[net-gold] INTERNET NEUTRALITY : INTERNET ACCESS : BUSINESS: CORPORATIONS: NAMED CORPORTATIONS: GOOGLE, VERIZON, FACEBOOK: Facebook Criticizes Google Verizon Net Neutrality Pact
- From: "David P. Dillard" <jwne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Net-Gold <Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple University Net-Gold Archive <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple Gold Discussion Group <TEMPLE-GOLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sean Grigsby <myarchives1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K12AdminLIFE <K12AdminLIFE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Platinum <net-platinum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K-12ADMINLIFE <K12ADMIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, MediaMentor <mediamentor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Digital Divide Diversity MLS <mls-digitaldivide@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:40:58 -0400 (EDT)
.
INTERNET NEUTRALITY :
INTERNET ACCESS :
BUSINESS: CORPORATIONS: NAMED CORPORTATIONS: GOOGLE, VERIZON, FACEBOOK:
Facebook Criticizes Google Verizon Net Neutrality Pact
Facebook Criticizes Google Verizon Net Neutrality Pact
FCC Commissioner Copps urges the agency to reassert authority over
broadband telecommunications as the social network provider advocates
principles of net neutrality for both landline and wireless networks.
By W. David Gardner
Information Week
August 11, 2010 07:00 AM
<http://www.informationweek.com/news/infrastructure/management/
showArticle.jhtml?articleID=226700006&cid=RSSfeed_IWK_All>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/25ba7tq>
The debate over the National Broadband Plan is beginning to look like a
giant rugby scrum as reaction to the Google-Verizon pact on net neutrality
widens. Google competitor Facebook has jumped into the fray, criticizing
the deal.
Meanwhile, FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps has said the Google-Verizon
announcement underscores the need to move the decision-making process on
broadband forward.
"Some will claim this (Google-Verizon) announcement moves the discussion
forward," said Copps, a Democrat, in a statement. "That's one of its many
problems. It is time to move a decision forward -- a decision to reassert
FCC authority over broadband telecommunications, to guarantee an open
Internet now and forever, and to put the interests of consumers in front
of the interests of giant corporations."
Facebook weighed in on the debate, criticizing the Google-Verizon pact,
which would weaken the FCC's regulatory powers over landline Internet
access.
"Facebook continues to support principles of net neutrality for both
landline and wireless networks," said Andrew Noyes, a Facebook spokesman,
in a statement. "Preserving an open Internet that is accessible to
innovators -- regardless of their size or wealth -- will promote a vibrant
and competitive marketplace where consumers have ultimate control over the
content and services delivered through their Internet connections."
What Would a 'Private' Internet Look Like?
Google-Verizon Net Neutrality Proposal Could Create Tiered Internet,
Some Internet Law Scholars Say
By KI MAE HEUSSNER
ABC News
<http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/google-verizon-
net-neutrality-proposal-opens-door-private/story?id=11370035>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/2vnts72>
Imagine an Internet divvied up like the cabin of an airplane --
first-class content for those willing to pay a premium and basic services
for everyone else.
If a new Internet proposal from Google and Verizon becomes policy, some
Internet law experts say a tiered, private Internet could become reality.
On Monday, the two tech giants made waves with a joint proposal on how to
manage Internet traffic. As more and more information travels across the
Web, the companies said Internet service providers (ISPs) should not be
allowed to block some kinds of content or fast-track others.
"It is imperative that we find ways to protect the future openness of the
Internet and encourage the rapid deployment of broadband," Google wrote
Monday on its public policy blog. "Verizon and Google are pleased to
discuss the principled compromise our companies have developed over the
last year concerning the thorny issue of 'network neutrality.'"
But despite their stated goal of protecting the "open Web," the companies
also included a provision for "additional online services" and didn't
mention rules for wireless broadband -- key measures that some critics say
open the door for a pay-to-play, "private" Internet.
In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post Tuesday, Google CEO Eric Schmidt
and Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg said that though prioritizing Internet
traffic is harmful, ISPs should be allowed to provide additional services
to help them invest in broadband infrastructure.
Google, Verizon are right to push out the wireless net neutrality talk
By Larry Dignan |
August 11, 2010, 5:18am PDT
Between the Lines
Larry Dignan, Sam Diaz, Andrew Nusca
ZDNet
<http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/google-verizon-are-
right-to-push-out-the-wireless-net-neutrality-talk/37872>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/36k285e>
As with all things having to do with net neutrality the debate went from
zero to way overblown and emotional as soon as Google and Verizon posted a
proposal on where they stand. The source of the entire hubbubthe idea that
wireless access should have different rules for nowseems to reflect the
reality that mobile networks arent even built out yet.
But reality isnt going to stop anyone from screaminga lot.
The Google-Verizon compromise raised quite a ruckus. The big issue for
some folkstheres actually compromise. You can twirl around in a circle and
hit someone saying Google sold out. And of course, the telecom carriers
are always portrayed as evil. However, the Google-Verizon proposal has a
bevy of items that make sense on the wireline front. The Electronic
Frontier Foundation has a nice analysis of the nuances here and at least
tries to cut through the clutter.
Overall, the Google-Verizon missive isnt all that jarringuntil you get to
the wireless part of the net neutrality issue. Then the technology peanut
gallery goes nuclear. Is Google really carrier-humping net neutrality
surrender monkey?
Heres the passage in the Google-Verizon proposal that has many folks
freaked out:
<snip>
Magid on tech: Speaking up on net neutrality
By Larry Magid
Daily News Columnist
Posted: 08/10/2010 06:33:02 PM PDT
Updated: 08/10/2010 10:54:00 PM PDT
San Jose Mercury
<http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_15735660>
The Net is full of criticisms of Google and Verizon's announcement on
Monday when they released a joint policy proposal "for an open Internet."
As many bloggers pointed out, that proposal actually calls for a less than
fully open Internet. The issue, which is generally referred to as "network
neutrality," is whether broadband and wireless carriers such as Verizon,
Comcast and AT&T should have the ability to prioritize certain traffic on
their networks over other traffic.
<snip>
It's no surprise that Verizon would want to put limits on net neutrality,
but what disappointed many people about Monday's "Verizon-Google
Legislative Framework Proposal" was that Google, a staunch advocate of
network neutrality, appeared to have sold out.
To its credit the statement did say that providers "would be prohibited
from engaging in undue discrimination against any lawful Internet content,
application, or service in a manner that causes meaningful harm to
competition or to users" and it called for the requirement for broadband
Internet access providers to "disclose accurate and relevant information
in plain language about the characteristics and capabilities of their
offerings, their broadband network management, and other practices
necessary for consumers and other users to make informed choices."
But the statement carved out exceptions, big enough to put a 1980s-era
cell phone through. These include a vague statement that could exempt
"additional online services" and a provision that would totally exempt
wireless broadband, which, by most accounts, is growing far faster than
fixed broadband and is likely to be the dominant way most people access
content in the future.
Google, Verizon Take Net Neutrality Fight to Op-Ed Pages
08.10.2010
PC Magazine
<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367626,00.asp>
Google and Verizon took to the op-ed page of The Washington Post Tuesday
to defend their joint net neutrality proposal.
<snip>
After much speculation, Verizon and Google on Monday unveiled a proposal
for how they believe the issue of net neutrality should be handled. It
backed an open Internet for the Web, but would exempt the wireless
industry from any regulation at this time. It also provided an exemption
for emerging technologies.
The plan is not something that Verizon and Google will put into effect. It
is a plan the duo hope a member of Congress or the FCC might adopt in the
form of a bill or rulemaking process.
"Consumers should be able to choose any lawful content, services or
applications they want," the CEO's wrote. "Our proposed policy presumes
that prioritization of Internet traffic -- such as slowing down delivery
of one video file so another's arrives more quickly -- is harmful."
The wireless industry, however, has "unique technical and operational
challenges, demanding different consideration than wireline networks."
Providers should be exempt from net neutrality regulation at this point,
but they should be transparent about their activities and be subject to
regular review by Congress, Schmidt and Seidenberg wrote.
Google-Verizon Net Neutrality Pact: 5 Red Flags
Ian Paul
PC World
Aug 10, 2010 12:00 pm
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/202970/
googleverizon_net_neutrality_pact_5_red_flags.html>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/2c2qgkc>
Regardless of the legal standing, this proposal is backed by two major
technology corporations involved in the network neutrality debate. That
means the proposal could influence discussions about the future of
broadband Internet access in the U.S.
So far, reaction to the proposal has been highly critical. Citizen
interest group Public Knowledge said the proposal "shouldn't form the
basis of legislation in Congress or of rules by the FCC." The headline
"Google Goes 'Evil'" lead the Huffington Post's coverage of the proposal.
FCC Commission Michael J. Copps believes the Google-Verizon proposal is a
call for the FCC to assert "authority over broadband telecommunications.
(PDF)" to protect the interests of users. While Paul Misener, Amazon's
vice president for global public policy, told The New York Times the
Google-Verizon proposal "appears to condone services that could harm
consumer Internet access."
There are many concerns and questions surrounding the Google-Verizon
proposal. Here are five things that are top of my mind.
How Would this So-called Private Internet Work?
Why is wireless out?
What Does "Lawful Internet Content" Mean?
What Happens to the Regular Internet?
What Will Be The Costs?
Google net neutrality stance gives Nets future to corporations
By protecting short-term interests, Google is acting like just another
company
By Siva Vaidhyanathan
msnbc.com contributor
updated 8/10/2010 4:09:08 PM ET
MSNBC
<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38645475/ns/
technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/26nqxu3>
It could have been worse. Last week The New York Times ran a story that
declared Google was working on some sort of secret agreement with Verizon
to allow Google services (like YouTube) to flow faster over Verizons
networks than other content would.
If true, it not only would have meant that Google was reversing its
long-held commitment to "network neutrality," it also would have meant
that each of the major Internet service providers would have immediately
cut separate deals with a variety of media companies, essentially
auctioning off the "fast lanes" to their services.
So we held our breath for five days, hoping it was not true. Well, it
wasnt. Google is innocent of the charge of dealing away its principles for
an unfair advantage.
But Google is guilty of once again acting like just another company with
short-term interests to protect.
Net neutrality lost in Google-Verizon deal
San Francisco Chronicle August 11, 2010 04:00 AM Copyright San Francisco
Chronicle.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=
/c/a/2010/08/10/EDRB1ERRQ1.DTL#ixzz0wIuQ09jq>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/268w7zh>
What's next: Unless Washington is ready to accept an Internet that only
works for the wealthiest and most-established websites, Congress needs to
step in with net neutrality legislation. And the Google-Verizon pact isn't
even close. They need to go back to the drawing board and get support from
consumer groups and Internet users instead of just broadband carriers and
web giants. The FCC also needs to step in immediately, by reclassifying
broadband under a section of the telecommunications code that's subject to
more scrutiny - and therefore less ability to discriminate.
What you can do: Let FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski know you want
the FCC to take action on net neutrality. His e-mail is
Julius.Genachowski@xxxxxxx
Net Neutrality: Reading Between the Google-Verizon Lines
By Tony Bradley
PC World
August 10, 2010 7:59 AM
<http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/202971/
net_neutrality_reading_between_the_googleverizon_lines.html?tk=hp_blg>
A shorter URL for the above link:
<http://tinyurl.com/39lp92l>
Google and Verizon unveiled a joint proposal advocating net
neutrality--sort of. When net neutrality opponents band together to
embrace the concept, it's prudent to pull back the curtain and look more
closely at the details and motives behind the plan.
The New York Times may have been off the mark in prematurely reporting
that Google and Verizon were double-crossing the ongoing FCC net
neutrality negotiations with secret back-room deals. However, the reports
may actually have been more truth than fiction because ultimately the two
parties emerged from those secret meetings with a self-serving plan that
sabotages those efforts.
Let's use an analogy. Assume that the FCC called a meeting to declare
pizza the best food ever. Then Google and Verizon meet on the side and
call a press conference to declare that pizza is, in fact, the best food
ever. Awesome! We all agree. Right? Well, when you look at the details,
Google and Verizon are declaring pizza the best food ever as long as it
doesn't have pepperoni and it is only eaten indoors while sitting on
folding chairs. All other scenarios are still open to interpretation.
If Google and Verizon are in favor of net neutrality, why not simply get
on board with the FCC plan? The more important questions are: "Why is the
FCC asking the industry it is tasked with regulating what the regulations
should look like?" or "Why should we let the fox propose a plan for
protecting the hen house?".
Involving Verizon, Comcast, and other broadband Internet providers--wired
or wireless--is like inviting Al Qaeda, North Korea, and Iran to work out
a plan for defending the nation, or inviting BP, Exxon-Mobil, and Shell to
work out details to protect our environment from the perils of offshore
drilling.
Web Plan From Google and Verizon Is Criticized
By CLAIRE CAIN MILLER and MIGUEL HELFT
Published: August 9, 2010
New York Times
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/technology/10net.html>
According to the proposal, Internet service providers would not be able to
block producers of online content or offer them a paid fast lane. It says
the Federal Communications Commission should have the authority to stop or
fine any rule-breakers.
The proposal, however, carves out exceptions for Internet access over
cellphone networks, and for potential new services that broadband
providers could offer. In a joint blog post, the companies said these
could include things like health care monitoring, advanced educational
services, or new entertainment and gaming options.
The two companies are hoping to influence regulators and lawmakers in the
debate over a principle known as net neutrality, which holds that Internet
users should have equal access to all types of information online.
This principle is crucial for consumers and for fostering innovation among
Internet entrepreneurs, Eric E. Schmidt, Googles chief executive, said in
a call with reporters. The next two people in a garage really do need an
open Internet, he said.
But some proponents of net neutrality say that by excluding wireless and
other online services, Google and Verizon are creating a loophole that
could allow carriers to circumvent regulation meant to ensure openness.
The plan creates an Internet for the haves and an Internet for the
have-nots, said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, senior vice president and policy
director at the Media Access Project, an advocacy group in Washington and
a member, along with Google, of the Open Internet Coalition. It may make
some services unaffordable for consumers and access to those services
unavailable to new start-ups.
----------------------------------------
The complete articles may be read at the URLs provided for each.
WEBBIB1011
Sincerely,
David Dillard
Temple University
(215) 204 - 4584
jwne@xxxxxxxxxx
<http://daviddillard.businesscard2.com>
Net-Gold
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/net-gold>
Index: http://tinyurl.com/myxb4w
<http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/net-gold.html>
<http://groups.google.com/group/net-gold?hl=en>
General Internet & Print Resources
<http://guides.temple.edu/general-internet>
COUNTRIES
<http://guides.temple.edu/general-country-info>
EMPLOYMENT
<http://guides.temple.edu/EMPLOYMENT>
TOURISM
<http://guides.temple.edu/tourism>
DISABILITIES
http://guides.temple.edu/DISABILITIES
INDOOR GARDENING
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/IndoorGardeningUrban/>
Educator-Gold
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Educator-Gold/>
K12ADMINLIFE
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/K12AdminLIFE/>
THE COLLEGE LEARNING CENTER
<http://tinyurl.com/yae7w79>
Nina Dillard's Photographs on Net-Gold
<http://tinyurl.com/36qd2o>
and also http://gallery.me.com/neemers1
Net-Gold Membership Required to View Photos
Twitter: davidpdillard
Bushell, R. & Sheldon, P. (eds),
Wellness and Tourism: Mind, Body, Spirit,
Place, New York: Cognizant Communication Books.
Wellness Tourism: Bibliographic and Webliographic Essay
David P. Dillard
<http://tinyurl.com/p63whl>
<http://tinyurl.com/ou53aw>
INDOOR GARDENING
Improve Your Chances for Indoor Gardening Success
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/IndoorGardeningUrban/
http://groups.google.com/group/indoor-gardening-and-urban-gardening
SPORT-MED
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/sport-med.html
http://groups.google.com/group/sport-med
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sports-med/
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/sport-med.html
HEALTH DIET FITNESS RECREATION SPORTS TOURISM
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/healthrecsport/
http://groups.google.com/group/healthrecsport
http://healthrecsport.jiglu.com/
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/health-recreation-sports-tourism.html
Please Ignore All Links to JIGLU
in search results for Net-Gold and related lists.
The Net-Gold relationship with JIGLU has
been terminated by JIGLU and these are dead links.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Net-Gold/message/30664
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/healthrecsport/message/145
.
Other related posts:
- » [net-gold] INTERNET NEUTRALITY : INTERNET ACCESS : BUSINESS: CORPORATIONS: NAMED CORPORTATIONS: GOOGLE, VERIZON, FACEBOOK: Facebook Criticizes Google Verizon Net Neutrality Pact - David P. Dillard
