The largest US Internet service providers spent a total of $ 4.2 million (about $ 1.25 billion at today’s exchange rate) on a project that in 2017 flooded the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the US Congress with fake comments, messages, and comments. Shareholders demanded the abolition of the so-called net neutrality law. Now, however, the New York State Attorney’s Office has roughly found that. 9 million comments were wrong, most of them from people who don’t even know what to give their name to. Their data was obtained by specialized companies through other internet services.
The scandal has affected the largest US ISPs, including AT&T, Comcast and Charter. According to the prosecution, service providers have commissioned and funded companies through a group called Broadband for America to flood the FCC with notes and comments calling for the impartiality to be repealed, but it has not been demonstrated that the service providers knew they were doing so. Comments on behalf of people who don’t know anything about it. However, according to the prosecution, it is definitely strange that the representatives of the service providers in the 2017 debate often made reference to the large number of observations and comments calling for the repeal of the Internet Neutrality Act when validated.
In the United States, the Internet Neutrality Rules were introduced in 2015 after many years of debate. The core of the debate was whether ISPs had the right to favor certain data flows over others. This is the only way service providers say they can properly maintain the internet, as a large part of today’s massive data hunger is faced by massive services like Netflix or even Youtube that generate massive amounts of traffic. On the other hand, representatives of the flip side say that the essence of the internet is that all units of data, whether it’s email, video downloads, or anything, should be treated as equals. This means that ISPs cannot sort as desired and create fast and slow domains within the network.
This, second place, would put a heavy burden on the service providers, while the first place would have given these companies unrealistic great power, as they could (and did) take money from online services in exchange for the pages always loading for those services faster. For its users as competitors for that service.
However, in 2014, it appeared the Federal Communications Commission would grant the right to ISPs. In November, President Obama himself intervened and called in a video statement for both the committee and US lawmakers to defend the network’s neutrality, thus adopting a second position for his daughter.
However, these rules were repealed in 2017, in large part to the public protest often cited by service providers. (The New York Times)