Successful Blog

Net Neutrality 6-09-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

House rejects Net neutrality rules

The U.S. House of Representatives definitively rejected the concept of Net neutrality on Thursday, dealing a bitter blow to Internet companies like Amazon.com, eBay and Google that had engaged in a last-minute lobbying campaign to support it.

By a 269-152 vote that fell largely along party lines, the House Republican leadership mustered enough votes to reject a Democrat-backed amendment that would have enshrined stiff Net neutrality regulations into federal law and prevented broadband providers from treating some Internet sites differently from others.

Of the 421 House members who participated in the vote that took place around 6:30 p.m. PT, the vast majority of Net neutrality supporters were Democrats. Republicans represented most of the opposition.

The vote on the amendment (click for PDF) came after nearly a full day of debate on the topic, which prominent Democrats predicted would come to represent a turning point in the history of the Internet.

“The future Sergey Brins, the future Marc Andreessens, of Netscape and Google…are going to have to pay taxes” to broadband providers, said Rep. Ed Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat behind the Net neutrality amendment. This vote will change “the Internet for the rest of eternity,” he warned.

A Note to Google Users on Net Neutrality:

. . . In the next few days, the House of Representatives is going to vote on a bill that would fundamentally alter the Internet. That bill, and one that may come up for a key vote in the Senate in the next few weeks, would give the big phone and cable companies the power to pick and choose what you will be able to see and do on the Internet.

Today the Internet is an information highway where anybody – no matter how large or small, how traditional or unconventional – has equal access. But the phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest. They want to build a two-tiered system and block the on-ramps for those who can’t pay.

Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight. Please call your representative (202-224-3121) and let your voice be heard. . . .

No Tolls on The Internet By Lawrence Lessig and Robert W. McChesney [via MediaCitizen]

Without net neutrality, the Internet would start to look like cable TV. A handful of massive companies would control access and distribution of content, deciding what you get to see and how much it costs. Major industries such as health care, finance, retailing and gambling would face huge tariffs for fast, secure Internet use — all subject to discriminatory and exclusive dealmaking with telephone and cable giants.

We would lose the opportunity to vastly expand access and distribution of independent news and community information through broadband television. More than 60 percent of Web content is created by regular people, not corporations. How will this innovation and production thrive if creators must seek permission from a cartel of network owners?

The smell of windfall profits is in the air in Washington. The phone companies are pulling out all the stops to legislate themselves monopoly power. They’re spending tens of millions of dollars on inside-the-Beltway print, radio and TV ads; high-priced lobbyists; coin-operated think tanks; and sham “Astroturf” groups — fake grass-roots operations with such Orwellian names as Hands Off the Internet and NetCompetition.org.

They’re opposed by a real grass-roots coalition of more than 700 groups, 5,000 bloggers and 750,000 individual Americans who have rallied in support of net neutrality at http://www.savetheinternet.com/ .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-08-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

The Question of Access

Why is the principle of network neutrality so important? As a hero of mine, Trevor Goodchild, once put it, “It’s not a question of excess, it’s a question of access.” Content, and by extension, what people choose to do with content, is not the just domain for discrimination or constraint.

Tech News :: Google Founder Lobbies For Neutral…

Google co-founder and President Sergey Brin met with U.S. lawmakers Tuesday to press for legislation that would prevent Internet access providers from charging Web sites more for faster content delivery.

“The only way you can have a fast lane that is useful–that people will pay a premium for–is if there are slow lanes,” Brin told reporters after meeting with Republican John McCain, a member of the Senate committee that oversees telecommunications issues.

Google, Microsoft and other major Internet site operators have joined with small Web site owners to oppose broadband providers such as AT&T and Verizon Communications that want to offer faster network performance to companies that pay more. The issue has been dubbed Net neutrality by those who oppose a two-tier system of access and pricing.

John McCain pushes a la carte TV channels bill

“We are pleased to see that this bill pushes forward the concept of themed a la carte family programming,” said RCN Senior Vice President of Strategic and External Affairs Richard Ramlall. “Since August 2004, our company has expressed a willingness to test consumer reaction to themed program tiers on our digital systems. Most recently we met with Federal Communications Chairman Kevin Martin and indicated we would be willing to conduct a trial in Boston.

“We believe that themed a la carte tiers would greatly enhance consumer choice by allowing them to choose from an array of smaller programming tiers, limited to the kind of categories of programming they most want and value. At the same time it would support development of new and diverse programming in those categories,” explained Ramlall.

“However, we’ve been frustrated in our effort to develop such offerings by the impediments imposed by programmers. Many of them are owned or controlled by the largest incumbent cable operators, who require tying arrangements and other contractual restrictions that preclude RCN and other competitive providers from offering consumer-driven programming options.”

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-07-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

FCC Chairman: Too soon for net neutrality rules

CHICAGO (MarketWatch) — Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin said Monday that it would be premature for the agency to issue rules on the doctrine of Net neutrality, which would prevent discrimination in the delivery of services over the Web. . . .

Martin added that the commission has demonstrated its willingness to step in and take action if it sees, for example, a large cable or phone company discriminating against certain content providers. However, he said: “We’re not seeing widespread examples of abuses in the marketplace that would justify us trying to adopt rules at this time.”

The FCC chair said the commission’s main objectives under his watch are to make sure broadband deployment continues; that the regulatory environment “rewards” investors in new technologies; that there be sufficient competition to ensure “more innovation” and benefits for consumers; and that there be an “even playing field” that “treats like services alike.”

Specifically, he referred to digital subscriber line-based broadband technology and the cable modem, which enable users to obtain fast Internet connections.

Net Neutrality: Who’s David? Who’s Goliath?

I guess since they really only care about one side of the value chain of the Internet – the side that touches the users – they are viewed as representing the “little guy,” the end-user, the consumer. In reality, they are using their market power and big business lobbying oomph (that is a technical term) to shape the debate so that they can benefit from the network but don’t have to invest in it.

The “other” side of the debate, mainly the service providers, are trying not to get their hands tied in developing next generation networks with speeds and feeds that will be able to support all the high-bandwidth consumer and business applications that are coming down the pike. They actually care deeply about consumers as well, which is why they are seeking help from their large users (see pro-net-neutrality advocates above) to pay for differentiated services and quality of service which will help offset the huge cost of their infrastructure investment.

Craigslist is being blocked by Cox Interactive – is this a net neutrality issue? By Tom Foremski for Silicon Valley Watcher

An SVW reader left this tip:

I use Cox cable internet, Cox’s media empire printed classifieds is one of their big revenue drivers. Guess what? If you try to access Craigslist over Cox Cable internet… its nearly impossible! It appears that they throttle access to craigslist – as a matter of fact there have been a zillion complaints but hey, who can blame Cox? They’re trying to stop the opening cap in their money dam! Maybe you should investigate this tip further. Cheers.

I did investigate further, I walked out of my apartment and across Alamo Square and popped in on Jim Buckmaster, the CEO of Craigslist. Jim was just getting back from work and I spoke with Susan Best, publicist for Craigslist. Susan said they have known about the problem with Cox.

Jim soon arrived and said the problem of access had been going on since late February. It had something to do with the security software that Cox isusing from a company called Authentium.

Cox has been collaborating with Authentium since April 2005 to develop the security software suite.

Back on February 23rd Authentium acknowledged that their software is blocking Craigslist but it still hasn’t fixed the problem, more than three months later. That’s a heck of long time to delete some text from their blacklist. . . .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-06-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

Net Neutrality Astroturf Commenting Harms..The Telcos

For several weeks now, I’ve been writing about what appears to be a coordinated group of possibly paid blog commenters who roam the web looking for blog items on net neutrality. (See here and here.) These commenters almost always write in generalities and their comments are always negative of net neutrality regulations.

Mark Glaser at PBS’ MediaShift blog has done a superb job of following up on this matter and has an excellent analysis of the net neutrality astroturf-sock-puppet-commenting brouhaha. If you’re a telco (and I assume the pack of commenters were hired by telcos and not cable operators, but I could be very wrong…it just seems such a telco-ish thing to do somehow), make sure you read Glaser’s write-up of his investigation.

Glaser contacted a known telco PR firm called Issue Dynamics Inc. to find out if they’re behind the robotic anti-net neutrality comments. IDI’s assistant vice president Kevin Reid answered Glaser’s email with an emphatic no — in fact (and here’s the lesson), Reid thinks a stunt like this ultimately hurts the telcos’ cause.

Why? Because now no one will take at face value any blog comments that deride net neutrality, however sincere the commenters may be. . . .

Internet Freedom Update

A couple of updates on the net neutrality fight. The tech companies are wading into the fight, gingerly (with eBay as the most effective). I’m hearing, though I can’t confirm, that the telcos are spending between ten and fifty million dollars on this fight. Their ads are splashed all over local TV in DC, and in other areas of the country, though it’s hard to track because the money is channeled through front groups like Hands off the Internet and TV4US (along with indirect costs, such as money to think tanks).

This money has bought a lot of support in the House, though less in the Senate. The overall telecom reform bill that’s passing is called the COPE Act, and that includes the evisceration of net neutrality. We always thought that it would go through the House; what’s surprising is how long it’s taken.

We’ve set up this fight in the House so that the Senate takes the issue seriously. Now we’re in the last throes of the House fight. . . .

Does The Power Company Do It?

If not, then why should the telco cartel? youtube video

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

7 Steps & the Key to Spotting Trends

by

Getting the People Data

Trendspotters 101 logo

It’s easy to get the people data. Just become obsessive. No, I don’t mean get clinical. Don’t be grabbing people off the street and pulling them in under interrogation lights. I mean get steeped in the culture, become a saturation learner. You can see it in trendspotters — Seth Godin, Tom Peters, Prince Campbell — that they live people. breathe what people think. People aren’t just information on paper to them. People are what trendspotters think about, talk about, even when you’re not around.

They do it so much their significant others say, “Honey, don’t make me live it.” [Read more…]

Net Neutrality 6-05-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

A think tank issues a report favorable to it’s funders? Shocking! by George

Can you believe it? The Heritage Foundation issues a brief against net neutrality without disclosing its relationship to companies also against it: . . .

Nothing Neutral about Net Neutrality

The issue is more complicated than this — and even goes so far as to granting corporations the same 1st amendment rights that individual citizens have. Just as a citizen has the right to disagree with something and to express that disagreement by NOT speaking in favor of it, so too a corporation can choose to NOT speak in favor of or support in any way something it disagrees with. A newspaper does not have to print an editorial it does not support. That sounds ok you say. But how about: An ISP does not have to deliver an e-mail it does not support?

Statistics Lie – Are They Alone?

I’ll be damned! There’s the $200 Billion! Right there! They’ve been using it to eliminate competition and drive their argument that they need more to improve the infrastructure.

Don’t we feel good now that we have been giving them our money so they can screw us? How’s it feel to have some arrogant human like Ed Whitacre tell us they’re “HIS PIPES.” They’re our damn pipes Ed – we’ve already paid for them and for your salary also!

Putting all the talk of packets, fiber optics, infrastructure, last mile, pipes etc. aside, the bottom line is that the Telco’s have a money issue at stake. It isn’t about research and development, it isn’t about improvement, it’s about making more! And they don’t care about us. This argument that its about charging the content providers like Google? Just lame stuff because that will all filter down to you and I anyway.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE