One of the most fundamental reasons why the Internet has succeeded is that it is a level playing field. I’m seeing from many sources this is being challenged. Ray Lin on campus describes net neutrality for a class project. Wikipedia has a good article on it. The EFF, ACLU have been active for a long time and others like save the Internet have been active created. An active group in SF posted about InternetYourNeed.com. My friend Christian posted to sf-lug.org providing this link.
Quite a bit started after the Verizon vs. FCC ruling prompting for petitions from moveone.org with almost 16,000 signatures among others.
Here is the current fcc.gov/guides/open-internet.
We meet on the second and fourth Sundays of each month from noon to three in Berkeley near the Downtown Berkeley BART station near the corner of University & Shattuck. We hope you join us at Bobby G’s Pizzeria and/or join the discussion on our email list.
This is getting more and more press. Here’s another link http://consumerist.com/2014/05/08/a-second-large-coalition-calls-on-white-house-fcc-to-not-screw-up-net-neutrality/
Here is Read Write Web’s Anthony Myers take. http://readwrite.com/2014/04/25/net-neutrality-fcc-fast-lane-proposal-wheeler-open-internet
Someone from Oakland’s sudoroom-discuss list recently contributed a fascinating and highly relevant link entitled ‘Here’s How The Corporations Defeat Political Movements’ http://www.popularresistance.org/heres-how-the-corporations-defeat-political-movements/
Here is the top summary from this article:
~~~ quoting ~~~
Divide activists into four groups: Radicals, Idealists, Realists and Opportunists. The Opportunists are in it for themselves and can be pulled away for their own self-interest. The Realists can be convinced that transformative change is not possible and we must settle for what is possible. Idealists can be convinced they have the facts wrong and pulled to the Realist camp. Radicals, who see the system as corrupt and needing transformation, need to be isolated and discredited, using false charges to assassinate their character is a common tactic.
I somehow suspect that the powerful proponents who are so actively campaigning to reverse the FCC’s earlier net neutrality position may be adopting net-favoritist tactics from these very “Corporate Strategy” methods of neutralizing activist groups; groups such as the EFF, ACLU, save the Internet, … etcetera.
The Fast Lane debate popped up on on Marketplace Tech Report podcast this morning. I was happy to get some more reporting on this important issue. When I tried to download it was missing. I see no mention of the story. The tag of Net Neutrality brings up a few items. They haven’t been very careful with their RSS feed in the past, but is this a coincidence? http://www.marketplace.org/tags/net-neutrality
This just came in this morning from the local SFGate.com: ‘FCC chair said to be backing down on plan to destroy net neutrality’, http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2014/05/12/fcc-chair-said-to-be-backing-down-on-plan-to-destroy-net-neutrality/?cmpid=hp-hc-bustech
From reading the full SFGate blog, it seems to me that FCC chair Tom Wheeler is just upping his “lip-service game”, while really continuing to destroy net neutrality behind-the-scenes. As the blog concludes:
~~~~ quoting ~~~~
Said wireless expert Brad Reed: “Basically, this is the exact same endgame as the one in Wheeler’s original plan, only this time he’s decided to add some more language to assure us that the plan really isn’t supposed to do what he’s designed it to do.”
Anybody have any good ideas what ELSE Wheeler and the Internet FastTrackers/FastLaners have up their sleeves?
Coiner of the term Net Neutrality, Columbia professor Tim Wu on Marketplace Tech Report. http://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace-tech-report/marketplace-tech-friday-april-25-2014