Posts Tagged ‘net neutrality’

Canada Protects Net Neutrality as US Prepares to Dismantle It

Friday, April 21st, 2017

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the world reacts to this issue; will net neutrality be dismantled in most countries, or will it be protected?

While the United States is poised to gut its own net neutrality rules sometime in the next month, Canadian regulators just doubled down on protecting it — and have now created some of the toughest net neutrality rules in the world. Canadian regulators had already passed functional net neutrality rules that prohibited blocking and other blatantly anti-competitive behaviors. But the CRTC this week released its full, final guidelines that take things further, effectively prohibiting giant ISPs from using arbitrary usage caps to give their own content an unfair market advantage (aka zero rating).


Thompson Warns Over ‘Two-Speed’ Net

Wednesday, January 19th, 2011

I’m sure something like this will eventually come to the US too …

BBC director general says its delivery of content will be undermined if ISPs start charging for online ‘fast lane’

The BBC director general, Mark Thompson, has warned broadband providers not to introduce charges for delivering the corporation’s programmes to homes via the internet.


Net Neutrality – Content and Discontents

Friday, January 7th, 2011

Here’s something to think about …

The free and open ethos of the internet is at stake if prioritizing data for profit becomes a reality

The desire for high-bandwidth internet services, such as internet TV is placing ever greater demands on the internet’s infrastructure. New technologies are being developed to meet these demands, but companies are increasingly considering new business models. With its Content Connect service, BT has brought itself into conflict with a fundamental design principle of the internet, raising concerns that the drive for profit could lead to changes that will harm consumers and content producers.


FCC Fumbles on Net Neutrality

Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010

I’m not quite sure what I think of this one yet …

The reason why mobile broadband doesn’t need net neutrality? It’s obvious, isn’t it: because Android is open. That’s really what they said.

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) which has the power to set the rules for use and, more importantly, charging for internet use in the US, has passed “limited” net neutrality rules by a 3-2 vote which split along Democratic (yes) and Republican (no) party lines.


FCC Approves White Space Device Rules

Friday, September 24th, 2010

It’s hard to say if this is good news or bad; I guess we’ll have to wait and see how it works out …

White Space broadband would use unlicensed and partially vacated spectrum created by the shift to digital television to create a new broadband delivery system. As expected, the FCC today voted to approve rules governing devices that use these white spaces, issuing a press release (pdf) stating these rules would require that white space devices consult a frequently-updated geolocation database to avoid interference with nearby TV broadcasts or wireless microphone transmissions. Says the FCC:


Tim Berners-Lee calls for Free Internet Everywhere

Thursday, September 16th, 2010

This is a very noble idea … but who pays for it?

Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, has used a speech at a Nokia conference in London to call for everybody worldwide to get free Internet access and at least a low bandwidth connection “by default”, as reported by the BBC.


Internet Must Remain Neutral, Says Sir Tim Berners-Lee

Wednesday, September 15th, 2010

I agree … but the tricky part is in deciding exactly “neutral” what means.

Access to data online must not be limited, founder of the world wide web tells Nokia World conference

Mobile operators and internet service providers must not be allowed to break the principle of “net neutrality” – that there should be no favouritism for connecting to certain sites online – Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the world wide web, warned today.


AT&T Forgets They Began the Network Neutrality Debate – Then Calls People “Conspiracy Theorists” for Pointing It Out

Friday, September 3rd, 2010

Sounds like somebody just realized that they’re sitting on top of a public relations nightmare …

Consumer group Free Press is apparently hitting some of AT&T’s buttons this week, if this missive from AT&T lobbyist Hank Hultquist is any indication. Hultquist this week attacked the consumer group as a purveyor of “Da Vinci Code conspiracy theories” for a recent letter the group wrote to the FCC that points out how AT&T’s long-standing dream of “paid prioritization” could be bad for consumers. In it, Free Press notes they don’t oppose intelligent network management, just paid prioritization:


More Closed Door Neutrality Deals Struck – Without Pesky Public Input Into the Process

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010

Congress needs to get itself in gear and do what we pay them to do, instead of just sitting around and letting corporations write the laws that are supposed to govern their own behavior.

We’ve already seen how the Goorizon deal is little more than an empty shell, solely designed to keep tougher consumer protections away from wireless networks, while leaving plenty of loopholes open for anti-competitive behavior over wired networks. Now a group of companies including Microsoft, the NCTA, Verizon, AT&T and Skype have “reached an agreement” on network neutrality behind closed doors, with no public, government, or objective expert input. As Mike Masnick at Techdirt notes, such a deal is a blend of hubris and pointlessness:


Net neutrality: Seven questions for the new Internet rule makers

Tuesday, August 31st, 2010

The most trouble thing about net neutrality, is that the definition of “neutral” seems to be up in the air …

It probably wasn’t how Google’s CEO-founder Eric Schmidt (of “Don’t Be Evil” fame) envisioned things. Earlier this month protesters converged on the Google campus to protest the Google-Verizon joint proposal to keep the internet neutral. Called a “joint policy proposal for an open internet,” it was innocuous-sounding enough, but to many it is being seen, above all, as a sellout of the wireless internet where Google itself is keen to play. There’s some thoughtful consideration given in the proposal to treating all content equally — but only where “wireline networks” are concerned. There is also a call for “network transparency,” but since decades into internet build-out there is still little network transparency, this seems more like a wish than a policy suggestion.