The proposal is one massive loophole that sets the stage for the corporate takeover of the Internet.
Quote:
1. Under their proposal, there would be no Net Neutrality on wireless networks -- meaning anything goes, from blocking websites and applications to pay-for-priority treatment.
Quote:
2. Their proposed standard for "non-discrimination" on wired networks is so weak that actions like Comcast's widely denounced blocking of BitTorrent would be allowed.
Quote:
3. The deal would let ISPs like Verizon -- instead of Internet users like you -- decide which applications deserve the best quality of service. That's not the way the Internet has ever worked, and it threatens to close the door on tomorrow's innovative applications. (If RealPlayer had been favored a few years ago, would we ever have gotten YouTube?)
Quote:
4. The deal would allow ISPs to effectively split the Internet into "two pipes" -- one of which would be reserved for "managed services," a pay-for-play platform for content and applications. This is the proverbial toll road on the information superhighway, a fast lane reserved for the select few, while the rest of us are stuck on the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road.
Next step for this is Congress and the FCC. Where does Obama stand on this anyone know?
The NYTimes Article is a puff piece if I've ever seen one. For anyone who didn't research further, the spoiler below contains the draft proposal issues by Verizon and Google.
Spoiler!
Verizon-Google Legislative Framework Proposal Google and Verizon have been working together to find ways to preserve the open Internet and the vibrant and innovative markets it supports, to protect consumers, and to promote continued investment in broadband access. With these goals in mind, together we offer a proposed open Internet framework for the consideration of policymakers and the public. We believe such a framework should include the following key elements: Consumer Protections: A broadband Internet access service provider would be prohibited from preventing users of its broadband Internet access service from-- (1) sending and receiving lawful content of their choice; (2) running lawful applications and using lawful services of their choice; and (3) connecting their choice of legal devices that do not harm the network or service, facilitate theft of service, or harm other users of the service. Non-Discrimination Requirement:In providing broadband Internet access service, a provider would be prohibited from engaging in undue discrimination against any lawful Internet content, application, or service in a manner that causes meaningful harm to competition or to users. Prioritization of Internet traffic would be presumed inconsistent with the non-discrimination standard, but the presumption could be rebutted. Transparency: Providers of broadband Internet access service would be required todisclose accurate and relevant information in plain language about the characteristics and capabilities of their offerings, their broadband network management, and other practices necessary for consumers and other users to make informed choices. Network Management: Broadband Internet access service providers are permitted to engage in reasonable network management.Reasonable network management includes any technically sound practice: to reduce or mitigate the effects of congestion on its network; to ensure network security or integrity; to address traffic that is unwanted by or harmful to users, the provider’s network, or the Internet; to ensure service quality to a subscriber; to provide services or capabilities consistent with a consumer’s choices; that is consistent with the technical requirements, standards, or best practices adopted by an independent, widely-recognized Internet community governance initiative or standard-setting organization; to prioritize general classes or types of Internet traffic, based on latency; or otherwise to manage the daily operation of its network. Additional Online Services: A provider that offers a broadband Internet access service complying with the above principles could offer any other additional or differentiated services. Such other services would have to be distinguishable in scope and purpose from broadband Internet access service, but could make use of or access Internet content, applications or services and could include traffic prioritization.The FCC would publish an annual report on the effect of 2 these additional services, and immediately report if it finds at any time that these services threaten the meaningful availability of broadband Internet access services or have been devised or promoted in a manner designed to evade these consumer protections. Wireless Broadband: Because of the unique technical and operational characteristics of wireless networks, and the competitive and still-developing nature of wireless broadband services, only the transparency principle would apply to wireless broadband at this time. The U.S. Government Accountability Office would report to Congress annually on the continued development and robustness of wireless broadband Internet access services. Case-By-Case Enforcement: The FCC would enforce the consumer protection and nondiscrimination requirements through case-by-case adjudication, but would have no rulemaking authority with respect to those provisions.Parties would be encouraged to use non- governmental dispute resolution processes established by independent, widely-recognized Internet community governance initiatives, and the FCC would be directed to give appropriate deference to decisions or advisory opinions of such groups.The FCC could grant injunctive relief for violations of the consumer protection and non-discrimination provisions. The FCC could impose a forfeiture of up to $2,000,000 for knowing violations of the consumer-protection or non-discrimination provisions.The proposed framework would not affect rights or obligations under existing Federal or State laws that generally apply to businesses, and would not create any new private right of action. Regulatory Authority: The FCC would have exclusive authority to oversee broadband Internet access service, but would not have any authority over Internet software applications, content or services.Regulatory authorities would not be permitted to regulate broadband Internet access service. Broadband Access for Americans: Broadband Internet access would be eligible for Federal universal service fund support to spur deployment in unserved areas and to support programs to encourage broadband adoption by low-income populations.In addition, the FCC would be required to complete intercarrier compensation reform within 12 months.Broadband Internet access service and traffic or services using Internet protocol would be considered exclusively interstate in nature.In general, broadband Internet access service providers would ensure that the service is accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
Most noticeably, note the paragraph about additional services and the regulations that will occur to show that they differ from normal broadband services. In other words, a single website will not be offered as an "additional service" and will remain as a traditional broadband service. An additional service, for example, would be purchasing a dedicated line, separate from your existing broadband connection, that is used specifically for the purpose of Video Conferencing. Such a link can have parity based upload/download speeds, much like a SHDSL connection, but be limited to just video conferencing and thus reduce the overall cost of such a connection.
Basically, what they are saying is they want to provide more services that incorporate use of the internet. The internet as we know it won't change. Rather, additional services will be added in order to give people more choice to fit their tailored, specific needs.
Also, the other recommendations they make are pretty darn good. The deployment of broadband connection in areas that don't have it is something that should of been done a long time ago. I'm all for it, tbh.
Joined: Apr 2006 Posts: 5570 Location: Being the forum ritalin
I'm glad somebody took time to read through it and give me a somewhat tl;dr version that wasn't "OH MY GOD NET NEUTRALITY WILL DIE WITH THIS" Thank you MrTwilliger for the true summary.
_________________ Quoted from BuDo (Except I Am Vegeta cuz we all know he is a used tampon when it comes to his personality)
Joined: Jan 2007 Posts: 9841 Location: US - Illidan
regardless of their intentions as outlined by Tedwillinger there need to be solid rules and regulations put in place so that things mentioned by doppleganger don't come to pass...
I wonder what the conservative stance on this is. Tt's very capitalist but then they could just complain that obama is trying to infringe on free speech by controlling the internet...
_________________ signatures by Hostage Co. <3 ~PoP is DEAD! My sTyLe is Supa-Flat!!~
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum