[governance] Net neutrality on mobiles

[parminder]

On Tuesday 10 August 2010 09:59 AM, McTim wrote:
> All,
>
> Here is the "deal", a proposed policy framework.
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/35599242/Verizon-Google-Legislative-Framework-Proposal
>
> It may be the same as the link Ian sent, but connectivity is dodgy this morning.
>
> Lots of negative reaction on huffpost (a site I can reach albeit slowly):
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-green/breaking-google-goes-evil_b_676021.html
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/google-verizon-deal-the-e_b_671617.html
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/google-verizon-pact-it-ge_b_676194.html
>
> All of it misses the point that the telcos have never really been NN
> practitioners, it's just not part of who they are.
>    
McTim, Sorry, but I think it is you who are missing the point here. It 
is not about what already happened surreptitiously and now may be more 
open, but what is your views on what is happening, and its threat or not 
to the Internet you want to advocate for.

Incidentally, if i remember rightly, you have said on this list that you 
support 'network neutrality' (NN). So the point is what is the NN you 
support, how important you think it is and what is it that you are ready 
to do to push for it.
> My question is "why now?" What does Google have to gain at this point
> by saying " under this proposal we would not now apply most of the
> wireline principles to wireless, except for the transparency
> requirement".   Is this the best they could get?
>    
I dont understand why you are so bothered about what google did vis a 
vis its interests and why, rather than how it affects public interest. 
And whether 'this is the best 'we', the public, can get'.
> @Tracy, any country can offer regulations that says "a bit is a bit is
> a bit, thou shall not treat them differently".  However, since most
> regulators are cozy with the telcos who have never treated bits
> equally, this is unlikely to happen.  Maybe in Scandinavia tho, one
> never knows!
>    
Again, dismissively mentioning 'what is unlikely to happen' may not the 
best way to go forward for an advocacy group at this kind of a juncture, 
which has taken upon itself to promote progressive Internet policies and 
'strive to ensure an information society which better enables equal 
opportunity and freedom for all' (from the charter). Also, why should be 
rather more sanguine that our efforts can dismantle the authoritarian 
regimes of the world but are unlikely to have any effect on continued 
corporatist domination of the Internet and the world.

Parminder



____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t