|
They do give providers flexibility to manage data on their systems to deal with network congestion and unwanted traffic as long as they publicly disclose those practices. They do not specifically ban "paid prioritization," where a provider might charge more for faster transmission of data, but they outlaw "unreasonable network discrimination." Wireless carriers are also barred from blocking access to any websites or competing services, but they are given more leeway to manage data traffic because wireless systems have less network bandwidth. Even supporters acknowledged that the rules are mainly about preserving the status quo of a system that is generally working well. But absent the rules, said Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., "there would be a major shift in power on the Internet to the broadband providers from the content providers." He said there was legitimate fear among nonprofit and religious groups that they would be consigned to a lower tier because they could not pay a higher price for premium service. "So your Web page from Nike might load faster than your Web page from the Catholic Church because, if there was tiered access, who would be more likely to pay for the speed of the access?" He also cited the actions of autocratic states such as China in blocking Internet content in saying the government must make clear that providers cannot discriminate against customers because of political or philosophical differences. ___ The bill is
H.J.Res. 37. ___ Online: Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor