Successful Blog

Net Neutrality 12-13-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

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

Alaska’s Stevens Left Out in the Cold

Senator Ted Stevens boasted this summer that he had nearly all the 60 Senate votes he needed to muscle his massive telecommunications bill through Congress by the end of the year. But as his fellow lawmakers called it quits this weekend, his quest to overhaul America’s telecom laws ended in failure.

[ . . . ]

Some doubted that a rowdy coalition fighting for such a nebulous cause as net neutrality could shut down a bill backed by Stevens, the powerful chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee.

“This is a huge victory for real people and a clear signal to the next Congress that standing up for big bold ideas is a winning political proposition,” declared Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Civic Action, a member of “Save the Internet” group that campaigned to sink the bill

But if his crowd is serious, it will have to do more than block legislation – it will have to get laws passed requiring net neutrality in the next Congress. That will be a great deal more difficult than thwarting Ted Stevens.

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 10-04-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

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

Internet Freedom and Innovation at Risk: Why Congress Must Restore Strong Net Neutrality Protection

READ THIS ONE IN ITS ENTIRETY

Net Neutrality rests on three guiding principles:

  • No discrimination against lawful content. Net Neutrality ensures that Internet users have the right to access lawful websites of their choice and to post lawful content, free of discrimination or degradation by network providers. . . . .
  • Equal Internet access at an equal price. Under Net Neutrality, network providers cannot give preferential treatment to their own services at the expense of competing sites consumers want to use. . . . .

    • .

  • Consumers choose network equipment. . . . Net Neutrality prevents network providers from eliminating competing equipment by making it incompatible with their gateway. In the process, it ensures that equipment choice remains in the hands of Internet users, where it rightfully belongs

[ . . .]

In 2005, the Telecoms Captured the FCC and Eliminated Net Neutrality Protection Following the Supreme Court’s Brand X Decision.

[ . . .]

In 2006, big network providers have censored lawful content and blocked their Internet competitors:

  1. Time Warner’s AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com, an advocacy campaign opposing AOL’s pay-to-send e-mail scheme.
  2. BellSouth blocked its customers’ access to Myspace.com in Tennessee and Florida.
  3. Cingular Wireless, run by AT&T, bars access to PayPal to make a payment on Ebay because it has struck a deal with another online payment service, which pays Cingular for that privileged status.

[ . . .]
The United States Senate is currently considering a bipartisan bill offered by Senators Olympia Snowe and Byron Dorgan, S. 2917, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act [Hyperlink to Snowe-Dorgan bill], that would restore Network Neutrality protections in place before July 2005. The Snowe-Dorgan bill requires that any content, application, or service offered through the Internet be provided on a basis that is “reasonable and non-discriminatory” and equivalent to the access, speed, quality of service, and bandwidth of services offered by network owners. It further prohibits network providers from blocking or degrading lawful Internet content. Finally, it leaves the choice for attaching legal devices to networks squarely in the hands of consumers, and not the Telecoms and cable companies.

A Telecom-sponsored alternative bill offered by Senator Ted Stevens, S. 2686, the Communications, Consumer’s Choice, and Broadband Deployment Act of 2006 [hyperlink to Net Neutrality provision of Stevens bill], permits Net discrimination to continue unabated. The bill provides no protection for Internet users and entrepreneurs. Instead, it merely includes a toothless requirement that the FCC study the Internet market for five years and file annual reports to Congress on the activities of network owners. Telecoms and cable companies are spending tens of millions of dollars in ads and big-dollar contributions pushing the Stevens bill to members of Congress. They view it as a small price to pay for the billions in profits they will reap as gatekeepers for the Internet’s content and users.
[ . . .]

READ THIS ONE IN ITS ENTIRETY

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 9-27-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

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

Net Neutrality Fight Moves to Pennsylvania Legislature

. . . With the Stevens bill looking like it’s going to die and a possible changeover in Congress, the telecom companies are looking for an alternative legislative vehicle so they don’t have to have strong net neutrality protections tacked onto the telecom reform bill next cycle. And that means going to the states. Rather than passing national franchising, the telecom companies are trying to get a bunch of big states to pass state video franchising bills, and then they won’t have to deal with a Federal bill next cycle and net neutrality can just die without legislative action. One of these states is Pennsylvania, and the bill is called SB 1247.

Now, video franchising isn’t bad in itself, but this bill is horrible. It allows redlining, which means that no one will invest in building out broadband to rural areas. The only people who will get cable and internet service over fiber are in high income suburbs and dense urban areas. And obviously, there is no net neutrality protections.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 9-08-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

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

Fight For the Internet Freedom Heats Up [via 3quarksdaily]

As the return of Congress loomed, however, the Alaska senator took a poke from the largest daily newspaper in his state, the Anchorage Daily News, which bluntly declared in a September 4 editoral that: “Net Neutrality is a good idea. Sen. Ted Stevens should support it.”

“Sen. Stevens has said he doesn’t see an immediate problem that requires regulation. In other words, he’s reluctant to have the government set the playing rules until more companies are caught cheating. Apparently he thinks competition can be counted on to prevent any abuses,” explained the editorial. “Only problem is, local Internet service is not a fluid, totally free market with a lot of competitors. Many markets are served by only one or two high-speed Internet companies. Switching providers is not as easy as driving to the next gas station or grocery store. Special expertise and special equipment are required to switch. Many consumers may not even be sophisticated enough to know when their Internet service is playing favorites in sending content.”

The Anchorage Daily News concluded that, “Net Neutrality is hardly a heavy-handed government intrusion into the free-wheeling world of the Internet. It is a simple antitrust rule that protects consumers by keeping Internet companies from exploiting their control over connections. Congress should get ahead of the curve and ensure net neutrality before abuses begin to spread.”

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 9-07-2006

by


Net Neutrality Links

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

Net Neutrality Wins More Senators

The Net Neutrality movement is gaining support among U.S. senators. At the close of the August recess, the SaveTheInternet.com coalition added four previously uncommitted legislators to the cause.

According to the website, that brings the tally to 26 senators in favor of the Snowe-Dorgan amendment to Senator Ted Stevens’ sweeping telecom bill. There is ground left to make up, though, with half the Senate still uncertain.

The split is almost entirely according to party lines. All 14 of the senators who’ve made a stance against Net Neutrality are Republican. Of the 26 senators in favor, 24 are Democrat. Fifty-six are still uncommitted, and four straddle the fence.

[. . . ]

“Powerful telephone company lobbyists will tell you one of two things – both of which, of course, are false,” said [David] Petit [of the Public Interest Research Group.] “First, they will tell you that the Stevens bill already preserves Net Neutrality. This is completely not true. Second, they might say ‘don’t regulate the Internet. Let the market decide.’ … All we want to do is reinstate the Net Neutrality principles that guarantee that the Internet treats everyone fairly.”

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 9-03-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

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

Outpouring of Support for Net Neutrality Sweeps the Country

From Buffalo to Fayetteville, Orlando to Seattle, the outpouring of public support for Net Neutrality comes as the Senate’s August recess ends, and members return to Washington to consider a major overhaul of the nation’s telecommunications laws. In response to the events, four senators — Mark Dayton (D-Minn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), James Jeffords (I-Vt.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) — issued strong statements in support of Net Neutrality. Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) pledged his support for Net Neutrality in August, after being questioned by a constituent at a public event.

In each location, local citizens urged their senators to place the needs of the public ahead of the interests of phone and cable lobbyists — and to oppose any legislation that lacks enforceable Net Neutrality protections.

[ . . . ]

More than 750 diverse groups have come together as the SavetheInternet.com Coalition — including Free Press, MoveOn, the Christian Coalition, Gun Owners of America, U.S. PIRG, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association, Consumers Union, Common Cause, Craig Newmark from Craigslist, musicians REM and Moby and others. The SavetheInternet.com coalition collected over 1 million petition signatures online in support of Net Neutrality.

The House has already passed a bill without Net Neutrality. A bill introduced by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) — HR 5252, which could reach the Senate floor in September — fails to provide meaningful or enforceable Net Neutrality protections.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE