|
High court hands big victory to cable
High court hands big victory to cable
Court overturns ruling requiring cable companies to open up high-speed Internet lines to rivals.
June 27, 2005: 1:16 PM EDT
At issue in the case, FCC v. Brand X, was whether cable operators should be required under federal law to lease their cable lines to competitors, much the way local phone companies were forced years ago to open up their lines to long-distance phone companies.
The justices overturned the U.S. appeals court ruling by a 6-3 vote.
In a separate case Monday, the court ruled that software companies can be held liable for copyright infringement when individuals use their technology to download songs and movies illegally.
The unanimous decision handed the music and movie industries a crucial victory in their battle to curb Internet piracy but it was a big blow to technology companies. (For more on that case, click here).
In appealing to the Supreme Court in the Brand X case, the government and cable companies argued the U.S. appeals court had not extended the required deference to the FCC's expertise and decision-making process.
Justice Clarence Thomas agreed in the majority opinion that the appeals court had erred.
Justices Antonin Scalia, David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented.
The decision is a big victory for the Federal Communications Commission and major telecommunications companies, including Charter Communications (Research), Time Warner (Research) and SBC Communications (Research).
On the losing side are small Internet service providers, including Earthlink (Research), consumer rights groups, and a host of local governments.
The case, which turned on the technical classification of cable modem services under federal communications law, has been described as crucial to the future of competition in the market of high-speed, or broadband, Internet service -- including how fast broadband service becomes available, what features it has, and what it costs consumers.
User Comments
(These do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this site)
|
TheSherminator
|
Date: June 27, 2005 @ 2:01 PM
This ruling is the big defeat of the day, not mgm v grokster. |
|
compmore
|
Date: June 27, 2005 @ 5:24 PM
this is sad. it shows that the mega media giants have suceeded in getting congress to twist laws to allow for monopolistic control of all information in this country. And the courts are now afirming it.
|
|
zxilton
|
Date: June 27, 2005 @ 5:36 PM
You see they don't need communism to control the populace....they are just making laws as fast as some corporation can pony up the cash.
Americans (and soon the rest of us) are under the worst bondage there has ever been. They have scared the hell out of everyone by terrorist propaganda..now ou borders are locked up...and now they are trying to freeze your movements...controlling the way you sleep shit and eat (so to speak). Everywhere you look there is a billboard trying to sell you something and when you decide you don't want it...the corporations are buying laws to chain you to a stake to force you to look at it. They are buying rules so that anything that comes about that could give you freedom to choose or put the power back into the hands of the consumer....won't see the light of day now. Under this new ruling....it can easily be construed now that the internet itself in your country is now in question because it also can be held liable for infringing uses.
The people in that country need to wake up and start fighting back. Your liberty is being stolen away while you sit and eat happy meals and big macs. |
|
Q2
|
Date: June 27, 2005 @ 6:13 PM
Now this case was about opening the line to everyone so you don't have to include some silly test/check/access fee with the provider? |
|
CaptainMorgan
|
Date: June 28, 2005 @ 12:03 AM
I'll have to go with the FCC and the Courts here. The FCC designed this specifically so that both cable companies AND telecommuncations would BOTH have modivation to run high speed data communication services.
My current cable modem speed just went from 3Mb/s to 6Mb/s because the phone company started speeding up their DSL. All the cable company had to do was flip a switch. I could have been using 6Mb/s (or more?) years ago.
Since this FCC ruling was made, phone companies have starting run fiber to the home. Sure they don't have to share the access, but that will encourage someone else to fire up an 802.16a service.
Hell, I might subscribe to all of them at once. Think of the download speeds I'd get from pooling 3 separate links.
Maybe I'd share it with my neighbors using open WiFi. |
|
INeedAlover
|
Date: June 28, 2005 @ 12:35 PM
"The case..., has been described as crucial to the future of competition in the market of high-speed, or broadband, Internet service -- including how fast broadband service becomes available, what features it has, and what it costs consumers"
Another reason why the U.S. doesn't rank first in percentage of dwellings with broadband service. Another victory for monopolistic companies. Another victory for GREED. |
|
|
Navigation
