URGENT - "NET Neutrality" Issue

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by spy1, May 8, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
  2. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,701
    Hello,
    I know we are not supposed to discuss politics, and so I will refrain from saying anything ...
    Mrk

    P.S. On the other hand, welcome to Medieval Age!
     
  3. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    *BTW, Markey's separate bill can be found here:

    http://markey.house.gov/docs/telecomm/Markey Net Neutrality Act of 2006.pdf

    - it's called the "Network Neutrality Act of 2006" - so if you go the extra step of actually contacting your Rep (rather than just signing the two petitions that're out there) make sure you let them know that you don't want COPE (H.R. 5252) unless the NNA gets passed, too. The NNA doesn't have an H.R no., yet apparently. Pete
     
  4. <DreamCatcher>

    <DreamCatcher> Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Posts:
    154
  5. Longboard

    Longboard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Posts:
    3,187
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Kudos to spy1; keep shining the light.
     
  6. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197085,00.html

    "House Judiciary Committee Votes to Uphold 'Net Neutrality' "

    "WASHINGTON — The U.S. House Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved legislation aimed at preventing high-speed Internet network providers from discriminating against unaffiliated services, content and applications.

    ....

    The measure, approved by a vote of 20-13, would amend U.S. antitrust law. It would also counter a rival bill from another House committee that wants to encourage network providers to preserve consumers' ability to freely surf the Internet instead of adopting stricter rules."

    =========================================================

    Not really sure how good this actually is - on the one hand, it's nice to see the Judiciary Committee acknowledge the issue.

    At the same time, it's still vital that the Network Neutrality Act of 2006 gets passed if there's any chance at all that COPE is still going to pass. This could just be Net Neutrality "lip service" designed to insure that the government retains its/ powers over the matter while allowing us to get shafted at the same time by lulling us to sleep thinking that the problem has now been "fixed".

    AFAICS, it hasn't. Pete
     
  7. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    And while I'm thinking of it, the "Net Neutrality" issue certainly hasn't gone away. (Have you studied the issue and contacted your Reps yet?).

    I've found an excellent resource with which to "keep up" with what's going on with it to be this newsletter: http://lists.freepress.net/pipermail/freepress_headlines/

    If you don't know where you're at with this issue, or don't understand the ramifications of not maintaining "network neutrality", you need to go there and read up on it. Pete
     
  8. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives handed a victory to AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications on Thursday by approving a bill that would make it easier for them to offer subscription television service.

    Lawmakers also turned aside an effort by some Democrats to bar high-speed Internet broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast Corp. from seeking payment from content providers like Google Inc. and eBay Inc. to guarantee access and service quality.

    The bill differs significantly from legislation pending in the Senate. With a short legislative session ahead of the November elections, that could make it difficult for Congress to pass a new law this year."
     
  9. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
  10. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=1800421

    "This Thursday, June 22, the Senate Commerce Committee will vote on a bill that would reform our nation's telecommunications laws. At stake is the future of the Internet. The "Stevens telecom bill" being considered by the committee would jeopardize the free and open nature of the Internet by making it impossible for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to write net neutrality protections into rule or law."

    In case you haven't noticed, that's tomorrow.

    If you haven't called your Representatives to let them know how you feel about this one way or the other, I urge you to do so today. Pete
     
  11. azumi21

    azumi21 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Posts:
    129
  12. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    Update on issue: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060628...kca.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--

    Note especially this particular statement: "The committee approved numerous amendments, including one provision that bars cable and video providers from charging customers an early termination fee that exceeds one month's service."

    That's what's wrong with this entire bill - there's all kinds of measures in it that desperately need eliminated - luckily, the legislator's amended that particular one. Pete
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 28, 2006
  13. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    "Senate Panel Approves Bill Without Strong Internet Neutrality

    The Senate Commerce Committee this week approved a broad package of communications legislation after narrowly defeating, on an 11-11 deadlock, a proposed amendment on the controversial question of whether network operators must treat Internet traffic on a neutral basis. The legislation appears to prevent network operators from outright blocking of certain content or applications, but not from discriminating between them in terms of speed or service quality. The legislation also contains provisions that would authorize the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reinstate its broadcast flag rules, and to consider new anti-copying provisions for audio broadcasts. With many areas of disagreement and little time left on the congressional calendar, enactment of the package this year is uncertain. June 29, 2006"

    CDT Paper: Internet Neutrality - http://www.cdt.org/speech/20060620neutrality.pdf

    =========================================================

    You know, there's still time to contact your legislator's about this - at the very least, if we can stall it out until after this session we may have a better group of legislator's to work on it.

    http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?itemid=20933&afccode=n56txt

    http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=1800421

    http://www.savetheinternet.com/=act

    Use one of those - or all of them.

    After all, it's your Internet that's at stake here. Pete
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.