good
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
Robert M. McDowell - Hands off the Internet
Despite this defeat, the FCC might still try to regulate the Internet under century-old rules made for railroads and Ma Bell phone monopolies. This mistaken effort would hinder recent successes in deploying broadband throughout the country. While the U.S. economy has shrunk substantially over the past two years, the Internet sector has flourished.
The future of the internet: A virtual counter-revolution | The Economist
THE first internet boom, a decade and a half ago, resembled a religious movement. Omnipresent cyber-gurus, often framed by colourful PowerPoint presentations reminiscent of stained glass, prophesied a digital paradise in which not only would commerce be frictionless and growth exponential, but democracy would be direct and the nation-state would no longer exist. One, John-Perry Barlow, even penned “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace”. Even though all this sounded Utopian when it was preached, it reflected online reality pretty accurately. The internet was a wide-open space, a new frontier. For the first time, anyone could communicate electronically with anyone else—globally and essentially free of charge.
1) Transparency for both wireline and wireless services, requiring disclosure to consumers, content and device providers, 2) Wireline providers are prohibited from blocking any lawful content, apps, services or devices; wireless providers, from blocking websites and competing telephony services, 3) Wireline providers are prohibited from unreasonably discriminating against any traffic (but no such rule for wireless). Paid prioritization is not explicitly banned, though any such regime would likely raise red flags for the commission under the “no unreasonable discrimination” test. That will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Below are key excerpts from the report and order the FCC voted on yesterday.
What the new FCC open Internet rules could mean for net neutrality | Gov 2.0: The Power of Platforms
Free Press is a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization working to reform the media. Through education, organizing and advocacy, we promote diverse and independent media ownership, strong public media, quality journalism, and universal access to communications. The Free Press Action Fund is member-supported. We don't take money from government, political parties or businesses.
Save the Internet | Join the fight for Internet Freedom
The Durable Internet: Preserving Network Neutrality without Regulation | Timothy B. Lee | Cato Institute: Policy Analysis
An important reason for the Internet's remarkable growth over the last quarter century is the "end-to-end" principle that networks should confine themselves to transmitting generic packets without worrying about their contents. Not only has this made deployment of internet infrastructure cheap and efficient, but it has created fertile ground for entrepreneurship. On a network that respects the end-to-end principle, prior approval from network owners is not needed to launch new applications, services, or content. In recent years, self-styled "network neutrality" activists have pushed for legislation to prevent network owners from undermining the end-to end principle. Although the concern is understandable, such legislation would be premature.
Al Franken urged the SXSW audience to 'use the internet to save the internet'. Photograph: Craig Lassig/AP Democratic senator Al Franken has has issued a rallying cry to "innovators and entrepreneurs" at SXSW to fight back against Comcast and other companies lobbying to pave the way for a two-speed internet . The principle of net neutrality , under which all content is delivered equally to internet users' homes, is "in big trouble", Franken warned in a passionate rallying cry at the conference on Monday. Franken's address was always going to be a preach to the converted – SXSW is the spiritual home for small, independent media and technology firms – but he warned that unless the 200,000 attendees "use the internet to save the internet", then big telecoms firms will muscle through plans for a two-tier net.
SXSW 2011: Al Franken warns of 'outright disaster' over net neutrality | Technology | guardian.co.uk
FOR a subject that arouses such strong passions, “network neutrality” is fiendishly difficult to pin down. Ask five geeks and you may well be given six definitions of it. The basic concept sounds simple enough: that the internet’s pipes should show no favours and blindly deliver packets of data from one place to another regardless of their origin, destination or contents. But the devil is in the detail.
Network neutrality: A tangled web | The Economist
Net Neutrality: Good or Bad Public Policy | Black Web 2.0
There is a lot of buzz surrounding Net Neutrality. Consumers want to know how it affects them in regards to their Internet service. In this article, I will attempt to explain Net Neutrality in plain terms and further explain what is means for you, the consumer. Apparently not. The Federal Communications Commissions imposed sanctions against Comcast when it discovered the cable giant discriminated against peer-to-peer networking file traffic in an effort to restrict bandwidth usage demand on its broadband network. Comcast is appealing this decision.
Telecommunications Act of 1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the first major overhaul of telecommunications law in almost 62 years. The goal of this new law is to let anyone enter any communications business -- to let any communications business compete in any market against any other. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 has the potential to change the way we work, live and learn. It will affect telephone service -- local and long distance, cable programming and other video services, broadcast services and services provided to schools. The Federal Communications Commission has a tremendous role to play in creating fair rules for this new era of competition.