back to article European Parliament rejects amendments to net neut rules, waves through law

MEPs voted against changes to net neutrality rules in the European Union on Tuesday lunchtime. It comes after key internet figures, including the creator of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners Lee, warned EU politicos not to wave through the regulations without amendments due to a number of loopholes in the proposed law. …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    About as much use as a chocolate teapot.

    1. msknight

      Re: MEPs...

      Apparently a chocolate teapot is actually of some use -

    2. Come to the Dark Side

      Re: MEPs...

      I read that article as a positive outcome from the MEPs. They voted against dumbing down the rules with amendments.

      1. Tenacal

        Re: MEPs...

        "I read that article as a positive outcome from the MEPs. They voted against dumbing down the rules with amendments."

        I had assumed the same. Rejecting amendments is what Sir Tim et al were after and they have had their wish granted.

        Any greater minds available to enlighten our possible ignorance?

        1. msknight

          Re: MEPs...

          This humble mind saw that the rules allow corporates too much wiggle room and open the door to abuses. The amendments were aimed at closing these loop holes and leaving the protests until last minute was a ploy aimed at causing enough doubt so that the MEP's would allow the amendments.

          However, failing to vote for the amendments means that the rules go through, complete with loop holes.

          The BBC report on this did quote an academic from the UK as saying that this outcome is no surprise given the number of agencies that worked towards the rules in their current form, to then delay the rules to look through yet another set of issues; and that the rules also contained the necessary bits and pieces to deliver the end of roaming charges in Europe by 2017 hence there were extra reasons to make sure the rules went through in order to deliver this.

          So, long story short, the rules were so long in coming, that nobody wanted to delay them, even though there are gaping holes in there. ... at least that is how I read it. I could very easily have the short end of a very confusing stick.

          There is always the chance that the issue will be looked at again, though. I can't think that this is the end of the matter. I can believe that the MEP's will wait a few years to see that everyone's fears are real; that the corporates (no surprise) make maximum use of the loop holes, and then decided to legislate to close the holes ... maybe twenty years down the line...

          1. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: MEPs...

            "..and that the rules also contained the necessary bits and pieces to deliver the end of roaming charges in Europe by 2017..."

            I saw that strange linkage of different topics into one set of rules, I would of have expected MEP's to have had the sense to split the two vastly different measures; just goes to show that the EU plays exactly the same tricks as the UK Parliament.

        2. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: MEPs...

          They made an Net Bias law and called it a Net Neutrality law. So if you re-title it to "EP rejects amendments to Net Bias rules, waves through law" it makes more sense.

      2. Frank Zuiderduin

        Re: MEPs...

        Sorry, no. The amendments were to fix the mess these idiots made of the original proposals. The result is a farce. MEPs are morons (so, what else is new...?).

    3. Lars Silver badge

      Re: MEPs...

      Just try to vote for the right MEP next time. You did vote, did you not.

  2. W Donelson

    Very confusing article

    The headline and the body seem to be at odds.

    1. auburnman

      Re: Very confusing article

      If you read the article linked in the second paragraph re: Sir Tim it makes things a bit clearer; basically the legislation is already weak/Swiss cheese and the campaigners wanted the amendments.

      The wording of this article is either really poor or the author has misunderstood the sequence of events.

    2. Daniel Hall

      Re: Very confusing article

      Which is typical of journalism today.

      I half expect the body to not remotely have anything to do with the headline on most occasions.

      The world wide web is dieing of a horrible dirty disease called "Journalism"

      Dont confuse this with "the internet" we learned in school the difference between the 2.

  3. Your alien overlord - fear me

    without interference or discrimination? Kiddie fiddlers charter then (obviously MEPs are the same as UK MPs).

    On the bright side, I can now host piratebay and the MIAA etc can't touch me :-)

  4. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Only 50 MEPs present

    Those 50 didn't understand what they were voting for and the other 700-odd apparently had something better to do than going to the European Parliament.

  5. Wolfclaw

    Did anybody see any brown envelopes being handed out under the table form the companies that would benefit the most, typical MEPS, voting like sheep for the corporations that lobby/pay them !

  6. RavingDaveD

    One way or the other?

    Surely as an avid reader of this learned electronic journal, can we not get a definitive on this from Sir Tim himself?

  7. DanboMB

    Will the end of roaming charges in the EU apply

    if the UK votes to leave....?

  8. Camilla Smythe

    Never Mind...

    I am certain Mr Orlowski will be along to explain things in due course.

  9. graeme leggett Silver badge

    rules to regulations step - way to go yet.

    Having voted for the rules, do the MEPs have a further vote/input when the regulations have been drawn up?

    The regulations themselves could (though not guaranteed?) close the loopholes.

    And what about when the regulations are turned into member country law, will there be an input/amendment by national parliaments then

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    We're all doomed

    Sadly, in future, our democratically elected (or self-appointed) representatives will be making ever more decisions on technical matters, from positions of near total ignorance.

    Journalistic media will pontificate on the same matters, from similar positions of near total ignorance. And the outcomes will be equally injurious to the longer term interests of society as a whole.

    In an increasingly complex world, why do we persist in believing in the ability of those with no technical understanding to make technical decisions on our behalf? And how should such decisions be made?

    1. Lars Silver badge

      Re: We're all doomed

      "understanding to make technical decisions on our behalf? And how should such decisions be made?"

      Damn good question. Probably old. I would wager the stone axe guys where pondering about it too, if not them, certainly their wifes regarding crocks.

    2. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: We're all doomed

      Not just ignorance, but potentially excessive timeboxing.

      If I'm correct in my reading of the EU calendar:

      It would seem that they only allocated 1.5 hours to consider both net neutrality and roaming charges.

  11. David 124

    So has this made it into UK law yet

    Or is the UK GOV ignoring this in light of #Brexit?

    The principle of USO is morally correct, however the devil is in the detail.

    Have they got it right? Probably not (yet). The principle of a starting point and then review later can be a good approach.

    What is going to happen to roaming charges post #Brexit?

    I bet given the power of the big commercial interested here and their quiet and persistent lobbying, we (the UK consumer) will get SCREWED !!!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like