Technology

59572 readers

3219 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

194

Net neutrality’s court fate depends on whether broadband is “telecommunications” (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Net neutrality’s court fate depends on whether broadband is “telecommunications”::We dig deep into how Supreme Court's "major questions doctrine" could affect FCC.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Aidinthel@reddthat.com 85 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I had the same question, so for anyone who doesn't want to dig through the article:

To defend its 2017 repeal of net neutrality rules, the Pai FCC argued that broadband isn't a telecommunications service because Internet providers also offer DNS (Domain Name System) services and caching as part of the broadband package. A judge said the Pai FCC was entitled to deference on this opinion—even if it didn't make a lot of sense.

Basically, Trump's lackeys legally classified broadband as an "information service" to screw the American people and the question is whether the Supreme Court will go along with this blatant nonsense.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 38 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And telephones use numbers and they print phone books. Lol. That’s just ridiculous. It seems on the face of it to be a purposeful misinterpretation to skirt the law. Could there be consequences for that?

[–] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could there be consequences for that?

In theory, yes. In practice... Ajit Pai is a lawyer and he's probably smart enough to avoid doing anything that is blatantly illegal. Or at least, avoid doing anything that would leave behind an evidence trail that could see him taking the fall for anything illegal.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago

Plenty of lawyers don't really know what they're doing, especially in Trump's orbit. I wouldn't be surprised if he was just betting on being on the side of political power and being able to get away with it.

[–] Takumidesh@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

And cell service isn't telecommunications because they offer caller ID and voicemail.

What stupid logic.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why does offering DNS somehow matter?

[–] vector_zero@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

I'm not saying I agree with it, but it kind of makes sense in a roundabout way. If you're resolving domain names and routing traffic to those domains, rather than simply routing traffic, then you're providing a more complete service.

I'd equate it to a phone company that includes a human operator as part of the service bundle, as opposed to you having to dial the numbers manually.

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

Why didn’t anyone sue when this ridiculous reclassification happened under Pai? If there was a lawsuit and it failed, I should hope this sane reclassification prevails. But we don’t have a very partisan court system right now.