A federal appeals court has agreed to halt the reinstatement of net neutrality rules until August 5th, while the court considers whether more permanent action is justified.

It’s the latest setback in a long back and forth on net neutrality — the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) should not be able to block or throttle internet traffic in a discriminatory manner.

The current FCC, which has three Democratic and two Republican commissioners, voted in April to bring back net neutrality. The 3–2 vote was divided along party lines.

Broadband providers have since challenged the FCC’s action, which is potentially more vulnerable after the Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down Chevron deference — a legal doctrine that instructed courts to defer to an agency’s expert decisions except in a very narrow range of circumstances.

Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Matt Schettenhelm said in a report prior to the court’s ruling that he doesn’t expect the FCC to prevail in court, in large part due to the demise of Chevron.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    5 months ago

    That’s part of the issue with free markets. There’s a missing part to the term that most people drop for some reason, and that would be ‘competition’. Competition doesn’t last very long before there are winners and losers. When it comes to the economy, that means the winner is the largest company and the losers are the companies that were bought or shut down. The end game of free market competition is monopoly. The only reason the competition doesn’t end is because of government regulation to facilitate and uphold capitalist free markets.

    • explore_broaden@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yeah this is exactly what free market lunatics on the right don’t understand. Monopoly isn’t a free market. Free markets simply cannot exist without regulation to prevent unfair business practices.

      Also any reasonable economist can tell you that the free market does not solve issues like the tragedy of the commons, because negative externalities are not factored in. It is also the government’s job to ‘internalize’ externalities so companies actually see the costs of, for example, polluting our air and water.

      TLDR: free market != unregulated market

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I respect your reasoning, though I disagree about free markets being better than a democratically managed economy. I think free markets are inherently oppositional to a cooperative society, and that the myth of the commons was invented as a justification for capitalism.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      The only reason the competition doesn’t end is because of government regulation to facilitate and uphold capitalist free markets.

      A.K.A. what Adam Smith was really talking about when he mentioned the “invisible hand” (contrary to what the laissez-faire cargo-cultists think).

      • qprimed@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        what Adam Smith was really talking about when he mentioned the “invisible hand”

        today, I got a clarified/alternate point of view. today was a good day. thank you, internet friend.