[–] catechumen ago (edited ago)
Because case law prevented them from censoring before period, now they have the green light. What recourse do we have as citizens if the censor something that isn't even technically illegal? It will be just gone. What's to stop Sony from calling up comcast and having a torrent site taken down?
[–] syn0byte ago
I will go ahead and assume what you are referring to things like the sandvine bit torrent traffic filtering.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/11/comcast-hit-with-class-action-lawsuit-over-traffic-blocking/
The reason this rule has nothing to do with that is that the case had nothing to do with the content of the bit torrent traffic. They were filtering ALL bit torrent traffic. They can't cherry pick legit linux distro torrents from pirate torrents, thus even with the new FCC rules allowing the filtering of "illegal content" they would run afoul the law if they tried to reinstate Bit torrent traffic filtering because it would also be filtering the "legal content" they are expressly forbidden from filtering.
I have no doubt the rules are a Trojan horse that won't do us any good. But it isn't an orchestrated attack on the First Amendment either and trying to make it out like it is only confuses the issue.
[–] catechumen ago (edited ago)
Admittedly it is speculation on what the government will do, I'm just not fond of vague legalese. If it's vague it's intentional and more often than not ends up abused at some later date. Remember millions of dollars can be spent lobbying on a single word, this is all deliberate to some end.