And one of the biggest regulatory threats to the Internet is “net neutrality.”Techdirt disagrees:
In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It would put the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities and higher prices.
President Obama this week came out aggressively for net neutrality and turning the Internet into a public utility. Some in the online community have embraced this call, thinking that cheaper prices would result. But when has that worked? Government-regulated utilities invariably destroy innovation and freedom. Which is more innovative, the U.S. Postal Service or Facebook and Twitter? Which is better for consumers, city taxi commissions or Uber and Lyft?
If the federal government seizes the power to regulate Internet pricing and goods and services, the regulations will never end.
Not a single part of that is accurate. Under the proposed plan, the government would not be in charge of determining any of those. Rather, it would make it so that no one (including the internet access providers) could block what types of products and services can be delivered.Techdirt could give a similar defense of Obamacare -- the government does not determine health insurance prices.
Obamacare is causing prices to go up because it limits what kind of health insurance policies you can buy. You usually have to pay for more coverage than you need in some areas, and less than you want in others. The purpose of net neutrality is for the FCC to regulate internet services, so that if you pay for music download bandwidth you also have to pay for porn download bandwidth. While some people have complaints about their internet service providers, FCC regulations are unlikely to address them. So in that sense, net neutrality is like Obamacare.