When the FCC decided to nullify net neutrality governance in December 2015, California state Sen. Scott Weiner delivered a video on the same day, stating that he called for the reinforcement of those protocols in state law.
The senator’s bill, SB822 accomplishes the California chambers, with fellow Democrat advocates in the Senate and Assembly. Once the charter took place along with New York and New Jersey introduced bills, a massive volume of the US population and austerity would be accountable to measures that the federal government persistently disagrees with. Soon, they will unify with Washington State, whose governor authorized a resilient net neutrality bill on March 5.
To date, this is the second net neutrality bill that California proposes this year. The state Senate enacted the first one at the end of January and will proceed to the Assembly in May.
If the second bill passed, it will in many events prohibits Internet Service Providers from privileging specific content from data limits. This conceptualization is the called the “zero rating.” This means broadband servers like AT&T will no longer exclude its
DirectTV Now video-streaming service coming from customers’ data limit, while summing data used up by Sling TV, a rival service.
Zero rating has been quite debatable for some time now. Upholders defend that it is consumer-friendly since it allows customers more usage of the data. On the contrary, critics claim that it enables carriers to choose between the victors and underdogs on the internet which slip away from the notion of net neutrality.
It would great if Sen. Weiner’s bill will pass because net neutrality will remain an internet that capacitates and assures free speech. It will also preserve our rights to have an open internet which means that ISPs should not block, throttle, or create “fast” and “slow” lanes.
FCC should not be that too confident that their efforts to abolish net neutrality will be in their favor.