How does Verizon defend its actions in challenging Net Neutrality?
Verizon has challenged the FCC's rules on Internet Neutrality in a US Federal Court of Appeals and won that stage of the battle. Abolishing net neutrality means that internet service providers can provide different access levels to content providers based on their ability to pay: the richer the company, the faster the access. This means that money will drive your content. Also, it will allow internet service providers to choose and bundle content available to you much like the cable companies currently do. If you want a certain video delivery system like Hulu or Netflix, you might be forced to use a particular search engine that was bundled with it. So your choices will shrink, and your access to sites will shrink, all being controlled by the ISP. This includes your access to independent news sources, information websites, causes you may support, and small independent retailers.
I have been a Verizon customer for many years, and recently brought my husband over to Verizon from Sprint. If Verizon succeeds in this attempt to overturn FCC rules, I will be looking for a new carrier. I find the greed and undemocratic principles behind this effort to be unconscionable. I would like to know how Verizon defends its actions.
Sadly all carriers want Net Neutrality to fail, and will gladly take advantage of it's absence. If it sticks, or continues, the world will reap the benefits of a structured dismantling of free speech on the Internet, which as of right now is it's most potent medium.
The only good will be for those corporations that have gone from the world of profit into the world of greed. It'll also be good for those folks who believe that a police state is a safe state.
Start a new topic or ask questions in the open forum.
