Verizon: U.S. Constitution Allows Data Throttling

[doorspawn]

[citation][nom]dcompart[/nom]If Verizon wants to be idiots and gouge their customers, customers need to move to different carriers.[/citation]

The problem here is that it's not (only) the customer, with their purchasing power, getting a raw deal. The non-verizon-affiliated content providers lose, and they have no recourse. The customer might even be happy, getting the content from different, verizon-supported providers quickly.


[citation][nom]dcompart[/nom]If you are a content creator and Verizon isn't living up to its contract move away from them.[/citation]

Few content creators will have contracts or any formal interaction with Verizon.
Also, the bad treatment Verizon is giving creators is to transmit their stuff worse than their Verizon-supported competitor.
Moving away from Verizon is giving Verizon what it wants and hurting you more.
It's like Verizon punches you so you punch yourself in protest.

 

[doorspawn]

[citation][nom]dcompart[/nom]If Verizon wants to be idiots and gouge their customers, customers need to move to different carriers.[/citation]

The problem here is that it's not (only) the customer, with their purchasing power, getting a raw deal. The non-verizon-affiliated content providers lose, and they have no recourse. The customer might even be happy, getting the content from different, verizon-supported providers quickly.


[citation][nom]dcompart[/nom]If you are a content creator and Verizon isn't living up to its contract move away from them.[/citation]

Few content creators will have contracts or any formal interaction with Verizon.
Also, the bad treatment Verizon is giving creators is to transmit their stuff worse than their Verizon-supported competitor.
Moving away from Verizon is giving Verizon what it wants and hurting you more.
It's like Verizon punches you so you punch yourself in protest.

 

[doorspawn]

Ugh, two double-posts in a row.
Tom's, why not sanity check posts to see they're not identical. This is an all-too-common problem.
I'll try to keep this one unique

 

[Zuesacoatl]

Like Romney and his band of for Big Business men say...."Companies are people too my friend." Ohh how humanity just keeps falling lower and lower.

 

[supere989]

There argument is tantamount to saying you can have any car you want but if you drive on our road, you can't go faster than 25MPH whenever we decide, but if you want to drive faster we will let you, if you pay more, but we reserve the right to put a boot on your car if traffic gets to heavy.(assuming they bought the land, paid for the right of ways, and all the maintenance of the road, and the boot.) Stupid Verizon....they need to cut off their legal departments crack supply....or is that against their 1st and 5th amendment rights as well?

 

[supere989]

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]I don't think their First Amendment claims have any merit, since it is purely profit-motivated, and as has been pointed out, they aren't the ones "speaking;" but the Fifth Amendment claims appear to be valid. They may be bound by all kinds of contractual obligations they have incurred, but controlling their own network is obviously their right, whether anyone likes it or not. I suspect, however, that there would be any number of [implied] contracts, especially where they have (or were given) competitive advantages, which would impose limitations to their ability to throttle or block potentially competing content.[/citation]

I think you have your definition of Property rights slightly skewed since their network transmission conduits ie:Bandwidth is Tax-dollar subsidized in the first place, so Screw that on the 5th note. Not to mention that they are in fact not the "Internet" but simply a connection to "it", therefore if they are impeding my ability to connect to public communication venues then are impeding on my 1st amendment rights to freedom of speech! Especially since i paid for it!

But this rule goes for all net-com companies not just Verizon. Clear.com anyone? They were the worst.

The real problem here is Verizon's Greed. They want to cram too many customers into too small of conduit and still charge high rates.

 

[jabliese]

Hmm, so now Verizon wants to be liable for all the copyrighted material passing over it's network? If it has editorial control, then it should be able to stop all illegal downloading.

The ISP defense in the face of the MPAA has always been we are not like a newspaper. Interesting turnabout here.

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]Antimatter79[/nom]The US Constitution also allows subscription cancelling.[/citation]
it's not free...

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]svdb[/nom]There's obviously no limits to the hypocrisy of mega-corporations in this country.[/citation]
you can thank OBAMA for all this crap

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]That is how the USA is supposed to work, not how it actually works. Money and influence is power and if you have it, then you can get better treatment than someone whom doesn't have it to an extreme. This is wrong, but i won't pretend that it isn't happening anyway.[/citation]

You are right to some degree but its like that everywhere. Money is and always has been power, or for the longest time it has been around the world.

But still, the Constitution is a very important document, even in these days. It should not be thrown aside be it by a corporation or a mere man.

 

[jesh4622]

Hey Verizon. Die in a fire.

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]jesh4622[/nom]Hey Verizon. Die in a fire.[/citation]
lol...not going to happen anytime soon....they have to much money

 

[Guest]

bad news for Verizon is that the government has been going against the U.S. Constitution for years now, so maybe not the best argument for you cause

 

[ProDigit10]

they forgot to mention, that they promote a certain speed, and when they are throttling, are not living up to these speed promises!
In that they are crooked, and lying; promoting one thing, and not delivering on their promises!

 

[hetneo]

Verizon's lawyers obviously need to stick to the corporate law and stay out of the constitutional law. Yeah their 1st Amendment rights are infringed as much as would be of bar owner who serves various amounts of drinks to different customers but charge each the same.

 

[hector2]

"U.S. Constitution Allows Data Throttling" ? Really ? Not sure about that, but I do know that consumers can simply choose to go elsewhere & dump Verizon.