Chile becomes first country to guarantee net neutrality

[DMac]

Chile becomes first country to guarantee net neutrality, we start thinking about moving (http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/15/chile-becomes-first-country-to-guarantee-net-neutrality-we-star/)

¡Vive Chile!

[Apparition]

I don't what it is over there but the so-called "net neutrality" being promoted here is nothing more than a power grab by a bunch of worthless FCC bureaucrats seeking to justify their existences and careers.

[Bobthetomato]

What better way to promote investment in high speed connections than by telling private companies exactly how they may use that bandwith. I guess they will need a bunch of new mouth breathers to enforce this.

[Phoenix]

What better way to promote investment in high speed connections than by telling private companies exactly how they may use that bandwith.


Yes, we'd all much rather have a tiny clique of corporatists with a monopoly on Internet connections permitting only "permissible" content.

::)

[DMac]

The Telecoms are against Net Neutrality.

Here is what is at stake:


Net neutrality (http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4741359) -- the principle that Internet users should be able to access any web content they want, post their own content, and use any applications they choose, without restrictions or limitations imposed by their Internet service providers (ISPs).


More (this link has a good overview of NN):

"Network Neutrality" (http://www.cybertelecom.org/ci/neutral.htm) is the idea that Internet access providers should not discriminate with regard to what applications an individual can use, or the content an individual can upload, download, or interacted with over the network. Individuals acquiring services from Internet access providers should be able to use the applications and devices of their choice, and interact with the content of their choice anywhere on the Internet.


Corporations manipulating the justice system to strengthen their monopoly in media:


Net Neutrality - the dark other side (http://lessig.org/blog/2006/06/net_neutrality_the_dark_other.html)

June 20, 2006

So Gary Reback, who was one of the important initial actors pushing the government to focus on the Microsoft case, has been focusing on telecom mergers. He's been pushing what's called as a "Tunney Act" proceeding (on behalf of a group called "Alliance for Competition in Telecommunications") to review phone mergers. (The Tunney Act used to be meaningless, but in 2004 was amended to give it teeth. Reback's case is the first under the new act).

Apparent there are now allegations that SBC and Verizon forced the deals through DoJ when the designee for head of antitrust was on Senatorial hold for too activist an enforcement bent. DoJ cleared the deals and the hold was lifted. DoJ then ignored the amended Tunney Act and let the companies close the deals even before the judge did the Tunney Act review.

This is sleazy stuff, and it forms the real basis for being concerned about the games the network owners would play if free to play games. The really striking part of this (to me, a constitutionalist) is how the legislative branch keeps passing laws that the executive branch just ignores. And why ignore the laws? Corporate influence. That's what this case reeks of.

more at link