Network Neutrality

Network Neutrality — No Comments
17
Aug 10

Your fears confirmed: “up to” broadband speeds are bogus

Broadband providers in the US have long hawked their wares in “up to” terms. You know—”up to” 10Mbps, where “up to” sits like a tiny pebble beside the huge font size of the raw number.

In reality, no one gets these speeds. Thats not news to the techno-literate, of course, but a new Federal Communications Commission report PDF shines a probing flashlight on the issue and makes a sharp conclusion: broadband users get, on average, a mere 50 percent of that “up to” speed they had hoped to achieve.

via Your fears confirmed: “up to” broadband speeds are bogus.

Network Neutrality — No Comments
19
Jul 10

Should broadband data hogs pay more? ISP economics say “no”

Should broadband data hogs pay more? ISP economics say “no”.

A fantastic article you simply have to read. Reposting it here just simply wouldnt do it justice.

CyberLaw / CyberWar / Information Security / Internet and Society / Network Neutrality — No Comments
26
Jun 10

The National Cyberspace Strategy | The White House

This draft policy (below) is based on the President’s Cyberspace Policy Review (bottom). I have embedded both your your convenience.

Draft: National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace

View more documents from Thomas Jones.
View more documents from Thomas Jones.
Network Neutrality / Simply Interesting — No Comments
17
May 10

Glenn Becks war on the FCC and Satan worshippers

This guy is already the circus clown of political commentary, evading any responsibility or accountability for what he says, all under the guise of “entertainment” (like calling Obama a racist - remember that one?) but I simply can’t let this slide.

Let’s be real, in my opinion he’s really just an inept idiot with no genuine integrity for anything he says, even in the act of his well known “fake crying”. He’s a recovered drug and alcohol addict with no college degree, million dollar contracts, and people who write his books for him, but yet tries to offer insight and influence on topics that he was either “self taught” or didnt even bother to consult wikipedia about (as elementary as that is).

His show really amounts to nothing more than passing along viewpoints from the Republican Party’s media corporation, Fox News. Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” has an entire page devoted just to the hypocritical things Beck says, and how moronic it not only makes himself look, but Fox News as well. I suppose his “success” says more about the quality of the American publics true interest in politics than it does about the clown that “delivers” it.

Fox constantly touts their ratings and tries to synonymize popularity as credibility, but anyone who has survived high school knows that popularity has nothing to do with relevance.

So what has he done to warrant my attention now? This gem from his latest episode in which he tries to talk about an issue he clearly doesn’t have the capacity to understand:

Right-wing talker Glenn Beck took to his Fox News TV program last Monday night to deliver a rant about how President Obama has compiled something “almost like an enemys list” and how Obama is into “silencing opponents.” The presidents tool of choice for this censorship? Network neutrality—the principle that ISPs cannot interfere with content.

via Glenn Becks war on the FCC and Satan worshippers.

Apparently his “Arguing with Idiots” book is an auto-biography.

Network Neutrality — No Comments
19
Apr 10

Making ISPs common carriers: just a simple “error correction”

Title II is the old “common carrier” bit of US communications law, the one that said public networks like the telephone must be open to all comers at the same rate and could not discriminate. Even though the old AT&T ran a private network, the company had to complete everyone's calls; blocking critics from using the network was illegal.

Internet service started out under this regime, too, since it's most common early incarnation was dial-up access provided by the common carriers. But cable networks had never been common carriers, and when they started offering Internet access, the FCC made a momentous decision: this access was not a “telecommunications service” but instead an “information service.” DSL was also placed in the same category, which removed the “common carrier” designation.

Under common carrier law, the FCC had clear authority to address discrimination; under the “information service” category, it had no such explicit support from Congress. Kevin Martin's FCC therefore relied on the FCC's “ancillary” jurisdiction, but that move was just rejected by the courts. If the FCC wants to regulate network management, it either needs explicit authorization from Congress… or it needs to move the “information services” back into common carrier “telecommunications services.”

via Making ISPs common carriers: just a simple “error correction”.

Internet and Society / Network Neutrality / The Public Domain — No Comments
4
Mar 10

A Vision of Students Today

Internet and Society / Network Neutrality / Simply Interesting / The Public Domain — No Comments
4
Mar 10

The Machine is (Changing) Us: YouTube and the Politics of Authenticity

CyberLaw / CyberWar / Information Security / Internet and Society / Network Neutrality / Privacy — No Comments
19
Feb 10

Internet filtering: 2009 in review | Berkman Center

Internet filtering: 2009 in review | Berkman Center.

From the OpenNet Initiative blog:

The OpenNet Initiative is proud to release its 2009 Year in Review, a look into instances of filtering, surveillance, and information warfare around the world in 2009.

The events of 2009 demonstrated a global rise in third-generation Internet controls. Within the first two weeks of January 2009, both Pakistan and Thailand had ordered the filtering of several Web sites, and Germany announced plans to filter certain types of pornography, garnering outrage from free speech activists. By mid-year, the events surrounding the elections in Iran had taken center stage, prompting Iranian authorities to crack down on Internet use and sparking outrage throughout the world, which then rippled through social media.

The OpenNet Initiative estimates that at the end of 2009, 32% of all Internet users were accessing a filtered version of the Internet.

Network Neutrality / The Public Domain — No Comments
13
Feb 10

5/6-5/7: Legal Frontiers in Digital Media | Stanford Center for Internet and Society

Conference Title:

Legal Frontiers in Digital Media

Description:

For more information and to register please visit: http://mlrc-digitallaw.stanford.edu

A joint conference of:

• Media Law Resource Center

• Stanford Law School Center for Internet & Society

• John S. Knight Journalism Fellowships at Stanford

This intensive two-day event is designed for lawyers and Web publishing professionals responsible for sorting out the emerging legal issues surrounding the distribution of content on digital platforms.

The conference will explore:

• banners, beacons, and behavioral targeting

• legal issues for internet advertising and monetization

• ethical issues in the new world of journalism and content distribution

• government, legislative, and regulatory developments

• evolving fair use policies in a digital age

• emerging issues with user-generated content and online sourcing

. . . with legal experts from entities including . . .

Microsoft • Comcast • Federal Communications Commission • CBS Interactive • Center for Democracy & Technology • Center for Investigative Reporting • John S. Knight Journalism Fellowships at Stanford • Stanford's Center for Internet & Society • key law firms across the country

Questions? Please e-mail DigitalLaw@medialaw.org.

via 5/6-5/7: Legal Frontiers in Digital Media | Stanford Center for Internet and Society.

Internet and Society / Network Neutrality — No Comments
11
Feb 10

2/4: Barbara van Schewick – The FCC’s Open Internet Proceeding – Implications for Political Speech | Stanford Center for Internet and Society

2/4: Barbara van Schewick – The FCC’s Open Internet Proceeding – Implications for Political Speech | Stanford Center for Internet and Society.

Name of Speaker:
Barbara van Schewick
Title of Event:
The FCC’s Open Internet Proceeding – Implications for Political Speech

Who should decide how users can use the Internet? users or network providers? Should network providers be allowed to block certain applications or content on their networks? Triggered by changes in Internet technology, these questions over network neutrality have moved to the center of the regulatory and legislative debates surrounding the Internet worldwide. They are at the core of the Open Internet Proceeding, launched by the Federal Communications Commission in October 2009 to explore what rules are needed to secure the Internet’s openness. The talk will give an overview of the draft rules proposed by the Federal Communications Commission and explain how the alternative options under consideration would affect the environment for political speech in the United States.

Barbara van Schewick’s research focuses on the economic, regulatory, and strategic implications of communication networks. In particular, she explores how changes in the architecture of computer networks affect the economic environment for innovation and competition on the Internet, and how the law should react to these changes. This work has made her a leading expert on the issue of network neutrality. Her book “Internet Architecture and Innovation” will be published by MIT Press this spring. Professor van Schewick is the Faculty Director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society and an assistant professor of electrical engineering (by courtesy) at Stanford’s Department of Electrical Engineering.

Presented by the Program on Liberation Technology, pary of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law.
For further information regarding the series:
http://cddrl.stanford.edu/research/program_on_liberation_technology/

← Older Entries