
FCC: We didn't impose stricter net neutrality regulation because Android is open - lotusleaf1987
http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/21/fcc-we-didnt-impose-stricter-net-neutrality-regulations-on-wir/
======
orangecat
A complete non sequitur. It makes no difference how "open" your hardware or
software is if all the ISPs are blocking or throttling or capping all your
connections.

~~~
jrockway
You could flash a version of Android that uses magic to communicate instead of
radio waves. Duh.

(The irony is: you can't flash your own build of Android on most devices, and
most Android builds are not 100% open source. Cyanogen is pretty close,
though.)

------
phatboyslim
So if linux is open, why were restrictions imposed on non-mobile internet?

~~~
tzs
Android has a significant share in consumer wireless internet. Linux has
rounding error in consumer wired internet.

~~~
JangoSteve
I hate to dignify the original argument using openness to justify something
completely unrelated, but... I think you're forgetting that the vast majority
of websites accessed on "consumer wired internet" are hosted on Linux servers.

~~~
tzs
On the website side of things, though, you have a competitive market for
internet services. The impression I've gotten is that the net neutrality
debate has been focusing on the consumer end, not the server end, because
there is typically only one or two choices for consumers for broadband
internet access.

On the website side of things, if you don't like the rules of your hosting
provider, you can choose from hundreds of alternatives. Hence, there is much
less need for regulation.

For home wireless access, there are usually more choices than for home wired
access, with at least 4 choices available in most decently populated areas.
With 4+ choices, plus open platforms that make it easier to switch carriers,
we may not need heavy regulation--the market might be adequate.

For home wired, an open system like Linux makes no difference for two reasons:

1\. As I noticed, not many use it, so even if Linux somehow made it easier to
switch wired providers, it would not have much effect, and

2\. Linux doesn't make it easier to switch wired providers. If you are on,
say, Comcast, and decide to switch to DSL, you aren't going to have an easier
time on Linux compared to those on Windows or Mac.

~~~
JangoSteve
Net neutrality deals with the transmission, not the server or client, which is
why openness and availability of operating systems has nothing to do with
these regulations.

As to your second point, it is equally difficult to switch wireless providers
(e.g. Comcast) as it is to switch wired providers (e.g. Verizon). Some would
argue it's harder to switch wired providers since they are essentially
government-endorsed monopolies, but then again many people cannot switch
wireless providers due to 2-year contracts, work-provided plans, etc.

------
gnok
Original FCC release at:
[http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1221...](http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1221/DOC-303745A1.pdf)

------
eli
Anyone want to take bets on whether these rules will even survive the
inevitable legal challenges?

My understanding is that since the FCC declined to classify internet as a
"telecommunication service" their authority to regulate it is pretty shaky

------
VengefulCynic
Cars are getting opener, so we don't foresee needing to worry about the roads.

------
ck2
This now seems completely plausible within this decade:

<http://i.imgur.com/hmScT.jpg>

------
gojomo
And there aren't "open operating systems like Android" in the wired world?

This is so nonsensical it's almost like a shout-out to Google.

Perhaps the providers of 10Mbps+ wireline service should tear out their last
mile wires and install wireless transmitters for the last hop instead, so they
can fall under the same looser regulations as the <1.5Mbps (if you're lucky)
wireless providers.

~~~
JunkDNA
I know your last point is meant to be sarcastic, but that is the exact sort of
distorted behavior you get with these kinds of ill-conceived regulations.

~~~
orangecat
Specific example: <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125357990638429655.html>

------
guelo
We are ruled by idiots.

------
joeybaker
Android being open is only helpful for Net Neutrality in that it allows us to
route all our traffic through a proxy in another country.

------
brown9-2
This doesn't instill a lot of confidence in the FCC.

------
krakensden
Android's openness is pretty weak at best- it depends pretty heavily on what
phone you have/your carrier will let you have.

------
spaznode
Thanks, Google. >8/

------
robwgibbons
This is nothing more strawman justification meant to distract us from the real
issue. Android has nothing to do with network neutrality. The software on our
handsets has no effect on how the ISPs manipulate the Internet.

