Difference between revisions of "Net Neutrality"

From Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Links: John Latimer article.)
(Jay's notes)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
At the isoc-ny AGM on Feb 15 2007, Seth Johnson reported on the [http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2006/12/broadbandworkshop2.htm FTC "Broadband Connectivity Competition Policy" Workshop] earlier in the week. He mentioned that there were two weeks left for public comment. It was decided that isoc-ny should issue a comment. Danny Younger and Joly MacFie were tasked with drafting such.
 
At the isoc-ny AGM on Feb 15 2007, Seth Johnson reported on the [http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2006/12/broadbandworkshop2.htm FTC "Broadband Connectivity Competition Policy" Workshop] earlier in the week. He mentioned that there were two weeks left for public comment. It was decided that isoc-ny should issue a comment. Danny Younger and Joly MacFie were tasked with drafting such.
 +
 +
 +
== The Issues ==
 +
 +
(Quoting FTC)
 +
 +
<blockquote>Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory
 +
determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet
 +
services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the
 +
Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations.
 +
In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns
 +
about broadband Internet service providers discriminating
 +
against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated
 +
content and applications. In addition, concerns have been
 +
raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging
 +
providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for
 +
prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To
 +
prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other
 +
related types of conduct, some have advocated network
 +
neutrality regulation that would require equal treatment of
 +
all Internet traffic.</blockquote>
 +
 +
<blockquote>In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that
 +
such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation
 +
and competition in the market for broadband access by, among
 +
other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other
 +
network operators to recoup their investments in broadband
 +
networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is
 +
unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence
 +
of harm to competition or consumers to warrant such
 +
regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for
 +
broadband access will protect consumers from the harm
 +
anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust
 +
and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are
 +
sufficient to address any harms that may arise.</blockquote>
 +
 +
== MoveOn.org meeting ==
 +
Joesph S. has fwded an [http://lists.isoc-ny.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-February/000244.html invite] from move-on.org to a meeting with Rep. Yvette Clarke next week to discuss Net Neutrality - Wed Feb 21 in Brooklyn. [http://civ.moveon.org/save_the_internet/in_district.html details]
 +
 +
== Seth's points ==
  
 
Seth points out the following key points that the Internet Society of New York (and the Internet Society in general) can make as critical stewards of the Internet standards-making process:
 
Seth points out the following key points that the Internet Society of New York (and the Internet Society in general) can make as critical stewards of the Internet standards-making process:
Line 12: Line 52:
 
(I'll add more points as I think of them.  As I think ISOC likely can see very well, it is eminently possible to issue a highly important statement that can focus on technical issues like the above, without necessarily moving to a place that is more polemical.  The above points are chiefly about the responsibility that the Internet Society holds for assuring the integrity of standards.  -- Seth)
 
(I'll add more points as I think of them.  As I think ISOC likely can see very well, it is eminently possible to issue a highly important statement that can focus on technical issues like the above, without necessarily moving to a place that is more polemical.  The above points are chiefly about the responsibility that the Internet Society holds for assuring the integrity of standards.  -- Seth)
  
−
== The Issues ==
 
  
−
(Quoting FTC)
+
== Jay Sulzberger's notes [http://lists.isoc-ny.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-February/000254.html]==
  
−
Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory
+
David S. Isenberg was at the FTC workshop on Net Neutrality held
−
determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet
+
on 13 and 14 February 2007 in Washington DC.
−
services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the
+
 
−
Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations.
+
Below is a piece on Net Neutrality, and two notes on the workshop:
−
In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns
+
 
−
about broadband Internet service providers discriminating
+
* http://isen.com/blog/2006/01/internet-freedom-or-privilege.html
−
against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated
+
* http://isen.com/blog/2007/02/quote-of-note-deborah-platt-majoras.html
−
content and applications. In addition, concerns have been
+
* http://isen.com/blog/2007/02/unrepresented-at-ftc-broadband-workshop.html
−
raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging
+
 
−
providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for
+
And at
−
prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To
+
* http://www.panix.com/~jays/FTC.13.14.February.2007
−
prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other
+
are transcripts of the workshop.
−
related types of conduct, some have advocated network
+
 
−
neutrality regulation that would require equal treatment of
+
The official page of videos and transcripts is
−
all Internet traffic.
+
* http://htc-01.media.globix.net/COMP008760MOD1/ftc_web/FTCindex.html
  
−
In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that
 
−
such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation
 
−
and competition in the market for broadband access by, among
 
−
other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other
 
−
network operators to recoup their investments in broadband
 
−
networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is
 
−
unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence
 
−
of harm to competition or consumers to warrant such
 
−
regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for
 
−
broadband access will protect consumers from the harm
 
−
anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust
 
−
and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are
 
−
sufficient to address any harms that may arise.
 
  
−
== MoveOn.org meeting==
 
−
Joesph S. has fwded an [http://lists.isoc-ny.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-February/000244.html invite] from move-on.org to a meeting with Rep. Yvette Clarke next week to discuss Net Neutrality - Wed Feb 21 in Brooklyn. [http://civ.moveon.org/save_the_internet/in_district.html details]
 
  
 
== Links ==
 
== Links ==

Revision as of 12:36, 19 February 2007

Introduction

At the isoc-ny AGM on Feb 15 2007, Seth Johnson reported on the FTC "Broadband Connectivity Competition Policy" Workshop earlier in the week. He mentioned that there were two weeks left for public comment. It was decided that isoc-ny should issue a comment. Danny Younger and Joly MacFie were tasked with drafting such.


The Issues

(Quoting FTC)

Issues are raised by recent legal and regulatory

determinations that providers of certain broadband Internet services, such as cable modem and DSL, are not subject to the Federal Communications Commission’s common-carrier regulations. In the absence of such regulations, some have raised concerns about broadband Internet service providers discriminating against, degrading, or blocking users’ access to unaffiliated content and applications. In addition, concerns have been raised regarding ISPs and other network operators charging providers of unaffiliated content and applications fees for prioritized delivery of their products to end users. To prevent harm to competition and consumers from these and other related types of conduct, some have advocated network neutrality regulation that would require equal treatment of

all Internet traffic.
In response, opponents of network neutrality have argued that

such regulation would have adverse consequences for innovation and competition in the market for broadband access by, among other things, making it more difficult for ISPs and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks. Opponents also have argued that such regulation is unnecessary because: 1) to date there is insufficient evidence of harm to competition or consumers to warrant such regulation; 2) competitive conditions in the market for broadband access will protect consumers from the harm anticipated by net neutrality proponents; and 3) the antitrust and consumer protection laws, as well as FCC oversight, are

sufficient to address any harms that may arise.

MoveOn.org meeting

Joesph S. has fwded an invite from move-on.org to a meeting with Rep. Yvette Clarke next week to discuss Net Neutrality - Wed Feb 21 in Brooklyn. details

Seth's points

Seth points out the following key points that the Internet Society of New York (and the Internet Society in general) can make as critical stewards of the Internet standards-making process:

  • That the bodies that oversee the processes of Internet standards-making have not been given appropriate participation in the discussion
  • That the very process of Internet standards-making is at risk in the "network neutrality" debate, because the flexiiblity of the Internet transport and the diversity of applications that are made possible by it may very easily be affected by practices that would affect the transport
  • That the advantages of the existing protocols -- in particular the application flexibility of the Internet Protocol -- have not been acknowledged adequately in the debate
  • That in order to address policy questions related to "network neutrality" a distinction needs to be drawn between the nature and advantages of existing protocols and practices, and various practices that are being proposed

(I'll add more points as I think of them. As I think ISOC likely can see very well, it is eminently possible to issue a highly important statement that can focus on technical issues like the above, without necessarily moving to a place that is more polemical. The above points are chiefly about the responsibility that the Internet Society holds for assuring the integrity of standards. -- Seth)


Jay Sulzberger's notes [1]

David S. Isenberg was at the FTC workshop on Net Neutrality held on 13 and 14 February 2007 in Washington DC.

Below is a piece on Net Neutrality, and two notes on the workshop:

And at

are transcripts of the workshop.

The official page of videos and transcripts is


Links

Retrieved from "https://isoc-ny.org/wiki/index.php?title=Net_Neutrality&oldid=52"