Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Net User Bill Of Rights Proposed By Senate


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Scarlett

Scarlett

    Bleeping Diva


  • Members
  • 7,479 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:As always I'm beside myself ;)
  • Local time:11:46 AM

Posted 20 June 2006 - 08:46 AM

WASHINGTON--The latest Net neutrality provisions in a mammoth Senate communications bill stopped short of giving Internet companies and consumer advocacy groups all the assurances they've requested. By Anne Broache Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published: June 19, 2006, 10:28 AM PDT Last modified: June 19, 2006, 11:41 AM PDT Unveiled formally at a briefing here for reporters on Monday, new provisions in the latest draft of the sweeping Consumer's Choice and Broadband Deployment Act would allow the Federal Communications Commission to police subscribers' complaints of "interference" in their Internet activities and to levy fines on violators.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 jgweed

jgweed

  • Members
  • 28,473 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Il.
  • Local time:11:46 AM

Posted 20 June 2006 - 08:52 AM

The principle of net neutrality is one that all BC members should ask Congress to provide for in any legislation they are considering, unless of course, they support an oligarchical internet.
Regards,
John

Edited by jgweed, 20 June 2006 - 08:53 AM.

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should be silent.

#3 Heretic Monkey

Heretic Monkey

  • Members
  • 1,122 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NCSU
  • Local time:12:46 PM

Posted 20 June 2006 - 12:54 PM

I fully support more privacy on the internet, and whole-heartedly disagree with the oligarchical internet..... whatever that is...

As long as the government can't just demand to get internet traffic records, ip addy's, etc., i'm happy. Oh, and down w/ censorship too :thumbsup:

#4 rms4evr

rms4evr

  • Members
  • 812 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:East Coast
  • Local time:12:46 PM

Posted 20 June 2006 - 07:20 PM

This is great news (if it passes, that is)! I want to surf the internet in peace, thank you very much! :thumbsup:

#5 Jesse Bassett

Jesse Bassett

  • Members
  • 418 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Rosemount, MINN.
  • Local time:11:46 AM

Posted 21 June 2006 - 12:17 AM

I hope this passes. We need to preserve the Internet!
Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 l McAfee Total Protection l Super AntiSpyware Free Edition l AdAware SE Personal l Spyware Blaster l Spyware Guard l Safe Eyes 2007

#6 yano

yano

    I can see what you post!


  • Members
  • 6,469 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:46 AM

Posted 24 June 2006 - 09:28 PM

As long as the government can't just demand to get internet traffic records, ip addy's, etc., i'm happy. Oh, and down w/ censorship too :thumbsup:


Agrred.

Net Netruality has to stay. We can't have the Internet go from a freeway to a highway.

Edited by yano, 24 June 2006 - 09:28 PM.


#7 phawgg

phawgg

    Learning Daily


  • Members
  • 4,543 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Washington State, USA
  • Local time:08:46 AM

Posted 12 July 2006 - 08:14 PM

I'm going to have trouble appreciating the US government deciding on behalf of all other nations what the Internet Users Bill of Rights is.
Sounds more economically driven, ie: FFC policing/budgeting on the rise.
Election year constituant pleasing also comes to mind.
What can the US do to govern the world?
Why?

Perhaps they simply intend to enforce laws regarding limited matters such as interstate commerce,
copyright infringement of US citizens, tax evasion issues, Moral Majority issues, and continue to
attempt to track terrorism website actions & communication?

Its more likely a braoder-base approach that will involve decades of Supreme Court interpretation though.
Industrial/defense/politally driven spying, manipulation & disinformational confusion coupled with
age-old smokescreen diversions akin to blaming computers and/or something attached
for the problems it needs more money from taxes to combat unfortunately
turns the headline's words to glowing neon in my mind's eye.

Edited by phawgg, 12 July 2006 - 08:27 PM.

patiently patrolling, plenty of persisant pests n' problems ...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users