tmcg: (sword)
Terry ([personal profile] tmcg) wrote2006-06-12 08:35 am
Entry tags:

Net Neutrality

From What If They Gagged Gutenberg? (by Craig Newmark, San Francisco Chronicle, June 11th):

Imagine if the leaders of 16th century Germany, feeling threatened by the democratizing forces of the printing press, had taken Gutenberg’s invention and limited its use to those they politically agreed with — or if Luther had to pay licensing fees for nailing up his 95 Theses on every church door in Germany.

That’s what big telecom is trying to do: shut the democratic architecture of the Internet. By creating two "tiers" — one that is fast and charges fees to Web site owners — and a second class Web that is cheaper and slower and could limit access to independently run sites — big telecom is hoping to make a larger profit off the Internet.


In a June 10th commentary, he offered a couple of other metaphors:

Here's a real world example that shows how this would work. Let's say you call Joe's Pizza and the first thing you hear is a message saying you'll be connected in a minute or two, but if you want, you can be connected to Pizza Hut right away. That's not fair, right? You called Joe's and want some Joe's pizza. Well, that's how some telecommunications executives want the Internet to operate, with some Web sites easier to access than others. For them, this would be a money-making regime.

[...]

... The telecom executives tell us that they can be trusted to play fair to let all companies, and not just their paying partners, be equally accessible from homes everywhere. But some of these executives have admitted that they intend to cheat.

William L. Smith, the chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., recently told the Washington Post that BellSouth should, for example, be able to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc. or vice versa. "If I go to the airport, I can buy a coach standby ticket or a first-class ticket," Smith said. "In the shipping business, I can get two-day air or six-day ground."

In my view, executives like Smith forget that they get the use of public resources, like the airwaves and public rights of way, on which they have built their businesses and made a lot of money. As such, they shouldn't be able to squeeze out some Web sites in favor of others. This would be a betrayal of the public trust.


To which Josh Marshall adds:

What shipping speed do you think TPM will get? Kos? Redstate? Figure 6 day ground. And how about CNN and Fox? One way or another they'll get guaranteed overnight. Or maybe Bellsouth partners with Fox, so the Fox site downloads faster in Georgia and CNN goes faster out west.

It changes what the Internet is and makes it into something more like Cable TV where the local cable company decides which channels are on the box.


House Ignores Public, Sells Out the Internet through Passage of COPE Act (press release at savetheinternet.com):

Net Neutrality Advocates Look to Senate to Save Internet Freedom

WASHINGTON -- June 8, 2005 -- Today the US House passed the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (COPE) without meaningful network neutrality provisions promoted by the diverse, right-left www.savetheinternet.com coalition of public interest and business groups.

[...]

The battle for Net Neutrality -- or Internet freedom -- now moves to the Senate, where there is significantly stronger bipartisan support. Senators Snowe (R-Maine) and Dorgan (D-N.D.) have introduced the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006" that enjoys the strong support from the SaveTheInternet coalition.


From Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo...

June 12th:

The fight is already over in the House. Now it goes to the senate. A new telecommunications bill is being moved through the Senate Commerce Committee by Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-AK).

The question is whether the new bill will include Net Neutrality language or not.

The pro-Net Neutrality legislation is co-sponsored by Sens. Snowe (R-ME) and Dorgan (D-ND) -- the Snowe-Dorgan bill (S-2917).

So if you're interested in trying to find out where your senator stands, the key question is whether they support and plan to vote for the Snowe-Dorgan bill. A supporter of Net Neutrality should say 'yes', an opponent 'no'.


And June 9th:

Okay, so Dorgan, Inouye, Leahy, Boxer, Clinton, Obama and Wyden are down for Net Neutrality. Just because someone's not a cosponsor, you can't infer from that that they're not for it. But it does give a list to start with of who's on the right side.

Now, here's what I'd like to do. Many of you out there are working this debate and you know which senators are leaning which way. But everybody can get on the Net and start googling. So I want your help in putting together a list of where the different Democrats stand on this issue. Let us know what you find out.

[identity profile] thirdstreet.livejournal.com 2006-06-12 03:46 pm (UTC)(link)
It's pretty appalling stuff and I have to wonder where the US is heading other than totalitarianism if this keeps up. It saddens me immensely.