Common Cause's perspective on Net Neutrality

Common Cause is a group that strongly desires Network Neutrality. In an article I found, the group stated that Net Neutrality was already being lost to big companies such as Verizon, NARAL, Comcast, and the worst-to-come, AT&T. They also say that while certain politicians are trying to work towards a completely open and free Internet, the subtle transition away from Net Neutrality may, in fact, change their opinion on the topic seeing as it benefits them more than it does the average US citizen. Needless to say, that these politicians will then try less to stop the telephone and cable companies whom provide internet to the people, and could change the outcome of Net Neutrality's legislation for the worse (in terms of the American people). If you wish to aid this powerful group in their strive for a free and open internet, which they hope and need so they can beat the FCC and get Net Neutrality, please visit: http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQ1wG&b=1421497

Virgin Media is putting Net Neutrality to the test

In the UK, Virgin Media is currently in the process of designing a super-fast broadband service that will allow the delivery of informative Internet to its consumers at an unbelievable rate. This will be done sometime in the late 2009 year and possibly perfected in 2010. This new service is designed to not only deliver fast, but to block torrent sites and other P2P (peer-to-peer) services. Should this service go according to plan, this blogger says, "Will cause the ultimate challenge of how to keep the Internet 'neutral' to be lost...FOREVER! (DUN DUN DUUUUN)" However, there is one small, but at the same time, large aspect that works against Virgin Media's "No-longer Neutral Net" system, and that is the cost of which it will take in order for consumers to use the service. The article reads that it will cost consumers 51 pounds! (about 72 dollars!) per month to use this service, which means that Virgin Media will either have to lower its prices and give a less promising product, or stay as it is and hope and pray that the majority of the world's population becomes exceedingly rich by 2009/2010. Either way, this allows for more debates on whether or not to make the Internet neutral to all or not.

Information found at: http://www.techwatch.co.uk/2008/12/17/net-neutrality-to-be-tested-by-virgin-media/

Summary of the Open Internet Coalition's Letter to Co-Chairs of Obama's Transition Project

This letter was written by the Open Internet Coalition to the Obama-Biden Transition Project in order to express the Coalition's pursuit of keeping the internet fast, open and accessible to all Americans. Highlighted in this blog are the four main points the Coalition touched on in their letter.

1. Appoint a new Chairman and a new Commisioner for the Federal Communications Commission that support strong enforcement and promotion of open Internet principle (Net Neutrality). Obama will be able to reform the FCC to enforce Net Neutrality by means of new plans and laws that will restrict providers from excessive pricing of consumers in order to block some sites and enable others

2. Appoint leaders at the Federal Trade Commission and the department of Justice who understand the importance of promoting an open Internet through vigorous use of pro-competition and consumer protection laws.

3. Require the chief Technology officer and the United States Trade Representative to promote open internet policies at home and abroad.

4. Support legislation in Congress that protects the Open Internet by prohibiting unreasonable discrimination by network operators


Any information regarding the Open Internet Coalition's motives, please write to:

400 N. Capitol Street, NW, Suite 585
Washington, D.C. 20001
Openinternetcoalition.com

History of Net Neutrality

The term "Net Neutrality" is relatively new, but the idea was developed around the age of the telegram back in 1860, and earlier! Telegrams were developed so that they were routed "equally" without discriminating the information being transfered from point a to point b. This network is called the "end-to-end neutral" network.

Telegrams and phone services are carriers under U.S. laws, which means that they are considered useable to public utililties and overseen by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) in order to ensure fair access and pricing for use of said devices. Technically, though, the Internet is considered to be under U.S. law as an informational service, not a service of the telecommunications department, thus not subject to the "common carrier" regulations. Because of the Internet's high speed data links, the Internet is not regulated by the common carrier regulations, but because it uses the phone lines, it is qualified and subject to the common carrier regulations.

However, on August 5, 2005, the FCC reclassified DSL services as Informatoinal Services, not Telecommunications Services, thus replacing the well-known common carrier regulations on it. This is wha sparked the initial and lasting debates over whether or not the ISP's should be able to offer different systems for the retrieving of the various Internet services/go against Net Neutrality in order to have the Internet consumer pay to use a service and download and retrieve Internet faster.

Information found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_US

summary by karateman