The FCC took the action declaring that they have “…acted to preserve the Internet as an open network enabling consumer choice, freedom of expression, user control, competition and the freedom to innovate.”
But have they? Perhaps, like so many other actions from the District of Columbia, this too will hinder freedoms more than it protects them.
The FFC’s press release speaks for itself, emphasis added by me:
This process has made clear that the Internet has thrived because of its freedom and openness -- the absence of any gatekeeper blocking lawful uses of the network or picking winners and losers online. Consumers and innovators do not have to seek permission before they use the Internet to launch new technologies, start businesses, connect with friends, or share their views.
Because there has been NO “gatekeeper” the FCC suddenly feels compelled to take on the job and regulate the flow of bits and bites. In fact, I think Ronald Reagan’s comment on government intervention relates all too well: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. To date, we have hit the second phase in the trilogy of the socialization of the internet. As has always been the case with those entrenched in the District of Columbia, there are unintended consequences to their actions.
Could this be the beginning of the end of Wikileaks in the United States?
No comments:
Post a Comment