Verizon: U.S. Constitution Allows Data Throttling

[bigdragon]

So Verizon wants the ability to violate my free speech rights. Yes, I know they're a private network and therefore those rights do not apply, but they also have taken billions of dollars in subsidies which makes them also partially a public network. They think they can have free speech rights while denying them to their customers. They want to have their cake and eat it too all while pillaging the wallets of every customer on their network. Screw you, Verizon. I will vote against any politician of any political party that supports Verizon's antics. I'd love to switch to a different ISP, but I have no choice. Given how much my Verizon bill has increased in the past 6 months I am absolutely disgusted with this news.

We really need some constitutional scholars to start setting things straight.Everyone and everything is claiming to have a constitutional right to whatever they want.

 

[Onus]

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.

 

[TechnoBowl]

Wow. And I used to like Verizon.

 

[Guest]

Most here may not agree with me, but I believe that the FCC or Gov't intervention in companies needs to be limited. Verizon may have questionable business practices, but I don't find it the role of the FCC and the Gov't to bend the will of a company to what the Mob wants. We all want more, more and more while paying less, granted providers do make some health margins. I think the responsibility truly lies with us consumers. If Verizon wants to be idiots and gouge their customers, customers need to move to different carriers. If you are a content creator and Verizon isn't living up to its contract move away from them. We continue to accept that we are sheep incapable of eating the foliage on the side of the fence. We expect Gov't to cut open the fence rather than us digging under or jumping over the fence. The grass is greener on the other side if we'd try.

 

[flaxx]

Talk about misconstruing facts!! The data going through Verizon's networks does NOT belong to them. Only the networks do. Their whole free-speech argument is thus invalid since they don't own "the speech" (i.e. the data).

If someone gives a speech and uses a microphone that amplifies his voice through speakers, the audio equipment owner cannot claim they own the speech and plead that it's their constructional right to modify it in any way.

 

[flaxx]

Talk about misconstruing facts!! The data going through Verizon's networks does NOT belong to them. Only the networks do. Their whole free-speech argument is thus invalid since they don't own "the speech" (i.e. the data).

If someone gives a speech and uses a microphone that amplifies his voice through speakers, the audio equipment owner cannot claim they own the speech and plead that it's their constitutional right to modify it in any way.

 

[evismang]

So if Verizon is trying to claim the data on their networks as their own speech, aren't they, by extension, admitting to copyright violation? You know, since they don't block access to torrent sites.

 

[itchyisvegeta]

They are just calling it a tax

 

[WyomingKnott]

Same businesses that argued the exact opposite when they were persecuted(sic) for online sharing by their users?

 

[Guest]

Wow, simply wow. Apple lawyers and Verizon should get together so they can reinvent the Constitution to their liking since it's all fiction anyways.

 

[Guest]

The argument is fundamentally flawed: if Verizon is truly the same as a newspaper or magazine, with rights to editorialize their content as they see fit, there where is the consumer choice to switch to a competing service?? If one doesn't like the editorializing of one magazine or newspaper, there is always the freedom to pick up the edition of a competitor. But in this country the consumer has no equivalent choice when it comes to broadband internet, most of us are stuck with the one monopoly that is offered in our respective neighborhoods. So if Verizon were allowed to prioritize internet traffic as it saw fit, those customers of Verizon who did not like it would have no alternative. Their claimed rights would greatly harm the consumer. That is why ISP's has always been treated like utlities, one regulated monopoly offering a standard service is a specific region. And that service needs to be regulated so that some consumers are not treated unfairly.

 

[blurr91]

[citation][nom]withoutcompensationmyfoot[/nom]"for use by others without compensation"Funny, I thought I PAID for internet service. Somebody's been ripping me off![/citation]

How about if your business paid enterprise class data package, but some people in your area sucked up the bandwidth watching HD movies streamed via Netflix? That directly affects your business. You paid enterprise rates for your enterprise needs. They paid basic rates for consumer needs. You are being ripped off.

 

[azgard]

[citation][nom]bigdragon[/nom]So Verizon wants the ability to violate my free speech rights. Yes, I know they're a private network and therefore those rights do not apply, but they also have taken billions of dollars in subsidies which makes them also partially a public network. They think they can have free speech rights while denying them to their customers. They want to have their cake and eat it too all while pillaging the wallets of every customer on their network. Screw you, Verizon. I will vote against any politician of any political party that supports Verizon's antics. I'd love to switch to a different ISP, but I have no choice. Given how much my Verizon bill has increased in the past 6 months I am absolutely disgusted with this news.We really need some constitutional scholars to start setting things straight.Everyone and everything is claiming to have a constitutional right to whatever they want.[/citation]

Actually their rights to try and limit your first amendment rights are severely limited as verizon exist's as a utility not just a private corporation, therefore vastly different rules for what they can and can't do to there customers apply. It's easier to think of verizon and it's power in the same area as electric and water utilities since internet/phone is nearly as important especially for businesses.

 

[scannall]

Their 1st amendment argument is stupid. Since owning a microphone, or an ink factory isn't speech.

The 5th amendment argument may hold some water though. It is at least worth arguing.

My biggest problem with Verizon, AT&T and the FCC though is spectrum. I'm as big a capitalist as you'll find. But selling spectrum is moronic. The public owns the airwaves, and the FCC 'manages' them for us. But it does a piss poor job. Since spectrum is a very finite resource, selling it off in bits and pieces wastes a lot of it. And precludes any real competition, and the benefits of capitalism.

The US Government needs to rescind all the spectrum sales. Build out the infrastructure, and sell bandwidth at the same rate to any company that wants to resell the service. Makes entry into the market easier, makes money to pay for the infrastructure and tech improvements. And as a bonus, companies actually have to *compete* for your business. You know, actually provide customer service. Compete on rates. Instead of locking you in with a stupid phone contract. Since everyone uses the same tech, you can take your phone from one carrier to the next at will. And not get taken for granted.

 

[kinggraves]

[citation][nom]dcompart[/nom]Most here may not agree with me, but I believe that the FCC or Gov't intervention in companies needs to be limited. Verizon may have questionable business practices, but I don't find it the role of the FCC and the Gov't to bend the will of a company to what the Mob wants. We all want more, more and more while paying less, granted providers do make some health margins. I think the responsibility truly lies with us consumers. If Verizon wants to be idiots and gouge their customers, customers need to move to different carriers. If you are a content creator and Verizon isn't living up to its contract move away from them. We continue to accept that we are sheep incapable of eating the foliage on the side of the fence. We expect Gov't to cut open the fence rather than us digging under or jumping over the fence. The grass is greener on the other side if we'd try.[/citation]

Internet pipelines function like a utility and do need some third party regulation to prevent practices such as price gouging and fixing. People do not always have options for multiple carriers, nor does that option help the consumer if all those options conspire to a situation that benefits them and not the consumer. If utilities were not regulated by the government they could charge you far more than they already do for the things you need to live like water and electricity. This is especially true in this case when the majority of internet, phone, and cable services are provided by the branches of only a handful of companies. I agree that consumers should use their wallets intelligently, but they don't always have an option with utility providers.

 

[svdb]

There's obviously no limits to the hypocrisy of mega-corporations in this country.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]You are right, its not perfect. That is why there are the Amendments, to allow it to evolve and better the rights to the people.But the reason we are "obsessed" with it is because it is what defined us and still defines us as a nation for the people, one of the first ones. While that is not always true it still holds our rights, some that most other countries, even ones like the UK, do not grant.I disagree with Verizon as has been said before, they are a content provider not creator and it needs to be fair to everyone, not just a small amount of people. Everyone who is paying Verizon should get the same treatment, be it the low speed DSL or 3G people to the top end FiOS and 4G people.Thats how it is supposed to work in America, equality for all not just some.[/citation]

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.

 

[A Bad Day]

In the argument, the company compares itself to newspaper editors which control what appears in their papers.

That means Verizon employs its network users.

They just violated several labor laws by requiring their workers to PAY them, not the other way around.

 

[livebriand]

Verizon, you're asking for it! You're just giving me another reason to switch to another carrier. (just a month to go in my contract; I already got a better phone on the $30 t-mobile prepaid plan...)

 

[livebriand]

Verizon, you're asking for it! You're just giving me another reason to switch to another carrier. (just a month to go in my contract; I already got a better phone on the $30 t-mobile prepaid plan...)