[governance] [lack of] Net Neutrality for Mobile Internet in different shapes and forms?

[Lee W McKnight]

Louis,

Not to worry, the stage has shifted yet again: 

AT&T + T-Mobile merger anyone?

(Is that then AT&T&T-Mobile? AT-3rd mobile? Anyway ; )

Seriously, conditions set on merger could well include...open Internet access or as some mislabel it, network neutrality.

Including for mobile services.

Lee
________________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org [governance-request at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Louis Pouzin (well) [pouzin at well.com]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 8:52 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] [lack of] Net Neutrality for Mobile Internet in different shapes and forms?

What's New @ IEEE-USA - Eye On Washington
Vol. 2011, No. 4 (18 March 2011)
http://ieeeusa.org/policy/eyeonwashington/2011/04eow2011.asp

FCC bill stalled.

Disapproval Resolution for 'Net Neutrality' Rules Advances Out of House Energy & Commerce Committee
. . .
"the Committee approved a resolution of disapproval (H J Res 37<http://www.cq.com/bill/112/HJRES37>) that turns back rules adopted by the FCC in December 2010<http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/Media/file/Hearings/Telecom/030911/MarkupMemo.pdf> barring fixed broadband service providers from blocking content and unnecessarily discriminating in transmitting network traffic."
. . .
The resolution gives broadband service providers a "green light to block from consumers any applications, content and services they choose to block," said Edward J. Markey ( D-Mass.). "I am not saying that all providers will do this, but some certainly will."


WHAT NEXT ?
- - -

On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com<mailto:roland at internetpolicyagency.com>> wrote:
In message <AANLkTimNELUwNo7pJCjoCNJD0x77t9bnfjavpDxm3eWW at mail.gmail.com<mailto:AANLkTimNELUwNo7pJCjoCNJD0x77t9bnfjavpDxm3eWW at mail.gmail.com>>, at 18:30:30 on Sat, 19 Mar 2011, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com<mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>> writes

These are very interesting email exchanges by the list. The questions I
have are to what extent then should content be controlled and what are
the rules for the prioritisation of traffic and who decides? Is it the
ISP that decides or is the regulator that decides and the ISPs enforce.

In the current UK case, the ISPs have identified some traffic (P2P and NNTP) which they say is causing most of the congestion. The regulator is asking them to be transparent about the measures introduced to rate-limit those two kinds of traffic.

It's not as sophisticated as it could be (I don't like to see text-only NNTP restricted because that's collateral damage). But I can now see who is going to be introducing measures.


What are the Traffic rules?

Should the person or persons downloading videos (whether they are
pirate or not) be profiled and given the option to purchase a different
product line so that they do not crowd up the Network?

In most cases they already have that option. In most cases they simply choose not to pay the extra.


Or would the Network be crowded anyway?

The network will still be crowded, but the ISP can prioritise the traffic of its higher-paying customers over that part of the network which matters. It can also use the higher revenue to buy higher bandwidth infrastructure (for everyone to benefit from).


Does this mean that policy writers who will think about the dynamics
behind what would be rules to guide open networks, would they have to
have some kind of economic model to govern the supply and demand of the
various types of traffic within a country's national network?

I'm sure the ISPs have very sophisticated models of the traffic flow inside their networks.


I don't know these answers and am not certain I am asking the right
questions but I would really love to understand the dynamics of
Internet Governance surrounding these issues.

It's a consumer protection issue mainly. Although there's quite a lot of Internet Governance which is there to protect the rights of consumers (eg many of the rules regarding the behaviour of domain name registries towards their customers).

Roland.

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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