David Kubicek

The Official Website

Archive for the tag “Net Neutrality”

Net Neutrality is Alive and Well . . . At Least for Now

In a close vote last week the Federal Communications Commission decided that the internet should be treated like a public utility. In other words, there will be no fast and slow lanes–internet service providers will not be allowed to decide which content should be given priority over other content. The danger of a non-net neutrality world would be that big companies with lots of bucks could buy faster delivery speeds for their content while smaller cash-poor websites could be relegated to the slow lane. So, for now, we can breath a sigh of relief.

But the battle hasn’t yet been won. Comcast predicts that some large providers will sue to override the FCC decision.

For more information on the latest goings on with net neutrality, check out these articles:

FCC Turns Internet Into a Public Utility

Comcast Now Says It Will Not Sue The FCC

Internet is Flat-Lining

This week a Federal court overturned the Federal Communication Commission’s Open Internet Order.

This means that now Internet Service Providers like Verizon, Comcast and AT&T can decide which websites you will be allowed to visit. They can slow down or block access to certain sites (read: smaller, poorer companies and bloggers), and they can speed up access to sites (read: large, well-funded companies) who can afford to pay hefty access fees.

Net neutrality isn’t dead yet, but it is very sick; the FCC can still reassert its authority over broadband.

To read more about this latest blow to a free internet, check out these articles by Craig Aaron

Net Neutrality is Dead–Here’s How to Get it Back

Does This Ruling Mean the End of the Internet? Maybe.

Net Neutrality: Congressional Panel Votes to Repeal New FCC Rules

A Republican-controlled House panel has voted to repeal the new FCC rules that would prevent cable and phone companies from dominating the Internet by setting priorities for web traffic. This would result in slower load times for competing services and for smaller websites that can’t afford to pay to have their priorities upgraded. It would be a major blow for free speech on the Internet, with a few major communications companies dictating what websites the rest of us are allowed to access. We could, technically, still access any websites we wanted, but we would become frustrated with the long wait times and click on to something more “user-friendly.”

The reason for repealing this rule, according to the Republicans, is that it would prevent the big cable companies from making costly upgrades to their networks. That is not true. We have had net neutrality since the Internet was opened to commercial traffic in the mid-1990s; it hasn’t prevented the big communications companies from upgrading during that time, and it’s unlikely that making net neutrality the law now will prevent them from making future upgrades. If they want to be competitive, they’ll upgrade. That’s the way it’s always been in business, even before the Internet, and that’s the way it will always be.

For a more detailed look at the panel’s decision see the Huffington Post article.

Net Neutrality Update

Yesterday, as was widely expected, the FCC passed the new regulations governing the Internet–the same regs that Sen. Al Franken called “worst than nothing.” Newsweek technology editor Dan Lyons in his article The Internet Splits in Two suggests that we’re entering into Phase Two of  Internet technology, which he compares to the growing pains of television – for example, cable vs. rabbit ears. The new regs probably will be challenged in court, and they may be tweaked – or they may not be, which wouldn’t be good for writers, researchers, or for folks with Websites and blogs who can not afford to buy priority placement in the pecking order. As Lyons suggests in his article, which I encourage you to read in full, expect these costs to be passed on to consumers, who will end up paying more for a crappier product. Sen. Al Franken in his Huffington Post article today, The Internet as we Know it is Still at Risk does offer a ray of  hope for the future of Net Neutrality.

To keep up on the Net Neutrality issue: savetheinternet.com.

Net Neutrality: The Most Important Free Speech Issue of Our Time

I’ve written an overview of the Net Neutrality issue in an earlier post, Net Neutrality: Keeping the Internet Free. Tomorrow the FCC will meet to discuss Internet regulations. Senator Al Franken doesn’t believe the draft regulations go far enough. In fact, he calls them “worse than nothing.” Rather than try to summarize what Sen. Franken says, I urge you to read his Huffington Post article, The Most Important Free Speech Issue of Our Time.

Net Neutrality: Keeping the Internet Free

I try to avoid politics on this blog, but occasionally I make an exception when it’s a topic of vital importance to writers. The Google-Verizon deal is one of those topics.

In a nutshell, Verizon is agreeing to give Google priority on its systems over all other Internet traffic. According to the New York Times, the agreement  “could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.”

If other corporate giants hammer out similar deals–and the Verizon-Google contract is all the precedent they need–it would be the death knell of Net (network) Neutrality. Net Neutrality means that all Websites are treated equally. No Website–from Google with all of its ramifications down to Uncle Joe’s blog on wheat grass–is deemed more important than any other; the users determine the importance of any particular Website.

According to savetheinternet.com: “The consequences of a world without Net Neutrality would be devastating. Innovation would be stifled, competition limited, and access to information restricted. Consumer choice and the free market would be sacrificed to the interests of a few corporations.”

Josh Silver, President of Free Press, writes in Huffington Post that “the [Verizon-Google] deal marks the beginning of the end of the Internet as you know it.” Later in the same article Silver says:

“A non-neutral Internet means that companies like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and Google can turn the Net into cable TV and pick winners and losers online … Ending Net Neutrality would end the revolutionary potential that any website can act as a television or radio network. It would spell the end of our opportunity to wrest access and distribution of media content away from the handful of massive media corporations that currently control the television and radio dial.”

In a New York Times article Edward Wyatt writes:

“Cable and telephone companies want free rein to sell specialized services like ‘paid prioritization,’ which would speed some content to users more quickly for a fee. Wireless companies, meanwhile, want no restrictions on wireless broadband, which they see as a different technology than Internet service over wires.”

If you think this is all abstract and may not affect you,  let’s bring it a little closer to home. Are you a Twitter or Facebook user? If Net Neutrality goes, those applications most-likely would go as well; Google has similar products which would be given priority. Do you blog on WordPress? Google has Blogger, which would elbow out WordPress.

Why is Net Neutrality in danger? According to Silver: “We have a pro-industry FCC Chairman who is terrified of making a decision …  a president who promised to ‘take a back seat to no one on Net Neutrality’ yet remains silent …  a congress that is nearly completely captured by industry.”

Net Neutrality has been called “the first amendment issue of this generation.” It must be protected.

Every writer, reader, and Internet user has a stake in Net Neutrality. For more information and to find out what you can do to make a difference, read the complete New York Times and Josh Silver articles and visit savetheinternet.com.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: