background preloader


Facebook Twitter


Netflix will pay Comcast to not throttle broadband. This is why. The Internet Must Go. Net neutrality in Europe: EDRi response to EC consultation - why does this read like 2007? Tuesday, October 16, 2012 EDRi response to EC consultation - why does this read like 2007?

Net neutrality in Europe: EDRi response to EC consultation - why does this read like 2007?

EDRi's response to the latest retro EC consultation on net neutrality is an enjoyable deconstruction of the extraordinarily amnesiac consultation questions - the EC is pretending it's not yet 2007 and the problem can be solved through 'super-user' consumers understanding exactly what (illegal) throttling is being undertaken, and switching contracts (which is itself, er, illegal in most Member States). The EC appears to have decided not to enforce its' own legal requirements? Or are we about to be pleasantly surprised by the Dutch Commissioner going Dutch on us? Posted by chris at 10/16/2012 12:23:00 PM Email ThisBlogThis!


Time to Fight for Net Neutrality in the EU. Subscribe to this blog About Author Glyn Moody's look at all levels of the enterprise open source stack.

Time to Fight for Net Neutrality in the EU

The blog will look at the organisations that are embracing open source, old and new alike (start-ups welcome), and the communities of users and developers that have formed around them (or not, as the case may be). Contact Author Email Glyn Twitter Profile. La Neutralité dInternet dans les différents pays européens : état des débats et enseignements à en tirer. 2012 - who guards the network guardians? Monica Horten Published on 03 January 2012 Will the next corporate scandal involve the Internet?

2012 - who guards the network guardians?

The Financial Times today* suggests that 2012 will be a pivotal year for the media. I think that when we look back in a few years’ time, 2010 will be a tipping point for the Internet too. In retrospect, we will know whether those who currently guard the networks had a public or a private interest at heart. In 2011, we saw the apparent vindication of the Internet as an enabler of democracy, coupled with a massive growth in Internet traffic, ending the year with a huge spike on Xmas day as people downloaded apps on their new Smartphones. Why would one bring these apparently unrelated concepts together in a discussion of Internet policy? Millions of apps downloaded on smartphones signals a volume increase in mobile traffic not anticipated when the regulations were drawn up. Against that traffic increase, we have to consider the blocking demands from an increasing list of stakeholders. Wikio. US House Subcommittee Votes To Kill Net Neutrality.

Clarinette: "RT @sdmediareform: RT @digiphile: ..." « New Flare-Up in Capitol Over 'Net Neutrality' Updated Feb. 17, 2011 12:01 a.m.

New Flare-Up in Capitol Over 'Net Neutrality'

ET WASHINGTON—In a contentious hearing, House Republicans attacked new regulations for broadband Internet lines and criticized the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission for adopting them. Republicans are targeting the "net neutrality" rules, which would bar Internet providers from blocking or slowing Internet traffic and services, as well as new regulations in such areas as health care and the environment, as unnecessary and overly burdensome on industry.

EU CommissnR net neutrality

Net neutrality US. Net Neutrality And The Future Of Web 3.0. Digg Email Share 0 Email Share Despite what you may think of everything you find here, The Internet is a celebrated platform for free expression and sharing…or is it? The pressing issue of Net Neutrality becomes more and more serious each day as private corporations continue to play a growing role into what users are able to access online. Netneutrality UK. Keeping the Internet Open, Innovative and Free. The ability to create new content and services on the Internet without seeking permission from gatekeepers has enabled unprecedented innovation.

Keeping the Internet Open, Innovative and Free

Regulatory safeguards are needed to protect against the risk that by favoring some Internet traffic over others, broadband providers could become gatekeepers and undermine the medium’s openness. At the same time, burdensome regulation could interfere with legitimate network management. A balance must be struck that prevents unreasonable discrimination without granting government unfettered jurisdiction over the Internet. Fiorina: Politicians don't care about Silicon Valley. ASPEN, Co.

Fiorina: Politicians don't care about Silicon Valley

--Carly Fiorina, the former chief executive at Hewlett-Packard, on Monday promised a deregulatory approach toward technology if elected to the U.S. Senate, warning of governmental overreach on Net neutrality and saying that current politicians don't understand what's important to Silicon Valley. Fiorina, who won the Republican nomination in June, echoed what many technology executives have said for years: America's skilled-worker visa system is so badly broken that "we have to start from scratch," and that too many government policies push jobs overseas instead of making U.S. companies competitive against international rivals. Verizon & Google Want to Kill the Open Internet. August 20, 2010 | Like this article?

Verizon & Google Want to Kill the Open Internet

Join our email list: Stay up to date with the latest headlines via email. 15 Facts About Net Neutrality [Infographic] Net neutrality has taken up a lot of headline space over the last two weeks.

15 Facts About Net Neutrality [Infographic]

There was the Goggle and Verizon thing, and then something happened with the FCC and some Congress members, and the French may have been involved somehow... Admit it, your eyes are glazing over aren't they? Yes, it's true, net neutrality sometimes isn't the easiest thing to wrap your head around. But the artistic folks at Online MBA Programs are here to help with 15 facts you may not have known about what neutrality on the Internet actually means. [Source: Online MBA Programs] Embed this Image on Your Site: Berkman Buzz: Week of August 9, 2010. August 13, 2010 BERKMAN BUZZ: A look at the past week's online Berkman conversations If you would like to receive the Buzz weekly via email, please sign up here.

Berkman Buzz: Week of August 9, 2010

What's being discussed...take your pick or browse below. * Doc Searls might be wrong about the future of the Internet. * Jonathan Zittrain gets to the core of net neutrality. * CMLP warns against three-strikes Internet laws. * David Weinberger wonders if Google ever really loved him in the first place. * Herdict discusses Australian Internet filtering. * Weekly Global Voices: "Rwanda: Bloggers Discuss Presidential Election 2010" The full buzz. After Google-Verizon fizzle, FCC should force Net neutrality. THE “LEGISLATIVE framework proposal’’ on net neutrality released by and last week was a shock and a disappointment for those who had bought into Google’s motto of “Don’t be evil.’’

After Google-Verizon fizzle, FCC should force Net neutrality

It’s a sad example of what happens when corporations are allowed to write regulatory rules — and why the Federal Communications Commission needs to re-seize the reins on broadband regulation. Net neutrality — the concept that Internet service providers shouldn’t be able to “shape’’ traffic, by, say, providing access to certain, popular sites at a speedier rate than newer, less popular ones — is one of the defining issues for the future of communications. Google had long been seen as an important ally of neutrality advocates, but its proposal with Verizon represents a troubling turnaround. The proposal suggests that all wirebound broadband Internet traffic should be treated neutrally, but then goes on to carve out a myriad of loopholes, most of them very broadly defined. Global Voices Advocacy » Spaniard bloggers react to the Google-Verizon proposed policy. Spaniard bloggers have been very busy discussing and arguing about the recent Google-Verizon proposed policy for an open Internet.

Most of them are against it because they consider it a very delicate subject because of the not so distant issue of the Sinde discussion when, “the Spanish Government announced at the beginning of December 2009 a proposal that may lead to shutting down websites that offer P2P file sharing of music and films, without the necessity of a court order.

Protection of Intellectual Property: The Core of the Net Neutrality Debate. It didn't take long for criticism of the Verizon/Google net neutrality proposal to start pouring in. "[I]nterest groups, bloggers, and even Google fanboys [have started] discrediting the plan" according to one trade publication. Although most of the commentary simply echoes various groups' long-held positions, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the nation's foremost cyber-rights watchdog, provided a crucial insight about the plan that goes to the core of the net neutrality issue. EFF found merit with some aspects of the proposal, particularly with regard to limiting the FCC"s regulatory authority. The NGO stated that although they strongly support net neutrality, "we are opposed to open-ended grants of regulatory authority to the FCC.

" EFF also thought that a Verizon/Google recommendation for using standard setting bodies to "develop reasonable network management" was an "intriguing" approach to "handling concerns about politicization of the FCC processes.... " Google : sa stratégie à long terme, et la neutralité du Net. Après avoir révélé la proposition de régulation de l'Internet que l'entreprise a élaboré avec Verizon, et étant maintenant attaqué par Oracle sur son utilisation de Java dans Android, plusieurs réactions de Google par la voix de son PDG Eric Schmidt sont à signaler.

Jonathan Zittrain asks why Google made a pact with Verizon at all. Jonathan Zittrain offers a typically rational, insightful analysis of the Google-Verizon net neutrality pact on Newsweek, as interviewed by Dan Lyons. Professor of internet law at Harvard, and co-director of the Berkman Centre for Internet & Society, Zittrain asks why Google is party to the agreement at all. How the internet might look without net neutrality Is it involved because of its role as a content provider, or as a potential provider of internet access?

"The practical answer may be that Google has argued fiercely against any perceived attempt by telecoms carriers to charge for acceleration (or delivery at all) of Google's content to those carriers' subscribers, and their part of the deal is to climb down from public conflict with the carriers and declare what would suit it," he says, saying Google can be expected not to do much more than represent its own interests. It is ultimately up to the public, and politicians, to decide what to do with the proposal. Q&A: Professor of Internet Law Jonathan Zittrain. Link by Link - In Google-Verizon Deal, Fears for Privacy. Ashurst. Following public concerns over the use of Phorm, Inc.' S behavioural advertising technology by UK internet service providers (ISPs), the European Commission has issued proceedings to address what it perceives as structural problems in the UK's implementation of European privacy Directives relevant to electronic communications.

In particular, the Commission considers that the absence of active user consent may be insufficient to ensure the confidentiality of public electronic communications. This is likely to raise concerns among ISPs and website owners that want to take advantage of Phorm's Webwise technology, and may force them to re-visit their proposed consent mechanisms. The Google/Verizon framework. I’ve been trying to figure out what the Google / Verizon announcement means. It’s not easy to do, in large part because the announcement doesn’t precisely announce anything. It’s titled a “legislative framework proposal.”

That is, on its own terms it’s not an agreement between two companies — neither is bound to do anything by it, which I guess is how they could deny last week’s New York Times report about a “deal on web pay tiers” — but it does represent a meeting of the minds between them about what ought to happen in the world, in particular what American (and presumably others’) law should become here. That kind of mental-but-not-legal agreement can get away with being far more vague than a typical contract. It’s amenable to what Cass Sunstein calls “ incompletely theorized agreements .” Here’s my own take so far — I figured it might be useful to share my own process in working this through rather than writing (yet) a firm advocacy piece for one view over another.

On The Media: Transcript of "Net Neutrality, A Musical Interpretation" (August 13, 2010) Reactions To Google, Verizon Proposal For 'Open Internet' Google & Verizon's Version Of Net Neutrality Offers Little Protection For Music Industry Innovation. Yesterday, Google and Verizon, announced a private agreement between the two internet powerhouses that they believe should serve as a framework for U.S. public policy on net neutrality. Report claims Google, Verizon on verge of net neutrality deal.

Editor's note, 05/08/2010: Google and Verizon have dismissed the New York Times story on which our report was based. Google-Verizon Net Neutrality Pact: 5 Red Flags - PCWorld. Google and Verizon unveiled a proposal to maintain an open Internet while creating room for a broadband network of premium services. The proposal has no legal standing whatsoever, and is basically a policy paper on network neutrality for consideration by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission. The Google-Verizon Deal. The Internet-management proposal released this week by Google and Verizon is unlikely to be adopted by Congress or other industry stakeholders anytime soon, if ever.

Google 'has made few compromises' on net neutrality. Google vs. Google On Wireless Net Neutrality. While I still think that uproar over Google and Verizon's "deal""agreement""pinky shake" "policy framework" statement on net neutrality is quite exaggerated given that no one has accepted it and the framework is more or less meaningless, it is amusing to watch the reaction to all of this. Google CEO Schmidt: No Anonymity Is The Future Of Web.

Google: Looking Out for #1 on Net Neutrality. Why Google Became A Carrier-Humping, Net Neutrality Surrender Monkey (UPDATED) An Impenetrable Web of Fees - Room for Debate. Consumer Choices on the Internet - Room for Debate. Regulators Make Matters Worse - Room for Debate. Controlling Commerce and Speech - Room for Debate. A Threat to Startups - Room for Debate. Call It 'Net Irrationality' - Room for Debate. Regulate Today's Rockefellers - Room for Debate.

A Deregulation Debacle for the Internet - Room for Debate. Net Neutrality Is Hard to Define - Room for Debate. Finding common ground on an open Internet. Do Not Track: Not as Simple as it Sounds. Net Neutrality Advocates Blast Google, Verizon Plan - PCWorld. Net neutrality. Google / Verizon. Infothought: "Net Neutrality" - deals, pawns, catspaws, and the jumping of sharks. Marvin Ammori: A Guide to the Network Neutrality Discussions at the FCC. Ammori’s Guide to the Net Neutrality Discussions at the FCC. Rethinking Net Neutrality after the Verizon/Google Framework. Blog The Future of the Internet — And How to Stop It. The Twitter "Bomb Hoax" - A Change Of Plea. Essential new book on 'Net Policy (blessed by Lessig!): "Internet Architecture and Innovation"

Google CEO Schmidt Fuels Critics With Controversial Privacy Remarks. Verizon-Google Legislative Framework Proposal. Google favorable à un internet à deux vitesses. Internet, schminternet « BuzzMachine.

Net neutralite France