Once again the Courts has shown the American people that the corporations owns them

[Hutzpa]

A ruling by the courts has provided an opening for corporations to control the internet
from being nuetral. This ruling by the U.S. Courts of Appeals that the FCC lacks authority
on how corporations can grant equal access to individual will open the flood gate for
corporations to monitor and restrict bandwidth to Americans.

Once again the Courts has shown their lack of regards to American rights and their
continued efforts in the systematic dismantling of human rights.

:banghead:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36193558/ns/technology_and_science-security/

[elleng]

1. Please read the decision and stop blaming judges.

ttp://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdf

[Hutzpa]

2. Your link broken

and yes the Judges are selling our rights slowly.

[elleng]

3. Try again.

http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201004/08-1291-1238302.pdf

[Hutzpa]

4. It still does not explain

why the these three judges would justify granting rights to corporation to
control what we see and do on the internet.

[elleng]

5. Decision MUST BE READ as a legal document,

NOT ONE OF SOCIAL POLICY.

CONGRESS will have to address issue of FCC's jurisdiction, and that will be a real fight. Until then, FCC and courts have to deal with law as it stands now, and courts do their best to interpret such.

[Hutzpa]

6. Are you suggesting that

the courts ruling on this is correct? :shrug:

[elleng]

7. Yes, as a LEGAL DOCUMENT.

See the final paragraph:

'the allowance of wide latitude in the exercise of delegated powers is not the equivalent of untrammelled freedom to regulate activities over which the statute fails to confer Commission authority.'

[Igel]

12. You've got it backwards.

It's not like the judges have granted rights for corporations to control the Internet.

The corporations own and maintain the Internet, or at least most of it. There's been no due process to seize their property, nor to restrict the rights they have over the control of their property.

The long tradition of rights in the US and English common law is that you have rights; the government should protect them and not infringe on them without good cause. The government does not grant you rights. Any "right" the government grants is a privilege.

What you can see and do on the Internet is firmly up to what your contract with your ISP says you can see and do, subject to laws duly enacted and signed.

What many people apparently want is to have a group of unelected people in a committee room making the laws, saying what can be done with private property and what the regulations enforcing the laws they just made up are: Screw separation of powers, screw representative democracy if it's inconvenient. Then they want that coterie immune from having the judiciary actually interpret the laws and limits set by those laws.

Sometimes Democrats aren't firmly in democratic territory.

If you can't extend due process and civil liberties to those you disagree with, then you don't really like the idea of due process and civil liberties.

[Hutzpa]

13. What?

The corporations own and maintain the Internet, or at least most of it. There's been no due process to seize their property, nor to restrict the rights they have over the control of their property.

Oh yeah! since when? Is there something I'm missing, because I can't remember how much they bought
the internet for, just for your personal information, the corporations do not own the internet,
yes, they do provide access to get connected to the web, that should not be interpreted as they
owning the net.

[tammywammy]

8. No, the ruling was correct

The FCC was on thin ice with their argument in the first place. Congress needs to pass legislation giving the FCC authority.

[Hutzpa]

9. How so

defending consumers from ripped off merchants is the wrong thing to do now.

The courts are suppose to protect people from injustice, not to enable these
characters to further their exorbitant profits.

[tammywammy]

10. If the current law doesn't give the FCC jurisdiction then

Congress needs to amend or make a new law. That's how it's supposed to work.


edited to add: I suggest reading the thread in LBN. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4333930 onenote and progressive professor do a good job explaining it there.

[Tutonic]

11. Agree.