Successful Blog

Net Neutrality 11-11-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

The top censored news stories of 2005-2006 [via Center for Creative Voices]

FOR 30 years, Sonoma State University’s Project Censored has released an annual list of the most important news stories not covered by the corporate media in the United States. Here again are the Top 10 news stories that didn’t make much news.

1. Net Neutrality

Throughout 2005 and this year, a largely underground debate has raged regarding the future of the Internet. More recently referred to as net neutrality, the issue has become a tug of war with cable companies on the one hand and consumers and Internet service providers (ISPs) on the other. Yet despite important legislative proposals and Supreme Court decisions throughout 2005, the issue was almost completely ignored in the headlines until 2006. And except for occasional coverage on CNBC’s Kudlow & Kramer, mainstream television remains hands-off to this day. . . .

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 11-10-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Cable and Telco’s Lying about Net Neutrality


. . . My point is that if the Cable and Telco’s are spending Advertising Dollars Lying about Net Neutrality, we need to amp up our efforts to Protect our Rights to a Free Internet.

And in case our friends in Canada think they are safe from Cable and Telco interference with the Internet in the Great White North, Read The Newspapers… They’re trying the same thing up there.

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 11-09-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

On Network Convergence ( Susan Crawford )

It would be a great day for me, if I as a subscriber, had the power to download the movies I like, edit these movies for my home viewing ( for example when my kids are up, edit out violent and sex scenes and when they are asleep, edit back these scenes) and generally have the power to select what comes into my tv.

Today, broadcasters decide what comes into my home and typically say, if you don’t like it…change the channel.

NO, I DON’T WANT TO CHANGE THE CHANNEL. ITS MY HOME, I LIKE TV AND I SHOULD HAVE A SAY ON TO HOW THE CONTENT IS PRESENTED IN MY HOUSE.

Afterall, we all agree that most of the evolution is happening at the edge of the network which is directly interfacing with me and my family.

So there are various arguments to what convergence means, there are economic implications that trigger off political, corporate and technological events, but please don’t loose focus that all this is done to serve me, since I and another 4B people are paying for these past present and future services and of course salaries.

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 11-08-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Can Citizen Journalism Save the Internet? Does it Need to?

It’s pretty clear that we DON’T have a problem with content-based Internet blocking in the US today. That doesn’t mean that we won’t tomorrow. “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” But that’s not what this post about.

We MAY have a problem with commercially-motivated blocking. At&t CEO Ed Whitacre has been clear that he considers parts of the Internet “my pipes” and that he believes at&t has a commercial right to charge information providers differentially for use of the pipes that we and the information providers believe are already paying for once.

Other telco execs have echoed this view.

Legislation requiring net neutrality has been proposed but may not be a good idea. It is very difficult to define the concept and enforcement itself might be a dangerous government intrusion.

But how do we avoid the need for neutrality legislation? How do we know if legislation has become the lesser of two evils? That’s where citizen journalism comes in.

Tom Evslin offers a process in which citizen journalists invesitgate and report — in real time and large numbers — instances of packet discrimination on the Internet.

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 11-07-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

No Room for Neutrality on Net Neutrality

Myth: Net Neutrality would, for the first time, regulate the Internet.
FACT: Massive innovation on the Internet since its creation occurred under pre-2005 Net Neutrality protection. . . .

MYTH: Net Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem.
FACT: There are numerous examples of network providers engaging in content or user discrimination that will only grow without Net Neutrality. . . .
[ . . . ]
MYTH: Network operators are protecting consumers.
FACT: Like any monopoly or oligopoly, network operators want to maximize their profits and minimize competition at the consumer’s expense. . . .

MYTH: Net Neutrality will cause broadband networks to be abandoned.
FACT: Net Neutrality promotes broadband development by increasing Internet services and applications that generate new consumer demand. . . .

MYTH: Net Neutrality will cause broadband networks to be abandoned.
FACT: Net Neutrality promotes broadband development by increasing Internet services and applications that generate new consumer demand. . . .
[ . . . ]
MYTH: The Stevens Bill already ensures Net Neutrality.
FACT: The Net Neutrality provision included in S. 2686 merely requires the FCC to conduct an annual study about how information is flowing over the Internet, but provides no teeth to protect the free-flow of information. . . .

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 11-06-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Battle over ‘net neutrality’ arrives in Canada

. . . “Right now, the internet is almost a perfect, universal democracy,” says Pippa Lawson, the executive director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Law Clinic.

“The smallest bloggers can be accessed as easily and as quickly as the websites of major corporations.”

There’s clear incentive there for those who have the economic interests to discriminate. That’s why it’s necessary to ensure that there’s a level playing field and you have to do that legislatively.”

Lawson said Canadian companies want exactly what American companies want — to control the web and make a lot of money doing so.

“There’s a big push in Canada right now to allow those sorts of discriminatory practices,” Lawson said.

“The companies that own the pipes of the internet — the telecom companies — haven’t liked sitting back and watching big content providers like Google and Yahoo make billions of dollars. They want a piece of the pie, and they want to be able to favour their own content or the content of the corporations that would pay them big money.”

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE