Defeat for net neutrality backers

Status
Not open for further replies.

shirish

Forerunner
Defeat for net neutrality backers

Film stars such as Alyssa Milano backed net neutrality
US politicians have rejected attempts to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in legislation.

Some fear the decision will mean net providers start deciding on behalf of customers which websites and services they can visit and use.

The vote is a defeat for Google, eBay and Amazon which wanted the net neutrality principle protected by law.

All three mounted vigorous lobbying campaigns prior to the vote in the House of Representatives.

Tier fear

The rejection of the principle of net neutrality came during a debate on the wide-ranging Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (Cope Act).

Among other things, this aims to make it easier for telecoms firms to offer video services around America by replacing 30,000 local franchise boards with a national system overseen by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Representative Fred Upton, head of the House telecommunications subcommittee, said competition could mean people save $30 to $40 each month on their net access fees.

An amendment to the Act tried to add clauses that would demand net service firms treat equally all the data passing through their cables.

The amendment was thought to be needed after the FCC ripped up its rules that guaranteed net neutrality.

During the debate House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, said that without the amendment "telecommunications and cable companies will be able to create toll lanes on the information superhighway".

"This strikes at the heart of the free and equal nature of the internet," she added.
Tim Berners-Lee, AP
The loss of neutrality could mean a two-tier net warned Berners-Lee

Critics of the amendment said it would bring in unnecessary government regulation.

Prior to the vote net firms worried about the effect of the amendment on their business lobbied hard in favour of the amendment. They fear their sites will become hard to reach or that they will be forced to pay to guarantee that they can get through to web users.

Meg Whitman, eBay chief executive, e-mailed more than one million members of the auction site asking them to back the idea of net neutrality. Google boss Eric Schmidt called on staff at the search giant to support the idea, and film stars such as Alyssa Milano also backed the amendment.

The ending of net neutrality rules also spurred the creation of activism sites such as Save The Internet and Its Our Net.

Speaking at a conference in late May, web creator Sir Tim Berners-Lee warned that the net faced entering a "dark period" if access suppliers were allowed to choose which traffic to prioritise.

The amendment was defeated by 269 votes to 152 and the Cope Act was passed by 321-101 votes.

The debate over the issue now moves to the US Senate where the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will vote on its version of the act in late June. The debate in that chamber is also likely to centre on issues of net neutrality.
If net neutrality is not there then bye bye bittorrent & welcome tiered Internet where only the rich survive :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It is too soon to see where this goes - there are a lot of consumer right and censorship issues involved here. "Net neutrality" is a strange concept in itself. The BGP protocol is inherently "non-neutral", though this non-neutrality manifests itself on the incoming line basis, not on the original source. Anyway, the telecom businesses may face too much competition - google has already started buying dark fiber. The others (Yahoo, Amazon etc) will join them. Plus there is always big boy MS who would hate having to pay a telecom operator to ensure that everyone gets MSN. The telecom companies have consistently shown through the past decade that they do not know how to make money off new advances (3g anyone?). They will just lose again. Plus, Citibank will not stand for their netbanking not being accessible to everyone. And trust me, those banks have a lot more influence than a bunch of reject telecom companies.

In any case, any attempt to downgrade the service of a legal site will almost ceratinly thrown out as a violation of the first amendment laws (I think it is the first amendment, someone correct me if I am wrong).
 
Does this mean we won't be able to access any website we like except a select few our ISP decides to include?

How soon will we see these changes in Idia?
 
Yes @Kingkrool, it would be violation of the 1st amendment it just sucks that on one level people are not aware & on the second they don't understand the significance of things. Taking the same case forward one could argue that MS or the other big companies could also perhaps pay the toll/tax but what about the small guy, something like TE itself or thousands of forums, blogs & what have you. Without support for the small guys the Net would be void of character.

@Boba Fett Here as it's we don't have any bandwidth. If this comes into force then it would be like nail in the coffin for lots of SME enterprises :(
 
how did I miss out in giving that link, thnx for bringing the site also saumil. More than anything on the site is the flyer that one can download, print & share as well as icons _& stuff for websites. Cyber activism & advocacy all rolled into one. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.