The Internet Is About To Change For The Worse
Terry Heaton
Telcos buying legislation to screw you and me
[…]
Meanwhile, there’s a House hearing tomorrow on a new bill that gives the Telcos what they want and will alter the way the internet is used by allowing them to divide bandwidth into a haves and have-nots system. By refusing to spell out net neutrality, this bill gives that authority to, of all people, the FCC and sticks a screw you finger in the eyes of small businesses and entrepreneurs in the U.S.
Declan McCullagh writes for CNet News:
“A November draft of Barton’s (Republican Joe Barton of Texas) bill (click here for PDF) explicitly said broadband providers “may not block, or unreasonably impair or interfere with” Internet access. The final version (PDF), on the other hand, simply gives the Federal Communications Commission the authority to set rules and publish violations.”
Barton released the text of the bill (the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act) Monday and scheduled a hearing for tomorrow. A vote could come as early as next week. Why the hurry? Because that’s the way flimflammery works.
Despite all the nice rhetoric about the Telcos needing to recoup their costs, the reality is that this legislation has been bought and paid for by Telco profits, and the only thing it guarantees is the furtherance of that. Call or email your Representatives and tell them you want net neutrality spelled out in the bill.
If you care about this and other internet freedom issues, I’d advise you to use this as a reason to pop on over to EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) and become a member supporter.
UPDATE: Kevin Marks has written a smart post on the Telcos trying to force their obsolete dedicated pipes model on an already supportive network model.
Tags: activism, business, capitalism, censorship, change, FCC, internet, Joe Barton, legislation, lobbyist, net neutrality, politics, telcos, Terry Heaton, World 2.0.
Search
No Tweets RSS feedLatest Posts
- album cover finished… whatch…
- working on designing the "…
- booker doesn’t tell band that …
- at 6th & vine in W-S, havi…
- checking out uncg’s master of …
- taking a prop plane from LGA t…
- can everyone thumbs up this sh…
- mixing down the recording of t…
- FREE. SORRY ABOUT DRESDEN. 30 …
- and the show is a go!
What I Write About (see all)
- 9 11 accountability activism Adam Smith Problem advertising America antiwar artsy fartsy blogging business capitalism change citizen media community Congress corporation corruption creativity disturbing experience design film funny George Bush government graffiti Greensboro Hip hop humanity information architecture innovation inspiration internet Iraq War journalism lyrics media music New World Order New York City North Carolina personal philosophy photography poetry politics reality Republican Party terrorism video World 2.0
Why are the same folks who accuse members of Congress of being bought and paid for by the telcos the same people who want to see those same members of Congress regulate the internet…a medium that has thrived BECAUSE of the lack of regulation?
First of all, tell me just how net neutrality legislation is needed. I don’t see a problem, and no one can seem to prove these accusations that the telcos are going to limit content or access. But even if that did happen, and it won’t, the consumers would solve the problem quickly by switching carriers. It’s called the free market, and it works.
the conversation around network neutrality isn’t focused on the limitation of content or access, it’s about keeping pipe owners from establishing a pay-for-use service to those who can afford higher broadband speeds/costs, which in turn *reduces* the speed of the internet for the rest of us.
as far as i know, there’s no way to provide such a service tier without negatively impacting the non-participants.
But again, why do you trust Congress to regulate the internet? Won’t the free market do a better job?
please give me an example how “the free market” can ensure network neutrality. i’m not all about legislation, but in this case if it happens, it’s necessary to do it right. telcom led legislation ain’t doin’ it right…
Given that the vast majority of broadband customers have a choice of more than 2 ISPs, in the event that a telco squeezed its pipes (or otherwise limited degraded or blocked content), customers would abandon said telco and take their business elsewhere. Voila, the market will have prevailed.
david weinberger has an in-depth, yet brief take on the issues.
Readers of this comment thread should know that oldhats and pkp646 are part of a tag-team of industry shills who invade blog comments on net neutrality to argue against any government regulation of the telephone companies. Other names who run with this crowd are John Rice, lessgov, AJ Carey and Paulaner01. (Google any of these names in combination and you’ll see how their game works).
By tag-teaming the blogs, this small handful of individuals gives the false impression of broad popular support for an telco-friendly position.
What they fail to point out is that Net Neutrality has been the rule that has governed access to the Internet since its inception. It’s the reason that the Internet has become such a dynamic force for new ideas, economic innovation and free speech. What they really want is for Congress to radically re-write our telecommunications laws so that companies like AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth can swoop in and become gatekeepers to Internet content — in a way that benefits no one except the largest ISPs.
I’d like these people to tell us how it is that they appear together (usually one after the other) spouting identical industry talking points.
What gives fellas? Are you being paid to do this? And by whom?