FCC

In an interesting turn of events, Comcast won a court battle to thwart regulation that’s paving the way for the FCC to respond in a way to increase regulation. This all stems from a court case where in 2007, Comcast “throttled” its users by blocking access to filesharing service BitTorrent. Net neutrality, which is supported by companies who rely on the Internet for business, such as Google and Amazon, is the absence of such throttling. Wearetheweb is an activist group fighting for net neutrality. The FCC stepped in, using the doctrine of “common carriers”, i.e., networks used for the public good. The broadband providers argue that they’re the ones spending billions on the infrastructure and therefore should be able to manage their systems in a manner they see fit. Comcast argued that the FCC rules had no teeth and are not the same as law, therefore the FCC order to stop throttling was illegal. The FCC has two courses of action at its disposal::

1. Request Congress to give it explicit authority to regulate broadband.
2. Appeal today’s decision.

Ben Scott, policy director for the public interest group, Free Press, noted::

“Comcast swung an ax at the FCC to protest the BitTorrent order…And they sliced right through the FCC’s arm and plunged the ax into their own back.”

Companies and industries tend to bend over backwards to regulate themselves to some extent or another, in order to thwart regulation. I find Comcast’s war with the FCC to be poor strategy and adding fuel to the fire of consumer dissatisfaction with telcos and broadband providers. This court case paves the way for the FCC to up the ante and given the FCC and the Obama administration support net neutrality.

As for Derveaux, here’s more on her story.

Twitterversion:: FCC loses case on net neutrality against Comcast, but will this just cause them to reclassify broadband? Possible strategic Comcast #fail. @Prof_K

Song:: Manish-‘Series of Tubes {Net Neutrality Dance Mix}

The US Supreme court just ruled on a case {5-4}, upholding the FCC citing of the network for violating decency rules.  The incidents stemmed from live broadcasts and involved Cher and Nicole Ritchie blurting out expletives during Billboard Music Awards in the early 200s.  Here’s the Cher “incident,” where she’s receiving an award and responding to her critics.  Nicole Ritchie’s transgressions involved banter with then-BFF Paris Hilton::

“Paris Hilton: Now Nicole, remember, this is a live show, watch the bad language.

Nicole Richie: Okay, God.

Paris Hilton: It feels so good to be standing here tonight.

Nicole Richie: Yeah, instead of standing in mud and . Why do they even call it “The Simple Life?” Have you ever tried to get cow shit out of a Prada purse? It’s not so fucking simple.”

–“FCC v. Fox Television Stations,” Bill Long

Those really interested can view the oral arguments in Fox Television v. FCC in the 3rd. Circuit Court of Appeals.  

Under the George W. Bush administration, the FCC made it a point to uphold decency rules.  Some critics argued that the FCC wasn’t applying standards uniformly.  Broadcast TV airings of Saving Private Ryan, full of “f-bombs” managed to make it through without scrutiny.  The FCC has been a target for years on the topic of censorship and their “oversight” on the public airwaves.  Comedian, George Carlin, made a name for himself with his “7 Words” schtick that’s a commentary on the FCC.

The Power of the Word in the Age of YouTube

In this case, Justice Scalia stated, “Even when used as an expletive, the F-word’s power to insult and offend derives from its sexual meaning.”  On the dissenting side, Justice Stevens countered with, “The FCC’s shifting and impermissibly vague indecency policy only imperils these broadcasters and muddles the regulatory landscape.”  Stevens noted with more than a bit of irony that the FCC polices for words with loose, at best, associations with sex and excrement, but has no issue with commercials for erectile dysfunction or going to the bathroom.

Bill Long makes a valid point, in my opinion, by bringing up the Internet and YouTube.  Indecent content abounds online, with easy access and largely unfettered by regulatory bodies. What is the point of the FCC upholding decency standards?  What exactly are they?  Apparently, you cannot say expletives, but you can sell all the sexual innuendo sex you want::

Warning:: content may be offensive & idiotic

I’ve been up in Canada all week, a land far more lenient than the US in terms of content restriction.  The FCC equivalent, the CRTC, tends to only intervene in serious or controversial matters.  So, in Canada, you can drop an F-bomb, but not between 6:00 AM to 9:00 PM.  So, when the Trailer Park Boys comes on at 6:00PM, it’s bleeped, but not at midnight.  Those unfamiliar with the TBP…enjoy.  This one goes out to Justice Scalia::

Warning::  content may be offensive & idiotic, but funny.