Total Pageviews

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Dutch minister on implementing Telecoms Package - courtesy of R. vd berg

I have been following Rudolf's posts on the Dutch net neutrality meeting - and the minister's words seem to confirm that transparency and the one-day switch procedure will be the key to their response, rather than detailed analysis of what 'reasonable network management' means - that may be left to the EC.

Monday, November 16, 2009

Net Neutrality at the IGF

Diplo Foundation has organized a 3-hour workshop that occupies the very end of the IGF, Wednesday at 1400 Egyptian time. The line-up of potential speakers is pretty incredible (we'll see who sticks around;-):
Robert Pepper, Vice President Global Technology Policy, CISCO
Thomas Lenard, President and Senior Fellow, Technology Policy Institute
Ian Peter, Internet Governance Caucus
Emmanuel Edet, National Information Technology Development Agency, Nigeria
Andrea Renda, Head of the Regulatory Affairs Programme, CEPS
Dr. Jovan Kurbalija, Director, DiploFoundation
Chuck Kisselburg, Director of Strategic Partnerships, CommunityDNS
Steve Purser, ENISA
Robert Schischka, CERT-Austria
Professor Belhassan Zouari, CEO National Agency for Computer Security (ANSI) and head of CERT-Tunisia
N. Ravi Shanker, CEO, National Internet Exchange of India (NIXI)
Jacquelynn Ruff, Vice President International Public Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Verizon Communications
Jake E. Jennings, Executive Director, International External and Regulatory Affairs, AT&T
Robert Guerra, Freedom House/Privaterra
Henry Owera, Government of Southern Sudan
Marilia Maciel, Center of Technology and Society - FGV
Chris Steck, Public Policy Directorate, Telefónica, S.A
Dr. Amr Badawi, CEO, NTRA Egypt
Willy Jensen, Director General, NPT Norway
Vanessa Copetti Cravo, ANATEL - Brazilian Telecommunication Agency
Parminder Jeet Singh, Internet Governance Caucus
Michael Truppe, Constitutional Service Media Affairs Coordination Information Society Austria
Moderator:
Vladimir Radunovic, Coordinator of Internet Governance Programmes, DiploFoundation
Chuck Kisselburg, Director of Strategic Partnerships, CommunityDNS
Ambassador David A. Gross, former U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy at the U.S. Department of State

Internauts and pharoahs: the Telecoms Package sold to the world

Catherine Trautman MEP (author of the compromise on Amendment 138) and Viviane Reding both were in Sharm el Sheikh this weekend, participating in the 4th Internet Governance Forum - where protests against Chinese firewalls were removed for fear of offending those fearful dictators as Obama just did (and Egypt itself is a ruthless dictatorship) - mildly ironic that they allowed Tim Berners Lee to launch the WWW Foundation devoted to the Web and society in such a place...
"If we are not allowed to discuss topics such as internet censorship, surveillance and privacy at a forum on internet governance, then what is the point of the IGF?" Ron Deibert, co-founder of the OpenNet Initiative told BBC News.

Friday, November 13, 2009

Art Brodsky: net neutrality 'opposite' to Fairness Doctrine

Interesting Huffington Post about the old fairness doctrine (RIP 1949-87), and its similarities - or otherwise - to net neutrality. In truth, one is about internal pluralism in a world of limited channels, the other about external pluralism in a world of only one channel - the Internet - but with billions of routes to the citizen's eyeballs. I wrote about it in a report for the Council of Europe a decade ago, but they didn't notice much!
Call it what you like, it is regulation - which is why free market Taleban-style fundamentalists hate it:
'what both ideas have in common is the notion, which goes back to the beginnings of our telecommunications law, that the interests of the public trump those of businesses or government. The idea that clear in the earliest days of broadcasting, just as it should be clear today. Herbert Hoover said in 1925 that there has to be a "public benefit" to broadcasting. U.S. Supreme Court Justice White in the Red Lion opinion also, said: "It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount."
Amen.

Christian Sandvig explains why net neutrality is in trouble...

...if Comcast buys NBC Universal, do you think they'll offer Hulu to allcomers? Quite right about how far Francois Bar is ahead of the curve, too!

Commissioner lays down a consumerist manifesto for 2011-15

Mme Reding's new speech emphasizes her consumerist credentials:

'The new rules state explicitly that fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens must be respected by Member States taking measures regarding use of services or applications via the telecoms networks. These measures must be appropriate, proportionate and necessary and in particular, they must respect the presumption of innocence and the right to privacy. Let me list some of the concrete changes that will be introduced as a result of the reform.
  • A European consumer, while keeping the same number, will be able to change mobile operator within one day.
  • Under the new telecoms rules , consumers will receive better information to ensure that they understand the services they are subscribing to, what they can and cannot do and the corresponding contracts will have to be specific including reference to being listed in telephone directories.
  • The new rules will ensure that European consumers have an even greater choice of competing broadband service providers.
  • Net neutrality and net freedom as well new transparency requirements are part of the deal.
  • There will also be better protection against personal data breaches and spam...
With the unanimous agreement of the Parliament and of the Council, a strong signal was given to European citizens on internet freedom, consumer rights and consumer choice in the digital environment.'

and also speaks to the place of self-regulation and privacy for e-commerce:

'Privacy must, in my view, be a high priority for social networking providers and for their users. I firmly believe that at least the profiles of minors must be private by default and unavailable to internet search engines. The European Commission has already called on social networking sites to deal with minors' profiles carefully, by means of self-regulation. I am ready to follow this up with new rules if I have to. But only if there is no other way.... The Commission is closely monitoring the use of behavioural advertising to ensure respect for our privacy rights. I will not shy away from taking action where an EU country falls short of this duty. A first example is the infringement action the Commission has taken with regard to the United Kingdom in the Phorm case.'
But what place for trustmarks?
'The Digital Europe strategy could also give a new impetus to the development of a self-regulatory system for European websites to build consumer trust...The issue of trustmarks has been on the agenda for a very long time and I see very little progress towards a European system. That is why industry and consumer associations, I am thinking of the BEUC in particular, must get together to establish a sustainable European trustmark which, I believe, could give our users the confidence needed to "surf abroad" and profit from our large market online. The Commission stands ready to act, if needed.'
Legislation or a Communication to follow? Trustmarks have never taken off properly...

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

New US legal treatment on First Amendment and net neutrality

There's a new Stanford Press book - refreshingly brief at 151 pages plus voluminous notes - which I can't tell you much about as it focuses entirely on the US debate and the 1st Amendment, but if you're from there, it might be worth a read. Jon Palfrey reviews it here.