Especially if said court has a history of conservative judges that rule in favor of conservative causes...like corporatism.
Eric -----Original Message----- From: Judah McAuley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 12:12 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: US Court rules against Net Neutrality Actually, they didn't rule against Net Neutrality because Net Neutrality wasn't a law. The FCC issued an order to Comcast under authority that it was not actually given. Most everyone agreed that the FCC was unlikely to win this case when the judges asked them to cite the statute that they had authority to give this ruling under and the FCC lawyers were unable to. Usually when you can't tell a judge why something you did is legal, you are probably going to lose. On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: > > "A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Federal Communications > Commission lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal > treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks." > > Peeps in the US are f***ed if this stands. Get ready for Tiered internet > access fees in the short term. > Hopefully this idiocy stays confined to US borders.Europe has already more > or less enshrined Net Neutrality. > But the jury's out for the rest of us,especially those countries serviced by > US broadband providers (like the entire Caribbean and parts of Latin > America) :-\ > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/06/net-neutrality-us-court-r_n_526972. html > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:315182 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
