Your Internet: Open or Closed?

During a Friday briefing in the chambers of the House Commerce Committee Tim Wu, Ben Scott, Marvin Ammori, Jef Pearlman and Markham Erickson laid out the central struggle in our campaign to save a free-flowing Internet.

Neutrality v. Monopoly

At stake is whether the Internet will be open, neutral and accessible to all or a closed network — controlled by a handful of gatekeepers with monopoly tendencies.

The speakers laid out this conflict in clear, concise and often chilling terms. Their comments are drawn into relief against a backdrop of abuses by network giants Comcast, AT&T and Verizon.

READ MORE HERE

Comcast’s Closed Internet

The FCC investigation of Comcast’s violations of Net Neutrality is in full swing. Thousands of activists have weighed in, and on Wednesday Free Press and its allies in the SavetheInternet.com Coalition filed extensive research and a lengthy legal analysis of what Comcast is doing (if you have been following the issue closely, you should enjoy all 100 pages).

Comcast is now playing defense.

Employing 10 lawyers and countless minions, Comcast claimed in its filing with the FCC that the crippling of innovative online video competitors such as BitTorrent, Vuze and Miro is no big deal. They claim to be only targeting the miniscule .01 percent of users who actually use the bandwidth they pay for every month. But this is completely false — even their army of high priced lawyers couldn’t mask their true aims.

What Comcast Is Really Doing

Let’s review what we know about Comcast’s actions:

1. It is crippling the content-delivery systems that have emerged as real threat to its $17 billion video business — and it’s own plans to dominate online video.

2. The company is limiting access for everyone — not just the mythical “bandwidth hogs.” Comcast isn’t just blocking the .01 percent from using these programs. They’re are also cutting off the other 99.99% — regardless of the size of the files being transferred. (The AP couldn’t even download a copy of the Bible.)

3. Comcast promised the public and the FCC over and over again that it has no reason to limit people’s connection and would never do so. Let’s review the history:

• Comcast, December 2000: We will value an open Internet.
• Comcast, May 2003: We don’t prevent our customers from doing anything.
• Comcast, August 2007: We do not mess with your connection.
• Comcast, October 2007: We (only slightly) mess with your connection, but it is “reasonable network management.”
• Comcast, February 2008: We mess with your connection and you can’t do anything about it.

 

That’s right. Now the Comcast lawyer army claims that the company can do whatever it wants with its network — and the FCC can’t do anything about it.

READ MORE HERE

Internet Bill a Blow to the Gatekeepers

Reps. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Chip Pickering (R-Miss.) today launched the latest salvo in the struggle to keep the Internet free from gatekeepers with the introduction of the “Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008” (HR 5353).

The bipartisan bill protects Net Neutrality under the Communications Act and calls for a nationwide conversation to set policy about the future of the Internet.

The legislation gives hope to the millions of Americans who have called for action to ensure that the public — not phone and cable companies — control the fate of the Internet.

Taking it Public

The new bill calls on the FCC to convene at least eight “broadband summits” to collect public input on a variety of policies “that will promote openness, competition, innovation, and affordable, ubiquitous broadband service for all individuals in the United States.”

READ MORE HERE

Comcast’s New Terms of Service: A Recipe for Discrimination

Comcast’s new “terms of service,” which were quietly issued last week, remove any doubt about who the cable and broadband giant is looking out for — and it’s not the customer.

On Jan. 25, the company released its “revised and effective” terms for Internet users with lots of restrictions and new limitations — but little fanfare. No press release. No announcement to customers.

Just a Web-accessible document that, fortunately for me, was forwarded by networking guru Robb Topolski. Upon reading the document Comcast’s relative silence becomes clear. Why publicize a limited and throttled service when you are pitching “unlimited” Internet access to your customers?

READ MORE HERE

A Bid for Cleaner, More Open Airwaves

Yesterday, the air that surrounds us became cleaner in a way.

The bidding on licenses to a chunk of the wireless spectrum hit its $4.6 billion minimum — triggering a set of open access conditions that will allow wireless Internet users to connect any device or application using these airwaves.

This marks as significant shift from the “walled garden” model that has dominated wireless networks in America.

READ MORE HERE