MEPs urge US to halt net neutrality repeal - Mobile World Live: "MEP Marietje Schaake, who is also VP of the European Transatlantic Legislative Dialogue, called the move to revoke the policy a “historic mistake”, adding: “Internet and the flow of data does not stop at the border and the FCC’s decision has a global impact. A reversal of net neutrality rules by the United States is a threat to the open, free and fair internet.”
“The European Parliament has been a vocal proponent of net neutrality rules within Europe. Today we undertake action to also preserve the open internet in the US.”" 'via Blog this'
Tuesday, January 23, 2018
CMA provisionally finds Fox/Sky deal not in the public interest - GOV.UK
CMA provisionally finds Fox/Sky deal not in the public interest - GOV.UK: "Fox announced on 14 December 2017 it had agreed the sale to Disney of certain assets including its interests in Sky. It also announced it was continuing its proposed acquisition of the shares in Sky it does not own. Should both acquisitions be completed successfully Disney would assume full ownership of Sky, including Sky News.
The sale to Disney will itself be subject to regulatory scrutiny and it is unlikely to be completed until after the CMA inquiry has concluded. It is therefore uncertain whether, when or how that transaction will be completed. As such, the CMA’s analysis of the Fox/Sky transaction cannot take it into account in its assessment of the transaction but implications of the Disney transaction in relation to remedies is considered in the notice of possible remedies." 'via Blog this'
The sale to Disney will itself be subject to regulatory scrutiny and it is unlikely to be completed until after the CMA inquiry has concluded. It is therefore uncertain whether, when or how that transaction will be completed. As such, the CMA’s analysis of the Fox/Sky transaction cannot take it into account in its assessment of the transaction but implications of the Disney transaction in relation to remedies is considered in the notice of possible remedies." 'via Blog this'
Monday, January 22, 2018
Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » The History of Net Neutrality In 13 Years of Tales of the Sausage Factory (with a few additions). Part I
Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » The History of Net Neutrality In 13 Years of Tales of the Sausage Factory (with a few additions). Part I: "As I record in my first “Net Neutrality Primer” from 2006 , the FCC under Republican Chairman Michael Powell classified cable modem as an “information service.”
As the FCC Order described, this eliminated the mandatory rules governing Title II telecommunications services that governed things like phone lines and DSL lines. Importantly, however, the FCC did not relinquish authority and oversight over broadband (indeed, they called the accusation they were abandoning all oversight of broadband “fear mongering”).
This is rather important for those who keep asking the question “why do we need net neutrality now when everything was fine before 2015?” As demonstrated with links by this little walk down memory lane, until December 14 2017, we always had rules to prevent the companies that owned the lines from blocking, degrading or otherwise interfering with the broadband traffic. The idea that we needed entirely separate rules to prevent this behavior didn’t even become a thing until after the Cable Modem Declaratory Ruling." 'via Blog this'
As the FCC Order described, this eliminated the mandatory rules governing Title II telecommunications services that governed things like phone lines and DSL lines. Importantly, however, the FCC did not relinquish authority and oversight over broadband (indeed, they called the accusation they were abandoning all oversight of broadband “fear mongering”).
This is rather important for those who keep asking the question “why do we need net neutrality now when everything was fine before 2015?” As demonstrated with links by this little walk down memory lane, until December 14 2017, we always had rules to prevent the companies that owned the lines from blocking, degrading or otherwise interfering with the broadband traffic. The idea that we needed entirely separate rules to prevent this behavior didn’t even become a thing until after the Cable Modem Declaratory Ruling." 'via Blog this'
Monday, January 15, 2018
States Push Back After Net Neutrality Repeal - The New York Times
States Push Back After Net Neutrality Repeal - The New York Times: " lawsuits against the commission are expected shortly after the policy becomes official. Last week, a lobbying group for big technology companies including Facebook, Google and Netflix announced that it planned to join the lawsuits, giving the opposition substantial new resources. More than a dozen state attorneys general have also announced plans to sue the commission.
But state lawmakers say they cannot wait around to see what happens with those efforts.
State Representative Norma Smith, a Republican who introduced the other bill in Washington, said net neutrality was an important safeguard for small businesses that might not be able to pay internet service companies for fast speeds. Even though Republicans in Washington, D.C., supported the repeal, she said many Republicans in her state supported her bill." 'via Blog this'
But state lawmakers say they cannot wait around to see what happens with those efforts.
State Representative Norma Smith, a Republican who introduced the other bill in Washington, said net neutrality was an important safeguard for small businesses that might not be able to pay internet service companies for fast speeds. Even though Republicans in Washington, D.C., supported the repeal, she said many Republicans in her state supported her bill." 'via Blog this'
Monday, January 08, 2018
How Law and Computer Science Can Work Together to Improve the Information Society | January 2018 | Communications of the ACM
How Law and Computer Science Can Work Together to Improve the Information Society | January 2018 | Communications of the ACM: "Net neutrality is a simple term that describes the complicated reality of highly complex engineering task: how to permit sufficient permission-free innovation in the network. The over-politicized doomsayers on both sides fail to mention what is becoming abundantly clear: policy can only partially steer traffic management practices. Net neutrality can do no more than prevent large telecoms companies continuing blocking Skype and WhatsApp or throttling back video traffic their subscribers want to see.
Net neutrality cannot stop innovation by telecoms companies (whose own corporate histories show a somewhat checkered relationship with Internet protocol network deployment). Regulators are simply not that competent, even if they had the resources and will to carry out laws to the letter, which they do not. More scientific exploration of the limited effects of Net neutrality policies would be rather useful. An example of regulators trying to do this in a non-confrontational manner is the extensive work produced by the Body of European Regulators of Electronic Communications.
Heroic policy interventions by government often fail, especially when aimed at industry self-regulation.
How can legislators discuss complex laws when they do not know the difference between an Internet access provider (IAP) and an Internet service provider (ISP)? In European law, an access provider (telco) is an 'Electronic Communications Service Provider' (ECSP), distinct from an Information Society Service Provider (ISSP). 'Information Society' was Europe's rhetorical counterpoint to Al Gore's 'Information Superhighway.' Lawyers often fail to master these terms.
Minimal rules made sensibly by technically proficient people are achieving quietly what millions of email messages to regulators and legislators cannot: conduct rules to stop telecoms companies blocking legitimate content while giving them the latitude to experiment where not harmful to the public Internet. Note that common carriage was a rather successful way of delivering public (alongside private and business) communications services in previous technologies." 'via Blog this'
Net neutrality cannot stop innovation by telecoms companies (whose own corporate histories show a somewhat checkered relationship with Internet protocol network deployment). Regulators are simply not that competent, even if they had the resources and will to carry out laws to the letter, which they do not. More scientific exploration of the limited effects of Net neutrality policies would be rather useful. An example of regulators trying to do this in a non-confrontational manner is the extensive work produced by the Body of European Regulators of Electronic Communications.
Heroic policy interventions by government often fail, especially when aimed at industry self-regulation.
How can legislators discuss complex laws when they do not know the difference between an Internet access provider (IAP) and an Internet service provider (ISP)? In European law, an access provider (telco) is an 'Electronic Communications Service Provider' (ECSP), distinct from an Information Society Service Provider (ISSP). 'Information Society' was Europe's rhetorical counterpoint to Al Gore's 'Information Superhighway.' Lawyers often fail to master these terms.
Minimal rules made sensibly by technically proficient people are achieving quietly what millions of email messages to regulators and legislators cannot: conduct rules to stop telecoms companies blocking legitimate content while giving them the latitude to experiment where not harmful to the public Internet. Note that common carriage was a rather successful way of delivering public (alongside private and business) communications services in previous technologies." 'via Blog this'
FCC issues final order dismantling net neutrality - CNET
FCC issues final order dismantling net neutrality - CNET: "The Federal Communications Commission released on Thursday the final text of its order repealing controversial Obama-era net neutrality regulations.
The 539-page Restoring Internet Freedom Order comes about three weeks after the agency voted 3-2 along party lines to dismantle rules passed in 2015 to ensure that all traffic on the internet is treated equally and to prevent broadband and wireless providers from blocking or slowing online content. The agency also voted to eliminate the legal foundation that gives the FCC oversight of internet service providers." 'via Blog this'
The 539-page Restoring Internet Freedom Order comes about three weeks after the agency voted 3-2 along party lines to dismantle rules passed in 2015 to ensure that all traffic on the internet is treated equally and to prevent broadband and wireless providers from blocking or slowing online content. The agency also voted to eliminate the legal foundation that gives the FCC oversight of internet service providers." 'via Blog this'