Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral  (Read 3937 times)


  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« on: July 19, 2006, 11:46:12 pm »

The internet is at risk of being singly put into the hands of the big cable and telephone (telecom) corporations, such as AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, etc. They wish to create an internet in which they can charge for "premium" information and have the final word in what is "valuable", via "gateway fees" and "internet tolls". Any site that can't / won't pay their fees and/or is designated as "not valuable", will be at serious risk of being shut down and/or having resources taken away and given to those that do pay and/or those that the corporations do find "valuable". They could effectively privatize and control the internet.

It's likely that sites this one will no longer exist or will be harder to access.

The following FAQ comes from

What is this about?

This is about Internet freedom. "Network Neutrality" -- the First Amendment of the Internet -- ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites.

But Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are spending millions of dollars lobbying Congress to gut Net Neutrality. If Congress doesn't take action now to implement meaningful Net Neutrality provisions, the future of the Internet is at risk.

To learn more, read Network Neutrality: Fact vs. Fiction

What is Network Neutrality?

Network Neutrality — or "Net Neutrality" for short — is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet.

Net Neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run the applications and devices of their choice. With Net Neutrality, the network's only job is to move data — not choose which data to privilege with higher quality service. Net Neutrality prevents the companies that control the wires from discriminating against content based on its source or ownership.

Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It's why the Internet has become an unrivaled environment for open communications, civic involvement and free speech.

Learn more in Net Neutrality 101.

Who wants to get rid of Net Neutrality?

The nation's largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services — or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls — and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

What's at stake?

Decisions being made now will shape the future of the Internet for a generation. Before long, all media — TV, phone and the Web — will come to your home via the same broadband connection. The dispute over Net Neutrality is about who'll control access to new and emerging technologies.

On the Internet, consumers are in ultimate control — deciding between content, applications and services available anywhere, no matter who owns the network. There's no middleman. But without Net Neutrality, the Internet will look more like cable TV. Network owners will decide which channels, content and applications are available; consumers will have to choose from their menu.

The Internet has always been driven by innovation. Web sites and services succeeded or failed on their own merit. Without Net Neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of users will be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is whether we can choose the content and services we want, or whether the broadband barons will choose for us.

What's happening in Congress?

Congress is now considering a major overhaul of the Telecommunications Act. The telephone and cable companies are filling up congressional campaign coffers and hiring high-priced lobbyists. They've set up "Astroturf" groups like "Hands Off the Internet" to confuse the issue and give the appearance of grassroots support.

On June 8, the House of Representatives passed the "Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006," or COPE Act (H.R. 5252) -- a bill that offers no meaningful protections for Net Neutrality. An amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), which would have instituted real Net Neutrality requirements, was defeated by intense industry lobbying.

It now falls to the Senate to save the free and open Internet. Fortunately, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) have introduced a bipartisan measure, the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006" (S. 2917), that would provide meaningful protection for Net Neutrality.

On June 28, the Snowe-Dorgan bill was introduced as an amendment to Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-Alaska) major rewrite of the Telecom Act (S.2686). The committee split down the middle on the measure, casting a tie vote of 11-11.

Though meaningul Net Neutrality protections were not added to Stevens' bill, the fight for Internet freedom is gaining serious momentum as the bill moves toward the full Senate later this year. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has threatened to place a "hold" on the entire legislation unless it reinstates Net Neutrality and prevents discrimination on the Internet.

Call Congress today: No senator can in good conscience vote against Internet freedom and with the telecom cartel.

Isn't this just a battle between giant corporations?

No. Small business owners benefit from an Internet that allows them to compete directly — not one where they can't afford the price of entry. Net Neutrality ensures that innovators can start small and dream big about being the next EBay or Google without facing insurmountable hurdles. Without Net Neutrality, startups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay for a top spot on the Web.

But Net Neutrality doesn't just matter to business owners. If Congress turns the Internet over to the telephone and cable giants, everyone who uses the Internet will be affected. Connecting to your office could take longer if you don't purchase your carrier's preferred applications. Sending family photos and videos could slow to a crawl. Web pages you always use for online banking, access to health care information, planning a trip, or communicating with friends and family could fall victim to pay-for-speed schemes.

Independent voices and political groups are especially vulnerable. Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips, silencing bloggers and amplifying the big media companies. Political organizing could be slowed by the handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups or candidates to pay a fee to join the "fast lane."

Isn't the threat to Net Neutrality just hypothetical?

No. So far, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But numerous examples show that without network neutrality requirements, Internet service providers will discriminate against content and competing services they don't like.

  • In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
  • In 2005, Canada's telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute.
  • Shaw, a big Canadian cable TV company, is charging an extra $10 a month to subscribers in order to "enhance" competing Internet telephone services.
  • In April, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned — an advocacy campaign opposing the company's pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

This type of censorship will become the norm unless we act now. Given the chance, these gatekeepers will consistently put their own interests before the public good.

Continue ...
« Last Edit: July 20, 2006, 12:27:04 am by prander »


  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2006, 11:47:23 pm »

Continued ...

Won't more regulations harm the free Internet? Shouldn't we just let the market decide?

Writing Net Neutrality into law would preserve the freedoms we currently enjoy on the Internet. For all their talk about "deregulation," the cable and telephone giants don't want real competition. They want special rules written in their favor.

Either we make rules that ensure an even playing field for everyone, or we have rules that hold the Internet captive to the whims of a few big companies. The Internet has thrived because revolutionary ideas like blogs, Wikipedia or Google could start on a shoestring and attract huge audiences. Without Net Neutrality, the pipeline owners will choose the winners and losers on the Web.

The cable and telephone companies already dominate 98 percent of the broadband access market. And when the network owners start abusing their control of the pipes, there will be nowhere else for consumers to turn.

Who's part of the Coalition?

The coalition is made up of hundreds of groups from across the political spectrum that are concerned about maintaining a free and open Internet. No corporation or political party is funding our efforts. We simply agree to a statement of principles in support of Internet freedom.

The coalition is being coordinated by Free Press, a national, nonpartisan organization focused on media reform and Internet policy issues. Please complete this brief survey if your group would like to join this broad, bipartisan effort to save the Internet.

Who else supports Net Neutrality?

The supporters of Net Neutrality include leading high-tech companies such as, Earthlink, EBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Skype, Vonage and Yahoo. Prominent national figures such as Internet pioneer Vint Cerf, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig and FCC Commissioner Michael Copps have called for stronger Net Neutrality protections.

Editorial boards at the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News, Seattle Times, St. Petersburg Times and Christian Science Monitor all have urged congress to save the Internet.

What can I do to help?

Sign the petition.

Call your members of Congress today and demand that Net Neutrality be protected.

Encourage groups you're part of to join the Coalition.

Show your support for Internet freedom on your Web site or blog.

Tell your friends about this crucial issue before it's too late.

You can find another FAQ here:

The following will allow you to find where your Senators stand on this issue:

Find your Senators' contact information here:

Network Neutrality Info:
CBS News: Understanding Network Neutrality
Wikipedia: Network Neutrality

Activist Sites / Coalitions:

Felix Benner

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
Re: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2006, 01:25:10 am »

This is wrong in so many ways, I don't know where to begin. But the short form is: How on earth would that be compatible with a government who's sole task is the protection of life, liberty and property?


  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
Re: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2006, 10:02:42 pm »

Oh, I see, the federal government should be protecting Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft by forcing Comcast, AOL, and other ISPs to subsidize web businesses . . .

The problem with calling Net Neutrality "the First Amendment of the Internet" is that the First Amendment protects people against GOVERNMENT censorship / abridgement of speech (among other First Amendment protections), not decisions made by private companies.  I have no doubt that -- in the world of competition -- an ISP would come along that would have a policy of Net Neutrality in order to attract customers.  The free market provides the solution.

It appears that Net Neutrality allows the GOVERNMENT to force private companies to subsidize / promote speech of which they do not approve -- ironically, an actual First Amendment violation.  It is the equivalent of forcing a mall to allow protesters to march on private mall property (it might even be a "taking" under the Fifth Amendment).

"Now that's just sad"
"t is the fortune of a free people, not to be intimidated by imaginary dangers.  Fear is the passion of slaves."

-- -- Patrick Henry of Virginia, speaking against ratification of the proposed Constitution, 7 June 1788


  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50
Re: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2006, 10:44:28 pm »

Protect network neutrality: Contribute to Tor, Freenet or similar encrypted onion- or mix-networks.

The *only* way to prevent Internet traffic from being prioritized, restricted, taxed, legislated, controlled and monitored is to make it impossible to do so. Stop begging your government for help, and protect yourselves from ISPs that you do not agree with: protect *all* your traffic from analysis, and leave any ISP that interferes.

<edit>Spelling and coherence</edit>


  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • It's like butter
Re: Save The Internet - Keep It Neutral
« Reply #5 on: November 02, 2006, 07:32:33 pm »

Oh hell no, nobody messes with the Internet and gets away with it.
Yeah, freedom baby, I love it!
Pages: [1]   Go Up