Time to Fight Back - https://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

show more
Upvotes (3)
Comments (1)
Sorted by:
  • [ – ] KennKong reply You're conflating two issues here. Net neutrality is about cable broadband providers being regulated as "information services" instead of "telecommunications services". If they were regulated as the latter, like DSL providers, they couldn't throttle competitors content. This has nothing to do with the banning of the Daily Stormer Today (hereinafter DST), because Google and Go Daddy aren't cable broadband providers. So if you're worried about net neutrality, switch to DSL, or CALL your representatives to get them to force the FCC to classify cable broadband as a telecommunication service. Don't bother writing, a poll of various representatives (federal, state and local) shows they pay much more attention to phone calls. There is a bit of misunderstanding as to terminology in the DST issue. Their domain registration isn't affected, it's their web-hosting. Go Daddy decided their site was a violation of their terms of service. This is an issue the DST should take up in court if they thin...morek they can show they didn't violate the TOS. In the meantime, DST should set up their own web servers. Their domain registration is safe, it's protected by international law. The non-indexing by Google is a tempest in a teapot. Google indexes much less than 1% of all accessible websites. This is merely anecdotal evidence, but they don't index mine (I check my server logs for bots, and I don't see many, from any search providers.) If DST wants traffic, they should buy ads. That said, Google's decision to target DST demonstrates their lack of value for the principle of free speech. You say companies shouldn't put ideology before business. That's not your call, that's up to their shareholders. Many businesses exist to promote certain ideologies. The problem I have with Google is that they are becoming a monopoly. If there were more competition for them, I doubt they would feel so free to risk their business on ideology. If they're the only game in town, then they can fuck over anyone they want. I think we share a loathing for over-regulation, but these issues show the need for appropriate regulation. Cable broadband should be regulated like telcos, Cable TV should be regulated like broadcasters, and Google should be broken up so its domination in search (which they're entitled to, they earned it) doesn't allow it to dominate competition in other areas as well.
    • [ – ] Bitchspot parent reply I think it's all part of a bigger issue. Yes, a lot of net neutrality is ISPs being able to throttle content that doesn't make them money. But what's the real difference between that and ISPs and other content providers deciding that they don't like the content, therefore they're not going to let you see it? It's still ultimately censorship for whatever reason they justify it. It's still a company deciding what you can and cannot see for their own benefit. I also didn't say it was a domain registration issue, I said Go Daddy is a domain registrar. This is yet another case where a company is deciding who can and cannot speak because the provider doesn't like what they have to say. I have a problem with that. Add to that the fact that Google has already openly said that if they don't like something, maybe it might not show up in their search results. It isn't like censorship, according to them, they just won't let you see it, which is exactly what censorship is. I agree that G...moreoogle has reached the point where they have too much influence over the Internet, earned or not. Anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws exist for a reason. No one should have that kind of control.
      • [ – ] KennKong parent reply The real difference is like this. Net neutrality is like AT&T giving you a shitty connection when you call a Sprint customer. They are violating the law and the terms of your contract. The Go Daddy/DST issue is like AT&T cutting off your phone service because you have used it to make bomb threats. You have violated the terms of the contract. IF DST feels that they have not violated the TOS, or that the TOS contains invalid terms (and they almost all do), they should sue. If this really an issue of them being banned for protected speech, they should prevail. However, I think this is an issue not of what they can say, but where they can say it. Suppose DST rents space on the sidewalk from Go Daddy, and the rental contract specifies they can't commit illegal acts. Also suppose there is a public park across the street. If DST says X, and X would get them arrested in the park, then Go Daddy almost certainly has the right to kick them off their sidewalk, too. If X is legal in the park, th...moreen Go Daddy probably doesn't have the right to cancel the rental contract. But what I think is happening here is that the contract specifies "No X", even though X is legal. Then the issue is whether the ban on X is binding as a matter of law. I hope Go Daddy is on firm legal ground here. If they get sued and lose, they could end up providing enormous funding to a hate group. Regardless of the legality, I think anyone who believes this is censorship should take their business elsewhere. I really want to keep the net neutrality issue free and clear of other issues. The American people have already spoken loud and clear to the FCC, which has ignored them. Also, it appears that under the current administration, they are also going to remove at least some of the restrictions on telcos, too. They are headed in the wrong direction. People need to get their Congressmen to act, NOW!
        • [ – ] Bitchspot parent reply Except bomb threats are illegal, "violating the TOS" is not. All they're really doing is saying "you hurt our feelings so we're going to penalize you." That's a damn stupid idea.
          • KennKong parent reply I made that distinction. I don't read the website, but I doubt that it has done anything illegal, or it would have been shut down long ago. Where Go Daddy has put itself by doing this is similar to bakeries that refuse to serve gay couples. One difference is that white nationalists, et. al. are disliked by a majority, and gay couples are disliked by a minority. So maybe Go Daddy is less afraid of losing business from free speech advocates by suppressing "hate speech". Go Daddy is my domain registrar, and if they don't offer a credible justification for their action, they will lose my business. I have already written their customer service telling them that. Maybe the thought of losing $15/year will scare them!
Load more comments
Download the Vidme app!