Washington state’s net neutrality law is the beginning of a big headache for Internet providers

30 comments

  1. dragsterhund

    |Author

    Don’t want to have to comply with 50 different sets of state regulations?

    Easy.

    Don’t throttle, block, or set up paid fast lanes. Keep the internet open and unrestricted, and you’ll only have to have one, open, set of policies. This is ONLY a problem if the ISPs intent is to limit or throttle access. They’re choosing to make this a problem

  2. almightySapling

    |Author

    “50 different regulations would be haaaard”

    Well maybe you should have thought of that before you pissed off everyone to the point of forcing each state to do so.

    Deal with it, scum.

  3. ahkian

    |Author

    Well if they didn’t want this to happen they shouldn’t have pushed to roll back net neutrality. I have no sympathy. They did this to themselves.

  4. Qarthos

    |Author

    Oh boo fuckin hoo.

    If they didn’t want a more complex system, they shouldn’t have bought and installed Idjit Pai to fuck with net neutrality in the first place.

    You reap what you sow, and they seeded a power void by removing a vital aspect.

  5. RogueStudio

    |Author

    Excuse me while I play the world’s smallest fiddle, my progressive legislature is actually doing the job the majority of the state voted in to do.

    Oh, and if Xfinity leaves, fine, I’m tired of the deal that my city council signed with them years ago. It’s created an annoying monopoly, poor speeds/service, and no faster alternative. In Boston I actually had CHOICES, including fiber. Not so in the 2nd biggest city in WA state. Enough.

  6. Big headache? They caused their own headache.

    They can either **try** to maintain 50 different lets of laws and regulations and risk running afoul of even one of them (which would result in lawsuits), or they can follow the previous NN rules and save themselves the risk of lawsuits, and spending a decade in a court room and losing money that way.

    But you know the ISP’s, they’ll probably risk breaking laws and heading into the courtroom over and over because they don’t want to follow NN rules anywhere.

  7. Blewedup

    |Author

    all that really needs to be done is for the state of CA to say that no government contracts or government funds can be used to buy internet, phone, or tv service from a provider who doesn’t adhere to net neutrality.

    that alone would push them into a nationwide standardized approach.

    CA did this with furniture and many other goods. they require certain industries to do certain things if they want to sell in CA. most manufacturers just decided to do things one way in order to simplify manufacturing, and every state in the union gets the CA version of whatever they make.

  8. MetaBotch

    |Author

    You had Internet regulation in the US in one nice, convenient federal bundle. But you went ahead and trashed the federal regulation so good luck having to now work with 50 different net neutrality laws across the country.

  9. Arg3nt

    |Author

    Oh, I’m sorry Comcast *et al*. Did your plan to make even more money by fucking over consumers go wrong? Geez, that’s too bad. Have you thought about just doing the right thing for your customers? No? You can’t do that? Then I guess you’ll just have to work within our new state laws. Geez, that’s terrible.

    https://i.imgur.com/Zzv2UKA.gifv

  10. ICPGr8Milenko

    |Author

    “As we have cautioned repeatedly, we simply cannot have 50 different regulations governing [broadband],” said USTelecom, a major trade association for Internet providers. “It’s time for Congress to step up and enact legislation to make permanent and sustainable rules governing net neutrality.”

    Managing the experience for 50 states is too hard, but I’m positive they’ll have a system for managing the millions of websites in relation to who’s paying for the priority treatment.

  11. >“One of the fears of Internet service providers is a patchwork of different state regulations,” said Jeff Kagan, an independent telecom analyst. “It’s much easier to manage and work from one national set.”

    Well then the FCC should have done its goram job!

  12. skimbro

    |Author

    Aw, poor telecomm companies. What’s wrong, you got what you wanted, didn’t you? You got your puppet to repeal the federal rules. Did you seriously not expect everyone to come out of the fucking woodwork? Now you get to face your worst fear: patchwork regulations. Now you don’t just have one set of rules to follow, you’ll have around 50 sets to follow, each slightly different, each a pain in the ass. And failing to follow any will result in losses. You made your fucking bed, now you get to sleep in it. You had it better before. Now everyone is pissed at you. Your life is not going to be getting any easier.

  13. 00benallen

    |Author

    Good! Straight up, I don’t care about the headaches of some of the richest and most powerful companies on Earth. Other companies that provide infrastructure have to deal with exactly this same issue, they can too!

  14. cinderful

    |Author

    I think the legislation for each state should be so complex, and punishing that the ISPs are gonna beg to reinstate federal net neutrality.

    States need to straight up start punishing the mega ISPs who don’t use build out funds and don’t share (public) infrastructure like they’re supposed to.

    The states are seeking blood now.

  15. Except Washington state can’t do anything if it happens upstream.

    So totally fine if Comcast just happens to partner with another ISP who does this on their behalf in another state…. or if another ISP does it on their own authority.

    People forget your connection to any website generally travels across at least 2 ISP’s… likely more. Net Neutrality only works if they all abide by the same rules.

  16. oced2001

    |Author

    “As we have cautioned repeatedly, we simply cannot have 50 different regulations governing [broadband],” said USTelecom, a major trade association for Internet providers. “It’s time for Congress to step up and enact legislation to make permanent and sustainable rules governing net neutrality.”

    Eat a dick you asshole.

  17. Wouldn’t it be beautiful if this spread across the country and IPs end up losing a lot more than if they hadn’t pushed (paid) the FCC to end Net Neutrality? Man, that would be glorious. Ajit would be hated by everyone after that.

  18. go_kartmozart

    |Author

    Good. They made this bed, now they can fucking sleep in it. I hope all the states make such a messy patchwork of regulation for them that they BEG to be treated like a utility under TitleII.

  19. TheBobWiley

    |Author

    Funny how businesses and lobbiest groups and such are always playing the “states rights” card when they want to circumvent federal laws. Look how quickly that tune changes when the states try to make laws that protect citizens which differ from federal law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Join the change!
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Be the first to get the latest updates on disruptive innovation straight to your email inbox.
Click to Submit
Join today.
close-link