FCC loses Comcast challenge

[babylonsister]

FCC loses Comcast challenge

By Cecilia Kang
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 6, 2010; 4:43 PM


Comcast on Tuesday won its federal lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission in a ruling that undermines the agency's ability to regulate Internet service providers just as it unrolls a sweeping broadband agenda.

The decision also sparks pressing questions on how the agency will respond, with public interest groups advocating that the FCC attempt to move those services into a regulatory regime clearly under the agency's control.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a 3-0 decision, ruled that the FCC lacked the authority to require Comcast, the nation's biggest broadband services provider, to treat all Internet traffic equally on its network.

That decision -- based on a 2008 ruling under former FCC chairman Kevin Martin -- addresses Comcast's argument that the agency "failed to justify exercising jurisdiction" when it ruled Comcast violated broadband principles by blocking or slowing a peer-sharing Web site, Bit Torrent.

But it also unleashed a broader debate over the agency's ability to regulate broadband service providers such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon Communications.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/06/AR2010040600742.html

[annabanana]

1. This is serious, folks...

Wingnuts and Moonbats unite!

We ALL have a vested interest in keeping the internet equally available to those with no pockets as well as those with deep ones.

FreePress.org sent an email about this today..
see:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8100432

[xchrom]

2. Earlier on in a judges career -- they often run for

Election for their local seats.

Corporations often contribute to those elections.
Some in significant money numbers.

These judges establish a relationship with corporations.

That now they turn out rulings in favour of corporations
should come as no surprise.

And it's only going to get worse.
And that is thanks to both political parties.

[onenote]

6. wrong about 2 of the three judges in this case

Only one of the three judges in this case ever ran for election--David Sentelle was elected to a state court judgeship in North Carolina early in his career.

The other two judges have never run for elective office.

The author of the opinion, Judge Tatel, was named to the court by Bill Clinton. Prior to becoming a judge, he was lawyer in private practice and a law school lecturer as well as a noted civil rights and education lawyer. Among other things, he helped found the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, served as Director of the National Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and was Director of the Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare under Jimmy Carter. He never ran for local office.

The other judge, Arthur Randolph, was appointed to the court by bush I. Prior to joining the court served as Jimmy Carter's solicitor general. He also had stints in private practice, teaching, and serving in government.

I don't have the statistics, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of federal judges who have ever run for office is pretty small.

[xchrom]

7. I wasn't trying to be specific about these judges.

But one out of three? Not great odds.

[onenote]

10. two out of three is pretty good odds

and of the 13 active members of the DC Circuit, Sentelle is the only one that ever ran for office. (James Buckley, an inactive member of the court, is a former US Senator).

Randomly searching through other Circuits, I have yet to find another federal judge who ran for elective office. There may be some, but they are far and away the exception, not the rule.

[blm]

11. Bush stacked these courts with pro-fascist judges. Just like he did with SC.

Fascist agenda has been in full swing, but, corpmedia won't talk about it, will they?

[ReverendDeuce]

3. HANDS OFF MY E-WEBS, PRES OMABA!!!

I can see the teabaggers' signage now...

[ReverendDeuce]

4. Drudge reports the story as a WIN for FREEDOM... LOL

Look at the Drudgers comment on CNet... their comments are absurd!

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20001825-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20v

[LetsgoWings13]

5. tea bags lovin this shit

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. With all the threads already on this we needed another one?

[babylonsister]

9. So sorry I didn't see the other threads, and

quit your whining. Don't read them if you're already so aware. Obviously others weren't.