Column originally published at LibertyColumns.com on May 17, 2014. Reproduced here per the shutdown of LibertyColumns.com.
It’s everywhere. All over Twitter, #OccupyFCC. Even on the discussion boards of Tea Party Nation. There is no avoiding the fact that the world supports new Internet regulation in light of the FCC’s decision that companies are permitted to pay ISPs for priority access.
I have warned several times on my blog about how regulation of the Internet right now is a bad idea. In fact, my entire blog is full of examples on regulation of anything right now is a bad idea.
Rather than repeat my comments, I will list eight quotes proving what happens when we let Congress and the FCC come up with their definition of “neutral”. While you read these quotes, keep in mind what “net neutrality regulation” is – regulation.
“With the FCC already promising exceptions from net neutrality for copyright-enforcement, we fear that 2010 could be the year when the FCC’s idea of an ‘Open Internet’ proves quite different from what many have been hoping for.”
-Electronic Frontier Foundation, 2010 (source
“And, you know, that typical politician smile he [an unnamed US senator] had suddenly faded from his face, and his eyes started burning this fiery red. And he started shouting at me, said, ‘Those people on the Internet, they think they can get away with anything! They think they can just put anything up there, and there’s nothing we can do to stop them! They put up everything! They put up our nuclear missiles, and they just laugh at us! Well, we’re going to show them! There’s got to be laws on the Internet! It’s got to be under control!'”
-Aaron Swartz (1986-2013) (source
“Thanks to important bipartisan compromises, we’ve put together a strong bill [to protect “real reporters”] that balances the need for national security with that of a free press.”
-Chuck Schumer (D-NY), 2013 (source
“…the U.K. Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit has been using its ‘super flagger’ authority to seek reviews – and removal – of videos it considers extremist. The news sparked concern that Google lets the U.K. government censor videos that it doesn’t like, and prompted Google to disclose more details about the program.”
-Wall Street Journal, 2014 (source
“When Private Bradley [aka Chelsea] Manning put his conscience ahead of his personal well-being by allegedly releasing important information to the world’s public via WikiLeaks, he was put into an inhumane solitary confinement and is now facing charges that carry the possibility of him spending the rest of his life in prison.”
-Ray McGovern, Antiwar.com, 2011 (source
“By harboring this known cybercriminal [Edward Snowden] they pose a clear and present danger to the American people. I don’t want to hear about extradition or rendition or any of that nonsense. This man is a traitor and if we don’t get him within 24 hours I say we need to start bombing the hell out of Hong Kong…We could probably destroy their infrastructure and occupy the entire country by the end of the week.”
John McCain (RINO-AZ), 2013 (source
“The medicine prescribed by the Messenger of Allah is the execution of those involved [in the “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” Facebook protests of 2010.]”
-Anwar al-Awlaki, Al’Qaeda terrorist (1971-2011) (source
And to sum it all up, Number 8 (emphasis mine):
“A Russia-led proposal calling for sweeping new governmental powers to regulate cyberspace could enable countries to block Web content and wrest control of allotment of Internet addresses from a U.S.-based body. The proposal, co-signed by China, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates…to rewrite a long-standing treaty on international communications…a leaked draft of the Russia-led proposals would give countries equal rights to manage the Internet including in regard to the allotment, assignment and reclamation of Internet numbering. This could allow governments to render websites within their borders inaccessible, even via proxy servers or other countries. It also could allow for multinational pacts in which countries could terminate access to websites at one another’s request.”
-Reuters, December 9, 2012 (source