[governance] Net neutrality on mobiles
Sivasubramanian M
isolatedn at gmail.com
Wed Aug 11 20:40:25 EDT 2010
Dear Tracy,
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:37 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google <
tracyhackshaw at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a very interesting discussion thread indeed.
>
> I am confused though about some of the examples being offered as those
> which violate the NN principle.
>
> Is http://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=391295167130, for example,
> (available in Trinidad & Tobago, the Caribbean, and many other developing
> countries) and example of a violation of NN?
>
I see this as an issue that is even larger than that of the propriety of the
commercial positions of Google and Verizon. This is an issue that makes it
obvious that mobile (phone) Internet is far different from conventional
Internet. It shows that certain values that are inherent in 'conventional'
Internet are bound to be missing in mobile Internet
1. 'Conventional' Internet does not *definitely* identify the end-user or
the terminal accessing the Internet. The Network provided Internet access to
the end-user without requirements such as precise identification of user and
identification of the terminal at the user's end (machine number or
processor number or a set of names and numbers that precisely identified the
user's terminal. This is a factor that significantly contributed to the
practice of non-discrimination, in the sense that it was difficult to
discriminate without absolute certainty of the person at the user's end.
That changes totally and completely in mobile Internet. The Phone Company
which doubles as the ISP has completely knowledge of the user's terminal,
which is identified by the IMEI number, the connection is identified by the
sim number and the phone number. An IMEI number is required to make the
'terminal' eligible for connectivity, it identifies the 'terminal' in no
uncertain terms and the sim card and number is linked to the user which
identifies the user.
The user at the end is highly visible to the network operator, so it becomes
perfectly possible for the network operator to discriminate between users,
if the operator chooses to.
2. Conventional Internet does not seek to know what is going through the
pipelines, but mobile Internet knows with absolute certainty. In the
0.facebook issue, the fundamental issue is that the mobile Internet Services
provider who is the phone company KNOWS (worse, monitors) that the user is
accessing facebook. That is not supposed to be known, not supposed to be
noticed. In the true principles of Internet, the mobile ISP is supposed to
be 'stupid' and is not supposed to know what is going through the connection
- whether it is voice or data, let alone whether it is facebook or LinkedIn.
But the phone company knows everything. So it becomes possible to free-lane
or fast-lane traffic.
The user is in a glass house while accessing Internet from a mobile phone.
Sivasubramanian M
> I am hopeful that someone can comprehensively respond to this and clear up
> some of the grey about the issue in my mind.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tracy
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> The point you are missing is that when a carrier or ISP creates a non
>> traffic shaped free zone for users who have exceeded download limits and
>> includes, say, Google and Facebook and no other search engine or social
>> networking site - meaning all other sites are subject to much lower speeds
>> -
>> we have created an uneven playing field where it is difficult for other
>> new
>> search engines or social networking sites to compete with the incumbents.
>> To
>> me this is is a serious issue for innovation, free markets, and network
>> neutrality. .
>>
>> I don't see how this is similar to customer loyalty systems or product
>> buyndling.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > From: David Goldstein <goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au>
>> > Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, David Goldstein
>> > <goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au>
>> > Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 23:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
>> > To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>,
>> parminder
>> > <parminder at itforchange.net>, <ciresearchers at vancouvercommunity.net>
>> > Subject: Re: [governance] Net neutrality on mobiles
>> >
>> > I can only say this is a bit absurd Ian. Next you'll be going after
>> airlines
>> > for
>> > giving their frequent flyers benefits over non-frequent flyers. Or the
>> > benefits
>> > Telstra gives for customers who bundle their services.
>> >
>> > There are many other internet issues that I see every week that are
>> never
>> > addressed in this group, and you want to focus on this trivial issue?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > David
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>;
>> > ciresearchers at vancouvercommunity.net
>> > Sent: Sun, 8 August, 2010 1:53:25 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [governance] Net neutrality on mobiles
>> >
>> > Hi Parminder,
>> >
>> > Unfortunately Australia has already jumped ship on this too. It is
>> common
>> > practice for ISPs here (who have volume charging regimes) to create free
>> > zones of their partner sites which do not attract volume charges and/or
>> > traffic shaping when people exceed download limits. Nobody here seems to
>> > want to pick this up as an issue. To me, this is a distortion of a free
>> > market and an open Internet at the same time and should be attracting a
>> lot
>> > more attention.
>> >
>> > The mobile world, as you mention, brings with it other distortions and
>> > potential distortions (eg built in apps and interfaces)
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree - we should discuss.
>> >
>> >
>> > Ian Peter
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> From: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> >> Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, parminder <
>> parminder at itforchange.net>
>> >> Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 08:51:02 +0530
>> >> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, <ciresearchers at vancouvercommunity.net
>> >
>> >> Subject: [governance] Net neutrality on mobiles
>> >>
>> >> Hi All
>> >>
>> >> The biggest mobile operator in India, Airtel, is providing Facebook
>> free
>> >> of data download charges in India (apparently, only for 2 months). I
>> >> understand this is happening in other countries too; i read about
>> >> something similar in Russia.
>> >>
>> >> I consider this as an outright violation of net neutrality (NN).
>> >>
>> >> Since there are existing codes of conduct on NN in some countries like
>> >> Norway and Brazil, I will like to know from those who know and
>> >> understand these country specific arrangements well if such a thing as
>> >> above will be considered a NN violation under these codes.
>> >>
>> >> If indeed developing countries are to have any chance of being a part
>> of
>> >> shaping and governing the future of the Internet, we should start
>> >> testing such cases as above with the telecom regulatory authourities,
>> >> and if needed with courts and anti-trust bodies.
>> >>
>> >> Parminder
>> >>
>> >> PS: See latest developments on NN debate in the US at
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/08/google-verizon-close-to-their
>> >>
>> -
>> >> own-net-neutrality-deal.ars
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> It appears that there is some move to treat wireless or mobile based
>> >> Internet on a different level vis a vis NN than wired Internet.
>> >>
>> >> As the largest market players - here, Verizon and Google - seek to
>> >> arrive at a mutually convenient arrangement, and the only other party
>> >> to it is the US gov, itself representing very partisan, and largely
>> >> dominant, interests, as far as the global public Internet is concerned,
>> >> the real shape of global IG is quite evident. Where does the IGF, and
>> >> indeed the IGC come into this may be a question that we need to ponder
>> >> upon.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ____________________________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100812/12bc3f00/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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
More information about the Governance
mailing list