mnottertail
Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
|
Yeah, that fuckin asswipe is as worthless and useless as any of your untutored opinions to date.
Since you are incapable of comprehension, cogitation, and even simple working knowledge in this matter, lets go ahead and look at the case:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/3AF8B4D938CDEEA685257C6000532062/$file/11-1355-1474943.pdf
There it is, and we await your vermiformous antics in interpreting page 4 in some way that it does not state what it states.
<snip>
it is popularly known, “net neutrality.” In Comcast Corp. v.
FCC, 600 F.3d 642 (D.C. Cir. 2010), we held that the
Commission had failed to cite any statutory authority that
would justify its order compelling a broadband provider to
adhere to open network management practices. AfterComcast,
the Commission issued the order challenged here—In re
Preserving the Open Internet, 25 F.C.C.R. 17905 (2010) (“the
Open Internet Order”)—which imposes disclosure,
anti-blocking, and anti-discrimination requirements on
broadband providers. As we explain in this opinion, the
Commission has established that section 706 of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 vests it with affirmative
authority to enact measures encouraging the deployment of
broadband infrastructure. The Commission, we further hold,
has reasonably interpreted section 706 to empower it to
promulgate rules governing broadband providers’ treatment of
Internet traffic, and its justification for the specific rules at
issue here—that they will preserve and facilitate the “virtuous
circle” of innovation that has driven the explosive growth of
the Internet—is reasonable and supported by substantial
evidence. That said, even though the Commission has general
authority to regulate in this arena, it may not impose
requirements that contravene express statutory mandates.
Given that the Commission has chosen to classify broadband
providers in a manner that exempts them from treatment as
common carriers, the Communications Act expressly prohibits
the Commission from nonetheless regulating them as such.
Because the Commission has failed to establish that the
anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules do not impose per
se common carrier obligations, we vacate those portions of the
Open Internet Order.
</snip>
We await massive spouting geysers of stupidity.
_____________________________
Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30
|
Ah the good news piles up - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
). If there aren't any other options, why aren't there any other options? What is preventing entrepreneurs from starting up companies to provide options? 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread