Tag Archives: net neutrality

How the FCC Plans to Save the Internet By Destroying It

Posted on by

Previous telecommunications systems — most notably the phone system — are regulated as “common carriers”. This means you can call whoever you like; you can use whatever phone you want; and anyone in a service area can sign up at a fair rate.

This designation recognizes that communication systems are too important to be left to the vagaries of profit-be-damned executives and that the operators are in very powerful positions to do harm and extract tolls.

via How the FCC Plans to Save the Internet By Destroying It: An Explainer — Medium.

F.C.C., in ‘Net Neutrality’ Turnaround, Plans to Allow Fast Lane

Posted on by

The new rules, according to the people briefed on them, will allow a company like Comcast or Verizon to negotiate separately with each content company—like Netflix, Amazon, Disney or Google—and charge different companies different amounts for priority service.

via F.C.C., in ‘Net Neutrality’ Turnaround, Plans to Allow Fast Lane.

Verizon’s diabolical plan to turn the Web into pay-per-view

Posted on by

As it stands now, you pay your Internet service provider and go wherever you want on the Web. Packets of bits are just packets and have to be treated equally. That’s the essence of Net neutrality. But Verizon’s plan, which the company has outlined during hearings in federal court and before Congress, would change that. Verizon and its allies would like to charge websites that carry popular content for the privilege of moving their packets to your connected device.

via Verizon’s diabolical plan to turn the Web into pay-per-view | The Industry Standard – InfoWorld.

Also from: Net neutrality faces uncertain U.S. court ruling

Verizon argues that the FCC doesn’t have authority to regulate an information service, a class of communications that the agency has previously exempted from most regulation. The net neutrality rules are a violation of Verizon’s First Amendment free speech rights and its Fifth Amendment property rights, the company has argued.

Deutsche Telekom to curb ADSL volumes

Posted on by

Germany’s national telco Deutsche Telekom is fighting back against OTT players using its broadband network for data-intense services like video-on-demand (VOD) portals without sharing their revenues by throttling the data rate to 384Kbit/s for ADSL and VDSL customers if they exceed the volume included in their tariff.

via Setback for OTT: Deutsche Telekom to curb ADSL volumes | Rapid TV News.

And so it begins….

SDN’s Killer App: More Network Control

Posted on by

When I pressed him for a real-life application that could be the result of the simpler networks that SDN promises, he didn’t disappoint. “You know how you have network neutrality now,” he asked. “What if the customer could flip it around and tell the service provider: ‘I’d like to give preference in my home network to Netflix.'”

via Light Reading – SDN’s Killer App: More Network Control.

What if the customer enforced that preference on their firewall?  They wouldn’t necessarily need this feature from their service provider.

FCC: OpenBand Contracts ‘Anti-Competitive’, ‘Forbidden’

Posted on by

Only one day after Dulles-based telecommunications company OpenBand filed a second lawsuit against two supervisors and the board’s of two of the Loudoun homeowners’ associations it serves in response to denial of its franchise agreement application, the Federal Communications Commission issued a statement claiming the company’s telecommunication contracts should not be upheld.

via FCC: OpenBand Contracts ‘Anti-Competitive’, ‘Forbidden’ – Leesburg Today Online—Daily News Coverage of Loudoun County, Leesburg, Ashburn: News.

Verizon called hypocritical for equating net neutrality to censorship

Posted on by

Verizon is in the middle of a legal fight against the open Internet rules the Federal Communications Commission adopted in 2010. In addition to arguing that Congress never gave the FCC authority to regulate network neutrality, Verizon also claimed that forcing Verizon to abide by network neutrality rules violated the firm’s First Amendment right to free speech.

via Verizon called hypocritical for equating net neutrality to censorship | Ars Technica.

But CDT says Verizon can’t have it both ways. If Verizon is going to claim ISPs are “passive conduits” for copyright purposes, then in CDT’s view that implies that its routing decisions cannot be “active” enough to deserve protection under the First Amendment.

AT&T, have you no shame?

Posted on by

The distinctions being drawn seem bizarre and arbitrary to many customers who argue that data is data—I paid for it and should control what I use it on, not AT&T. It’s even stranger because AT&T isn’t targeting “video chat” apps with its restriction; it is only targeting FaceTime.What is going on here?

via AT&T, have you no shame? | Ars Technica.

So what’s the solution? Competition plays a key role. While we would prefer a slightly stronger standard for wireless net neutrality, customers generally do have more choice when it comes to wireless carriers than they do in the wired world. Switching isn’t easy, especially in the US world of contract and early termination fees, so the mere existence of competition doesn’t always work magic, but those who want to use FaceTime do at least have the choice of moving to a company like Sprint.