| This 36 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 36 ( 1  ) || |
|E.U. Debates Net Neutrality|
| 1:59 pm on Mar 9, 2009 (gmt 0)|
E.U. Debates Net Neutrality [nytimes.com]
|As European lawmakers debate how to keep access to the Internet free and equal — so-called network neutrality — they are inundated, not unsurprisingly, by lobbyists. |
But the corporate envoys roaming the halls of Brussels trying to make their case, more often than not, do not represent the Continent’s myriad telecommunications and Internet companies, but rather those from the United States. Europe has become the world’s technology regulator. So the AT&Ts and Verizons are pitted against the Googles and Yahoos to shape European law in the hopes that American regulators will follow suit.
“The U.S. companies see the outcome of the fight in Europe as key,” said Jeremie Zimmermann, a lobbyist for La Quadrature du Net, an Internet advocacy group based in Paris. “Each side is hoping to score points on the issue here so they can take it back to the States to influence the outcome there.”
| 5:34 pm on Mar 11, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|That's the point. Maybe sounds like a joke, but there are mega-bucks involved in this. |
Well the mafia does 100 billion a year in the U.S., more than Microsoft or any other major corporation. And the correct term is extortion.
| 8:25 pm on Mar 12, 2009 (gmt 0)|
On the original subject, net neutrality is being fought by corporate interest who want their "own" in house version of the Internet. Like cable companies, AOL,so forth.
It is most important to keep the web open and neutral or we have reverted back to the old days of media monopolies. Until this growing pain is passed we must remain vigilant for net neutrality since most of us here have interests that depend on it.
Europe does set some of the international standards but so do others. There is not a cut and dry way of producing international standards. It is an organic process and is debated openly amongst professional standards organizations. It generally winds up being a good international standard all can agree on.
If it is a high stakes game that does not involve technical standards, like net neutrality, and it is in the early stages of developing then the lobbyists and politicians move in. Ages old process.
"Give me Internet neutrality or give me death." or something like that.
| 12:29 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Well, nobody seems worried about having their french customers forbidden web access, or about their websites not appearing on the officially approved list given access to by french public hotspots and from french public agencies (like libraries & universities). May you never have reason to regret it. Anyhow...
| 4:58 am on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Here in Australia we're calling it "the Great Rabbit Proof Firewall [pgts.com.au]", or as the pollies would prefer to call it, "clean feed". [defendingscoundrels.com]
All sorts of goodies being proposed in order to protect us mere mortals from the perils of the evil cyberweb.
| 9:36 pm on Mar 15, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|"Give me Internet neutrality or give me death." |
isn't it a bit like saying "give me government regulation or give me death"?
| 6:45 pm on Mar 18, 2009 (gmt 0)|
they should throw muni-broadband in there too; fight for the right to keep your pockets tight.
| This 36 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 36 ( 1  ) |