WWII Allies Secure Beachhead Against Net Neutrality

[Joanne98]

Ah, the Anglo-American alliance that won two world wars and crushed communism in Europe, thus protecting freedom around the world! Now, that same alliance is on the brink of allowing telecommunication companies to restrict, or privilege, any content they see fit within the greatest cultural achievement in the history of humanity: the network neutral Internet. Yey for Anglo-American freedom!

Network neutrality prevents Internet service providers from blocking, speeding up, or slowing down Internet content based on its source. Recent developments in Canada (two months ago), the United Kingdom (two days ago) and the United States (yesterday in the Senate) have all put network neutrality in serious danger. The three allies who stormed the beaches at Normandy are once again on the march, this time making the world safe for telecommunication companies.


I am not exaggerating the danger to net neutrality in most of the Anglophone world. Gory details on each case are provided in the extended entry:

Chris Bowers :: WWII Allies Secure Beachhead Against Net Neutrality
In chronological order, from oldest to newest developments:

In November 2008, the Canadian Telecommunications Commission ruled that it was legal for Internet service providers to reduce the quantity of data they transmit across their entire network. While the commission has not yet ruled on whether ISPs can discriminate against particular content on their network (that is, restricting the quantity of data on only certain types of content on their networks, rather than just restricting the quantity of data on all of the content on their networks), this is still a foot in the door to end network neutrality in Canada. The ruling on specific content discrimination will take place in July.

Two days ago, in the United Kingdom, the hereditary noble who also happens to be the Communications Minister (I'm not kidding) recommended the outright destruction of network neutrality:

Speaking to parliament yesterday, Lord Carter, the Communications Minister said that ISPs should be given the freedom to charge for prioritising types of traffic.
Given that this is taking place under a Labour government, thus endith network neutrality in Britain. Well, at least the UK had about four hundred and thirty years of top-notch, world-class cultural production before deciding to hand it all over to their telecommunications companies. Now, we can look forward to the lyrical stylings of British telecom CEO's coming from the land of poets:


Virgin CEO Neil Berkett recently described net neutrality as "a load of b*****ks".
Shall I compare thee to a load of bullocks?



Yesterday, net neutrality was dealt a surprising, and hopefully temporary, setback in the United States Senate. At first, there was some good news, as the broadband grants in the stimulus package were increased from the $6 billion in the House version, to $9 billion in the Senate version. Importantly, these grants also came with guaranteed network neutrality language. So, there was more money for high speed Internet access, and network neutrality was reinforced.

The bad news is that, on top of the $9 billion grants, the Senate version of the stimulus also provided tax credits for telecommunications companies to expand broadband access to rural areas. The dangerous part of this is that those tax credits did not come with any nondiscriminatory conditions (aka, net neutrality conditions):


The changes to the broadband part of the Senate stimulus bill were spearheaded by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee. Mr. Rockefeller has long advocated for expanded broadband service to rural areas. Verizon is the dominant phone company in his state.

The Senate proposal also would not ban Verizon, or any other company benefiting from the credit, from discriminating against certain uses of their Internet service, a principle often called network neutrality. Recipients of those grants would be required to follow network neutrality principles outlined by the Federal Communications Commission.

This is the nightmare scenario feared by many open media advocates: the stimulus providing corporate welfare that strips network neutrality provisions. This would allow some Internet Service Providers to create new, non-network neutral Internet access areas, and still receive tax credits from the government for doing so.


If you are confused by how one aspect of the broadband portion of the stimulus keeps network neutrality, while another portion destroys it, you are not alone. I am pretty confused at how that works, too. The key is that the final language will be hashed out during the conference between the Senate and the House once both chambers pass a stimulus package. While open media advocates are working extremely hard to make sure that the final package includes network neutrality conditions for all high-speed Internet access funding, this setback in the Senate shows that there is no guarantee they will succeed. As such, network neutrality is now legitimately in danger in the United States as well, even though the federal government is now controlled by an enormous Democratic trifecta (House, Senate and White House).

Really, this is pretty shocking. If Democrats and Labour simultaneously destroy net neutrality in the UK and the USA, there might not ever be recourse to get it back. The allies are on the march against network neutrality, and their free participation in the greatest cultural outpouring in the history of humanity is teetering on the brink of ruin.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=79D4F1FDA888E307D6903EE3DE2ADDBD?diaryId=11265

[Why Syzygy]

1. k/r

[Lasher]

2. We have got to get control of trade agreements.

If US businesses can't sell something like this domestically, they pull their strings and presto! A new trade agreement appears, requiring toll booths on the internet with telecoms and cable companies censoring everything they don't like. Sorry, we really wish we could help you but this is part of the latest 'free' trade agreement, you know. We have no choice. All part of the brave new global economy, you know. Don't even think about fighting it. Resistance is futile.

De facto laws are being passed without any regard whatever for the will of the majority.

[Old Codger]

3. I imagine

The dems will probably follow the repugs and help the poor telecoms get their way on this one.