From Mark Evanier, television and comic book guru, an astute observation made after attending a recent convention of furries in Pittsburgh.
“I don’t understand why people get tattoos or pierce body parts or eat cole slaw or ride roller coasters or vote for George Bush or sleep with some of the people they sleep with…or do any of a thousand other things I could name that I cannot conceive of myself ever doing. I am, however, capable of appreciating that some who find joy in such activities are fine, good people and I would be doing myself a disservice to erect any sort of needless barrier between them and me. With the exception of the ones who vote for Bush, they do me no harm …”
From Tim Berners-Lee, the fellow who invented the World Wide Web, a concise definition and defense of Net Neutrality.
Net neutrality is the fact that when I pay money to connect to the Internet and you pay money to connect to the Internet, then we can communicate, no matter who we are. What’s very exciting at the moment is that video is happening on the Web. YouTube gets a lot of attention, because they are delivering video over the Web … Now suppose I’m in Massachusetts and I want to find a Brazilian movie. I go to the Internet to find my favorite independent movie and filmmaker. But then the cable company in Massachusetts blocks the transmission and says, “No, we won’t let you do this, because we sell movies. So, yes, we do the Internet but on the other hand we will stop you from seeing Internet movies. We want to be able to control which movies you buy.” … We’ve seen cable companies trying to prevent using the Internet for Internet phones. I am concerned about this, and am working, with many other committed people, to keep it from happening. I think it’s very important to keep an open Internet for whoever you are.
If you think Net Neutrality is important, and you should, do something. I did. Why? How?
5 responses to “Wisdom From The Tubes”
First, there are consumer protection and antitrust laws on the books to address any potential blocking of content or sites, should this actually happen. I have been following the net neutrality debate in my work with the Hands Off the Internet coalition.
Second, aside from Berners-Lee and Vint Cerf, most of the senior network engineers, including Robert Kahn “the father of the internet” are strongly warning against enacting net neutrality regulations.
“‘If the goal is to encourage people to build new capabilities, then the party that takes the lead is probably only going to have it on their net to start with and it’s not going to be on anyone else’s net. You want to incentivize people to innovate, and they’re going to innovate on their own nets or a few other nets,’
‘I am totally opposed to mandating that nothing interesting can happen inside the net,’ he said.
So called ‘Neutrality’ legislation posed more of a danger than fragmentation, he concluded.”
http://www.theregister.com/2007/01/18/kahn_net_neutrality_warning/
A much more rational approach, as voiced recently by the FTC Chairwoman Deborah Majoras,
“market failure or demonstrated consumer harm, policy makers should be particularly hesitant to enact new regulation in this area.”
http://www.handsoff.org/blog/
Thanks.
I would totally believe you if you weren’t being bankrolled as an org by all the people who stand to gain by nipping net neutrality in the bud. Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that the telco’s and I have a lot in common as far as our point of view on net neutrality.
You’ll have to forgive me for taking your comment with more than a little suspicion.
Hands Off The Internet has the appearance of a grass-roots effort, much like Save The Internet. But appearances aside, HOTI campaigns on behalf of just about every major communications conglomerate, including AT&T.
And so, I find it difficult to reconcile your promise that such corporations will not successfully manage to block or regulate access, particularly in light of comments made in 2005 by then CEO of SBC (no CEO of AT&T) Edward Whitacre:
Why do CEOs always sound like uneducated retards? “Ain’t” is a word that should NEVER come out of a CEOs mouth.
And Whiteacre is such an ass…when an employee asked him why the company was terminating the Cingular brand, his response was “Because I want to.”
*flails*
Thanks for everyone’s responses. I’ve seen similar skepticism before so no worries, although I’m not asking you to trust me or the ISPs. As I said, there are laws and regulations on the books to deal with any of the hypothetical scenarios being thrown around of blocked or degraded access to sites.
Thomas, yes AT&T is one of our member organizations as are many other companies and groups (3M, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, etc.). The full list is readily available on our website.
Try reading the arguments of people like Robert Kahn, David Farber, Michael Katz and others who are strongly opposed to enacting new net neutrality regulations. Even Tim Berners-Lee hasn’t endorsed a specific net neutrality proposal.
You all may find this op-ed from Farber and Katz to be interesting as it raises a few of the many concerns with net neutrality legislation, such as Dorgan-Snowe.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/18/AR2007011801508.html
I’ll reiterate, as the FTC report notes, how is proceeding with restraint given their is no evidence of market failure and unsound approach? Thanks.