund energy efficient wind power through tax dollars?

What else should we get for free because of the stimulus. Probably a good long list. Of course, it kinda defeats the purpose of stimulating the economy to build something and then give it away for free.

PS - the stimulus money is dedicated for "unserved" and "underserved" areas. Do you think areas that already have Internet service, built with private investment, should get it for free?

[robinlynne]

11. built with private investment? I belive we the people payed for the

networks some years back.... We gave millions or billions for all the fiber optic cable to the phone companies already, remember?

[onenote]

15. didn't we pay for the phone wires? and the electric lines?

why do we pay for telephone service or electricity?

THe government didn't pay for the wires going into your home. A phone and/or cable company did. ANd the government didn't give them the money.

[robinlynne]

12. P.S. Free inernet is not a new idea. It would promote great growth in our country. It just gets

killed by AT&T every time the idea comes about. Think Philadelphia.

[Uncle Joe]

14. Or as Elton John sang, "Philadephia Freedom!"

:yourock:

[onenote]

16. "free" internet isn't free of course. Its just paid for by the taxpayers.

Or subsidized by private companies that then raise their rates to their customers to cover that cost.

Operating networks isn't like going outside and breathing fresh air. It costs money. Someone has to pay for it. So its not free.

And while I have no problem with municipalities trying to offer free wi-fi service if that's what their constituents want (heck I wouldn't mind free water or electricity if that's what everyone wanted) I have my doubts that a municipal service will stay on top of a rapidly evolvling technological environment. While that might not seem like an unreasonable risk, its one that puts the taxpayers in the position of holding the bag when it turns out the municipally-funded network needs a massive upgrade or needs to be abandoned.

[robinlynne]

17. WE paid for the upgrades anyway!!!! not the phone companies. They "couldn't

afford it", remember?

[onenote]

18. HUH?

Link?

[robinlynne]

19. several years ago. That is my point! fiber optic installation paid for with public funds, remember?

[onenote]

20. honestly, I don't remember

And I'm quite confident that the cable companies did not use any public money when they upgraded their plant to handle broadband. And Verizon and ATT haven't been using public money for their fiber upgrades either.

Not sure what you are referring to.

[kenfrequed]

4. I signed the petition.

[Triana]

6. THANK YOU!

I don't know how many Telecom lobbyists have bought our reps - I expect all of them. And I don't know the dollar amounts they paid for their influence (opensecrets.org anyone?) but dammit they need to hear from US too!

This is SUCH an unmitigated greedy, arrogant attitude on the part of TWC - and at a time when people are struggling like hell as it is!

Ugh.

[Uncle Joe]

7. Net Neutrality is of paramount importance,

Time Warner wants to trash the American People's First Amendment Rights by financial means.

They should get out of the business and sell *Tupperware.

*No offense intended against Tupperware.

Thanks for the thread, Triana.

[Triana]

8. Damn right it is Uncle Joe. And this is just why - attitudes and tactics like TW's

Heck, people are having trouble NOW paying their bills. Everyone needs internet access. TW wants to make it even harder for people. This goes against Obama's idea of internet access for all. WAY against it. So, I hope the Obama admin / our reps will stop this crap.

[onenote]

9. how much are people who use less than a gig/month paying now?

I think $15 may make it cheaper for those people in a lot of cases. My dad is not on a TW system, but the cheapest internet service his cable company offers is $20/month and I know he never uses anywhere near 1 gig in a month.

[derby378]

13. K&R! And signed! (n/t)