SCL: Predictions 2018

SCL: Predictions 2018 - 5: "Prediction: Ajit Pai abolishes net neutrality at the 14 December FCC meeting, then the courts stay his action in 2018. This net neutrality issue will run forever." 'via Blog this'

Strand on Net Neutrality in EU after 1 Year: Unintended Consequences for operators, content providers, and consumers

Net Neutrality in EU after 1 Year: Unintended Consequences for operators, content providers, and consumers: "Desperate EU gamble for popularity.

The European Commission and Parliament made a gamble to regulate net neutrality and roaming in the same legislation, on the desperate hope that the EU could translate Europeans love of the interent and mobile communications into love of EU government. The EU claims that the reason for the legislation was to protect and guarantee the engine of Internet innovation, but the regime fails on both fronts. The privacy of users is being violated by invasive measurement and blocks against securing networks.

As for innovation, there are little to no examples of new European developments since the legislation. If anything, the EU continues to fall behind the US and East Asia in Internet innovation." 'via Blog this'

5 crazy things that happened as the FCC voted to undo its net neutrality rules - The Washington Post

5 crazy things that happened as the FCC voted to undo its net neutrality rules - The Washington Post: "On the “Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” Colbert compared Verizon's and Comcast's promises not to block, slow down or prioritize Web traffic to the “shark lobby” promising not to eat people, despite pushing regulators to reclassify their mouths as “sleeping bags.”

 “By killing net neutrality, Internet providers can basically do whatever they want, as long as they disclose to their users what exactly they do to Web traffic. So, get ready for more fine print from your Internet provider. At least you’ll have something to read while you wait for website to load,” Colbert joked.

 He also mocked FCC chairman Ajit Pai for starring in an anti-net-neutrality video published by conservative news site the Daily Caller, that appeared to target young people by using memes and pop culture references. To lampoon Pai, Colbert, in shades and an offset baseball cap that said “Snapgram,” pretended to connect with millennials, or “chicken nugget teens” by exclaiming “Szechuan sauce!” and taking a selfie using an avocado as a camera." 'via Blog this'

Kieran McCarthy: 5 reasons why America's Ctrl-Z on net neutrality rules is a GOOD thing • The Register

5 reasons why America's Ctrl-Z on net neutrality rules is a GOOD thing • The Register: "If you sign up to the Platinum Double Plus package, you are going to get an internet so fast it will blow your socks off. And all the best content, carefully curated for you by your cable company. Think 3D gaming. Think 8K video.

You will be the envy of your street. You will be better than them. They suck. You're great. And it will only cost $200 a month. That's the price of just two coffees a day. And, for a limited time only, you can get it for just $150 a month." 'via Blog this'

Why is Disney buying Fox? - BBC News does not realize it has biggest net neutrality story in UK

Why is Disney buying Fox? - BBC News: "For Disney, the acquisition of 21st Century Fox is a key moment in a pivot towards streaming premium content directly into people's living rooms.
Disney has been focused on acquiring content, buying Pixar and Lucasfilm for example, and this deal helps beef up the distribution.
The stake in Sky gives it nearly 50 million European subscribers.
It also adds the Star India network with 58 channels in eight languages, reaching 650 million customers.

In addition, Disney will acquire a majority stake in the streaming service Hulu.

Add all that up and you have a potentially powerful future competitor to Netflix and Amazon Prime - who at the moment are streets ahead." 'via Blog this'

18 attorneys general ask FCC to delay net neutrality vote for fake comments investigation | TheHill

18 attorneys general ask FCC to delay net neutrality vote for fake comments investigation | TheHill: "The letter is signed by attorneys general from Virginia, the District of Columbia, Delaware, Hawaii, California, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Iowa, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Washington and Vermont.

“It is essential that the Commission gets a full and accurate picture of how changes to net neutrality will affect the everyday lives of Americans before they can act on such sweeping policy changes,” the attorneys general write.

 The letter comes after a separate letter from the office of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said as many as 2 million comments regarding net neutrality filed to the commission were falsified.

“But, if the well of public comment has been poisoned by falsified submissions, the Commission may be unable to rely on public comments that would help it reach a legitimate conclusion to the Page 2 rulemaking process,” the 18 attorneys write." 'via Blog this'

France’s top internet regulator, Sébastien Soriano, has a message for Americans on net neutrality.

France’s top internet regulator, Sébastien Soriano, has a message for Americans on net neutrality.: "Another point made by critics of net neutrality is that the internet developed just fine without open-internet protections in place. But it is not fair to argue that because the “internet as we know it” grew with no net neutrality rules, we do not need these rules today. Gutenberg did not benefit from any declaration of rights to invent the printing press. Nevertheless, we codified freedom of speech to keep using it.

 In today’s digital world, the main challenge is to make sure that startups, entrepreneurs, and all innovators still have the ability to reinvent our world. Big companies now in place—telecom, cable, media companies, tech giants—have been doing well in recent years, and the issue is not to fight against them. But we know from history that disruptive and game-changing ideas often come from the margins. More than ever, our duty is to give a chance to a future Magellan or Columbus to forge a way in the unknown." 'via Blog this'

TeleFrieden: “Restoring” Internet Freedom for Whom?

TeleFrieden: “Restoring” Internet Freedom for Whom?: "To answer my colleague’s question, I believe one has to consider ISPs as platform intermediaries who have an impact both downstream on end users and upstream on other carriers, content distributors and content creators. My research agenda has pivoted to the law, economics and social impact of platforms; see https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2935292.

           

Using the employment, innovation and investment criteria, the FCC also should have considered the current and prospective freedom quotient for upstream players.  Does nearly unfettered price and quality of service discrimination options for ISPs impact upstream ventures’ ability to employ, innovate and invest more?

           

Assume for the sake of discussion that ISPs can block, throttle, drop and prioritize packets.  A plausible, worst case scenario has an innovative market entrant with a new content-based business plan less able to achieve the Commission’s freedom goals.  Regardless whether you call it artificial congestion, the potential exists for an ISP to prevent traffic of the content market entrant from seamless transit.  The ISP could create congestion with an eye toward demanding a surcharge payment, even though the market entrant’s traffic had no possibility of itself creating congestion.  The ISP also might throttle traffic of the innovative newcomer if its market entry might adversely impact the content market share and profitability of the ISP, its affiliates and its upstream content providers that previously agreed to pay a surcharge.

           

Of course network neutrality opponents would object to this scenario based on the summary conclusion that an ISP would never degrade network performance, or reduce the value proposition of its service.  The airlines do this and so would an ISP if it thought it could extract more revenues given the lack of competition and the inability of consumers on both sides of its platform to shift carriers.   

ISPs do not operate as charities." 'via Blog this'

Pioneers for Net Neutrality

Pioneers for Net Neutrality: "It is important to understand that the FCC’s proposed Order is based on a flawed and factually inaccurate understanding of Internet technology. These flaws and inaccuracies were documented in detail in a 43-page-long joint comment signed by over 200 of the most prominent Internet pioneers and engineers and submitted to the FCC on July 17, 2017.

 Despite this comment, the FCC did not correct its misunderstandings, but instead premised the proposed Order on the very technical flaws the comment explained. The technically-incorrect proposed Order dismantles 15 years of targeted oversight from both Republican and Democratic FCC chairs, who understood the threats that Internet access providers could pose to open markets on the Internet.

 The experts’ comment was not the only one the FCC ignored. Over 23 million comments have been submitted by a public that is clearly passionate about protecting the Internet. The FCC could not possibly have considered these adequately.

 Indeed, breaking with established practice, the FCC has not held a single open public meeting to hear from citizens and experts about the proposed Order.

Furthermore, the FCC’s online comment system has been plagued by major problems that the FCC has not had time to investigate. " 'via Blog this'

The Demise of Net Neutrality Will Harm Innovation in America - MIT Technology Review

The Demise of Net Neutrality Will Harm Innovation in America - MIT Technology Review: "Even the very biggest startups could suffer. In an IPO filing published earlier this year, Snap warned that weakening or ending net neutrality would hurt its business if ISPs limited access to it or favored its rivals (see “Why Snap Is Worried About Net Neutrality”). Young companies that pay up for higher speeds would have to pass those costs on to consumers, making it harder to compete with bigger players.

 Big ISPs say they’re committed to keeping a level playing field, but history and economic realism suggest they won’t. AT&T, for instance, blocked Skype and other Internet calling services on iPhones on its network until 2009. In many markets in America, there are still only one or two high-speed broadband providers. " 'via Blog this'

The FCC Still Doesn’t Know How the Internet Works | Electronic Frontier Foundation

The FCC Still Doesn’t Know How the Internet Works | Electronic Frontier Foundation: "Since the FCC cites them, it clearly read the multiple comments stating that over 50% of Web traffic is now encrypted. Yet, it sticks to the assertion that “truly pervasive encryption on the Internet is still a long way off, and that many sites still do not encrypt,” and use that to dismiss “assertions in record that suggest that ISP-provided caching is not a vital part of broadband Internet access service offerings, as it may be stymied by the use of HTTPS encryption.”

 Although the FCC tries to claim that offering web caching is an integral part of the functionality that ISPs provide, this is not the case. In fact, Sonic, a San Francisco-based ISP, does not run web caching equipment for its customers (although they do host a number of boxes from non-affiliated CDN platforms, including the Google Global Cache, Netflix OpenConnect, and Akamai—but they don't operate those boxes).

 And if the FCC doesn’t understand the Internet in general, it understands mobile telephony and broadband Internet access even less." 'via Blog this'

Stranger Things: Why Netflix Isn’t Behind New Submarine Cable Builds

Stranger Things: Why Netflix Isn’t Behind New Submarine Cable Builds: "But how do we translate that number (190,000 gigabytes of data) to traffic? To make that calculation, let’s make a few simplifying assumptions. First, let’s pretend that Netflix fully refreshes its entire cache each month. Second, let’s say that Netflix does this refresh evenly over the course of 30 days in the month. That translates to 6,333 GB per day…which turns out to be a piddly 577 Mbps. If Netflix were to push this content to its caches only during a daily 12-hour off-peak period, the required capacity would be double: 1.2 Gbps." 'via Blog this'

Volume-based mobile data monetisation is unsustainable | Pal Zarandy

Volume-based mobile data monetisation is unsustainable | Pal Zarandy | Pulse | LinkedIn: "Case in point: as I mentioned in my post a year ago, Finnish networks – after over ten years of supplying the market with truly unlimited mobile data plans both for smartphones and for data-only devices) – now carry more mobile data volume per capita than fixed-line internet networks in Germany. 


Near zero marginal cost

investment intensity is basically independent of traffic volume growth

While operators invest every year huge amounts of money (~10% of service revenues) into their mobile infrastructure, our research showed that the investment intensity has been basically independent of traffic volume growth. Volumes grew by an order of magnitude, annual Capex stayed flat." 'via Blog this'

SCL: Predictions 2018 - 5

SCL: Predictions 2018 - 5: "Chris Marsden looks back on past predictions and looks forward through 2018 and beyond, with a special focus on net neutrality" 'via Blog this'

Net Neutrality Divide: Canada and the U.S. Go Separate Ways on an Open Internet - Michael Geist

Net Neutrality Divide: Canada and the U.S. Go Separate Ways on an Open Internet - Michael Geist: "While the change in U.S. administration has led to a dramatic shift in net neutrality policy, the same will not occur in Canada. New CRTC chair Ian Scott told an industry conference earlier this month that “as companies continue to innovate in their offerings to Canadians, the CRTC will continue to ensure that Canada’s Internet neutrality provisions are respected … the owners and operators of the country’s communications may not discriminate against content based on its origin or destination.” 


Canadian consumers may be shielded from net neutrality abuses, but the effects of the U.S. decision may still be felt north of the border. Since Canadian Internet traffic often transits through the United States, there are concerns that Canadian data could get caught by non-neutral policies. Moreover, Canadian internet services hoping to attract U.S. customers may face demands for payments to have their content delivered on the fast track.

Since the renegotiation of the North American free-trade agreement include a chapter on digital trade, Canadian negotiators should be pushing for the inclusion of a strong, enforceable net neutrality provision." 'via Blog this'

Net neutrality: Trai’s recommendations regarding internet services may be the strongest in the world

Net neutrality: Trai’s recommendations regarding internet services may be the strongest in the world: "The recommendations also require internet providers to declare whether they discriminate among various kinds of web traffic, like video and text.

 Nayantara Ranganathan, a researcher at the Internet Democracy Project, said this recommendation is not as specific as the one the regulator had floated in its consultation paper, which was circulated among stakeholders in the last few months.

 Ranganathan said that in the consultation paper, “they recognised the importance of meaningful disclosures, and went as far as including a sample disclosure format”. She added, “So it is surprising they haven’t really recommended anything more specific than saying that disclosures need to be given.”

 Yet another proposal of the regulator is that a committee of internet service providers, academics, civil society representatives and consumer groups be set up to detect net neutrality violations and communicate them to the government. It said it would elaborate on the specifics of this committee once the recommendation is accepted by the government." 'via Blog this'

Scrapping FCC net neutrality rules would be a mistake | openDemocracy

Scrapping FCC net neutrality rules would be a mistake | openDemocracy: "Christopher Marsden: I agree with Terrell McSweeny – this is a local US issue, so no change for Rest of World – in fact Tim Wu points out the draft Order is so egregious it will fall early under judicial challenge." 'via Blog this'

As FCC Contemplates Repealing Net Neutrality Protections, Indian Telecom Regulator Reaffirms Support for Principles of Non-Discrimination | Electronic Frontier Foundation

As FCC Contemplates Repealing Net Neutrality Protections, Indian Telecom Regulator Reaffirms Support for Principles of Non-Discrimination | Electronic Frontier Foundation: "In February 2016 TRAI issued an order prohibiting differential pricing which led to Facebook's Free Basics programme to be banned in India. TRAI's latest recommendations on net neutrality focus on modifying licensing terms fall under this second category of TRAI's interventions.

 Unlike its order on differential pricing order TRAI's latest recommendations on licensing issues are not binding. This is because while TRAI has the power to frame regulations on issues such as pricing, QoS, and interconnection, the Department of Telecom (DoT) has final authority on matters related to granting or modification of licences in India. But if TRAI's recommendations are accepted by the DoT, ISPs in India will be explicitly prohibited from and penalised for blocking, throttling, slowing down, or granting preferential speeds or treatment to any content on their networks." 'via Blog this'

Comcast deleted net neutrality pledge the same day FCC announced repeal | Ars Technica

Comcast deleted net neutrality pledge the same day FCC announced repeal | Ars Technica: "Under the FCC's previous Democratic leadership, the net neutrality rules allowed ISPs to implement zero-rating, but with some exceptions. Under its new Republican leadership, the FCC has allowed all manner of zero-rating. With the net neutrality rules eliminated, Comcast would be able to charge online providers for data cap exemptions without any fear of punishment from the FCC.

 But the question of whether paid prioritization is "anti-competitive" or "pro-competitive" may be moot. Pai's plan will eliminate the ban on paid prioritization altogether.

Without FCC rules, ISPs will basically be free to handle their network however they want as long as they disclose network management practices publicly. The Federal Trade Commission could punish ISPs that renege on their promises, but there won't be any specific rule requiring them to make the promises in the first place.

Comcast might really have no specific plans to enter paid prioritization agreements today.

But since Comcast's net neutrality promise now contains no pledge related to even "anti-competitive" paid prioritization, the company may be preparing for a future in which it does implement paid prioritization.

 Conditions on the NBCUniversal merger that place some limits on Comcast's ability to implement paid prioritization will expire in September 2018. If the FCC vote next month happens as expected, then Comcast will have free rein to charge websites and online application providers for priority access later next year." 'via Blog this'