• balloflearning@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sounds like posturing to add a new fee for being required to list their fees if their weak argument gets thrown out by the FCC.

    • takeda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      With ISP what is really need is Local-loop unbundling but extending to ISPs.

      Those that are old enough to use DSL in early 2000, might remember there was a lot of ISPs to chose from. The reason for it was that due to Title II telco companies were required to lease lines to their competitors. When cable started to be popular, ISPs lobbied politicians to categorize it under Title I which removed that requirement. We got Internet back to be categorized as Title II, but this specific rule was excluded and this is what is necessary to bring the competition.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seriously. We’ve even pushed it onto cell providers, which has been great for consumers - yet we let ISPs push laws which make nonprofit community options illegal in many states

        We’ve paid for their networks many times over at this point, and yet we still have some of the worst Internet in the developed world