[governance] IGP Alert: "Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance"

Tue Nov 6 11:24:13 EST 2007

On the subject, here is an interesting article from... Business Week.

--c.a.

====

Get Your Hands Off the Web 
http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/07_45/b4057090....
1 of 2 04/11/2007 21:18
Close Window
TECH &
YOU
PODCAST
NOVEMBER 5, 2007
OPINION -- TECH & YOU
Get Your Hands Off the Web
Interference in Web content by AT&T and Verizon shows that more 
regulation is needed
A bit over a year ago, I wrote a column arguing that innovation on the 
Internet would be best served if the government mostly
kept its hands off. I've changed my mind. The behavior of the top 
telecommunications companies, especially Verizon
Communications (VZ ) and AT&T (T ), has convinced me that more 
government involvement is needed to keep
communications free of corporate interference.
The incident that swayed me was a decision in September by Verizon 
Wireless, majority owned by Verizon Communications,
to block Naral Pro-Choice America from using its system to send 
text-message alerts to supporters. Verizon, which had cited
a policy barring distribution of content that "may be seen as 
controversial or unsavory," quickly backed down after a public
outcry. But, a spokesperson says, Verizon "reserves the right to deny 
other programs in the future."
Verizon has that right under current law. It may not interfere with 
voice messages, but "common carrier" requirements do not apply to
any form of text or data transmission. They should.
The fact is, the old Bell system that was broken up 25 years ago has 
reassembled itself into a duopoly that dominates the Internet
backbone and both landline and wireless phone service. Verizon and AT&T 
are also among the largest Internet service providers. The
old, overregulated AT&T was hostile to innovation, but as stodgy as it 
was, it saw itself as the steward of a public trust. The company's
lightly regulated successors view the world quite differently.
Until a recent change in the terms of its broadband service—again in 
response to a public flap—AT&T claimed the right to terminate
the connection of customers for "conduct that...tends to damage the name 
or reputation of AT&T." Verizon retains similar language in
its terms of service.
Then there's the push by phone companies, which long to get into the TV 
business, to ingratiate themselves with Hollywood. In
defending a plan to block what AT&T believes to be pirated content on 
its network, its veteran lobbyist James Ciccone said: "AT&T has
considered this whole problem of digital piracy, and we feel our 
interests are very much aligned with the content community's interests."
I don't endorse illegal downloads, but it's hard to spot pirated content 
in transit, so the potential for mistakes is high. And shouldn't
AT&T align with the interests of customers?
Phone companies and their allies in the cable TV industry oppose rules 
that would bar Internet service providers like them from
meddling with communications based on content. AT&T and others also say 
they must be allowed to charge companies such as
Google (GOOG ) a premium to deliver high-quality video and other 
advanced services. Their opponents support a single-fee structure
for all Internet users covering all types of traffic, be it voice, 
music, video, or data.
There's a certain irony here. The carriers warn that without premiums to 
pay for advanced services, the U.S. risks falling behind other
nations in broadband. But the U.S. is already losing ground to the rest 
of the industrialized world in broadband speed and percentage
of homes served. Last year the U.S. fell from 12th to 15th in broadband 
penetration among 29 countries ranked by the Organization for
Economic Cooperation & Development. Most of those nations are 
enthusiastic regulators. (Verizon is rolling out a fast service of up to
50 megabits a second, but so far it reaches just 1 million homes.)
The hands-off approach hasn't served consumers well. And the Web is far 
too important to entrust the free flow of information to the
shifting whims of a few big companies. Government must step in and tell 
them to leave our content alone.

====

Milton L Mueller wrote:
> New Paper Released / Rio Forum Workshops
> 
> As a contribution to the 2007 UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF), IGP has released a new paper showing how network neutrality can serve as a globally applicable principle to guide Internet governance. The paper defines network neutrality as the right of Internet users to access content, services and applications on the Internet without interference from network operators or overbearing governments. It also encompasses the right of network operators to be reasonably free of liability for transmitting content and applications deemed illegal or undesirable by third parties. Those aspects of net neutrality are relevant in a growing number of countries and situations, as both public and private actors attempt to subject the Internet to more control. 
> 
> An important part of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum is to develop globally applicable public policy principles for Internet governance. The paper contends that the principle of network neutrality combines and integrates concepts of universal access to the resources connected to the Internet, freedom of expression, economic innovation, and free trade in digital products and services.
> 
> Read the paper:
> <http://internetgovernance.org/pdf/NetNeutralityGlobalPrinciple.pdf>
> 
> *** IGF WORKSHOPS ***
> 
> IGP will be co-sponsoring two workshops at the IGF in Rio 
> de Janerio.
> 
> Mark your calendars because you can even participate 
> online!
> 
> "DNSSEC: Securing a Critical Internet Resource"
> 14 November, 2007
> Meeting Room III, Hotel Windsor Barra
> Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
> 10:30 (Rio de Janeiro)/13:30 (Berlin)/7:30 (New 
> York)/20:30 (Beijing)
> <http://www.internetgovernance.org/events.html#IGF2007DNSSECWorkshop_111406>
> 
> "Public Policy on the Internet"
> 14 November, 2007
> Meeting Room VI, Hotel Windsor Barra
> Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
> 18:30 (Rio de Janeiro)/21:30 (Berlin)/15:30 (New 
> York)/4:30 next day (Beijing)
> <http://internetgovernance.org/events.html#IGF2007PublicPolicyWorkshop_111406>
> 
> =========================
> Subscription Information
> =========================
> 
> Subscribe/unsubscribe from the IGP-Announce mailing list via web interface:
> http://internetgovernance.org/subscribe.html
> 
> ===============
> Privacy Policy
> ===============
> 
> The IGP-Announce mailing list is used only to mail IGP news announcements.
> We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list.  We do not enhance (link to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.
> 
> In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information."
> 
> Internet Governance Project
> http://internetgovernance.org
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.23/1113 - Release Date: 11/6/2007 10:04 AM
>  
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
> 
> 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance