Total Pageviews

Sunday, March 29, 2015

FCC Chair: Net Neutrality Is “Right Choice” Because Big ISPs Want “Unfettered Power”

FCC Chair: Net Neutrality Is “Right Choice” Because Big ISPs Want “Unfettered Power” – Consumerist: "“The true choice is between protecting the gatekeepers, or protecting consumers and insurgents,” Wheeler continued. “To understand the problem, it is necessary to understand the power of the biggest ISPs. Consider this simple fact: About three-fourths of American households have zero or one choice for highspeed, wired broadband to their homes. No choice or one choice,” he said, “does not make an attractive marketplace from a consumer’s perspective.”

After this understatement, Wheeler went on to remind the audience that the large incumbent ISPs, monopolies that they are, have both the ability and the incentive — the tools to act and the financially rewarding outcomes — to disadvantage both companies and consumers when it comes to transmitting content. And that, of course, is where a strong net neutrality rule comes in. If screwing with content and connections is made illegal, they probably won’t do it.

As for those lawsuits against the new rule (and the others likely to follow), Wheeler was confident." 'via Blog this'

Friday, March 27, 2015

Indian regulator consults on anti-net neutrality: "over the top" services

See document here - extremely biased in favour of mobiles of course, as India's fixed line penetration is pathetic: "Question 5: Do you agree that imbalances exist in the regulatory environment in the operation of OTT players? If so, what should be the framework to address these issues? How can the prevailing laws and regulations be applied to OTT players (who operate in the virtual world) and compliance enforced?
"Stakeholders are requested to send their comments preferably in electronic form by 24th April, 2015 and counter comments by 8th May 2015 on email id For any clarification/information, Shri A. Robert. J. Ravi, Advisor (TD & QoS)".

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

3UK Finalises Deal to Buy O2 from Telefonica for £10.25bn if antitrust/regulators agree

UPDATE Three UK Finalises Deal to Buy O2 from Telefonica for £10.25bn - ISPreview UK:

"On top of that there’s the increasingly complex web of Network Sharing and Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MVNO) deals to consider, with both TalkTalk and Sky Broadband having signed MVNO deals with O2.

 The MVNO deals aren’t likely to be much of a concern due to O2/Three UK’s (aka – Throat, as we like to call them) lack of a fixed line business, although O2 also has a network sharing agreement with Vodafone and Three UK has one with EE. Somewhere along the lines a difficult decision will have to be taken because that situation may soon start to look untenable.

 Meanwhile Three UK’s customers will be hoping that the operators low-cost and data centric approach isn’t sacrificed, while O2 users will be wary of any potential quality loss to the now more budget conscious owner. Both operators also have fairly recognisable brands, but Hutchison Whampoa may well wish to move them under a single umbrella.

 In any case we’ll have to wait and see how everything turns out, although it could a year before everything is completed (the same as with BT’s purchase of EE) and that’s assuming the competition authorities don’t raise concerns."

'via Blog this'

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

First Round of Lawsuits Filed In Net Neutrality Case. Now What?

Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » First Round of Lawsuits Filed In Net Neutrality Case. Now What?: "Both the D.C. Circuit and the 5th Circuit are generally considered conservative circuits hostile to regulation generally and the FCC specifically. We will not pause to ponder, here, what that says about our supposedly neutral court system at the moment. However, the FCC asserted that it was following the “invitation” laid out by the D.C. Circuit to reconsider its classification decision, and that is not an unreasonable reading of the Verizon decision. So it is plausible that, as between the D.C. Circuit and the 5th Cir., the FCC may prefer to be in the 5th Cir." 'via Blog this'

Stallman joins the Internet, talks net neutrality, patents and more

Stallman joins the Internet, talks net neutrality, patents and more | Network World:

"However, he was critical of the government for not going far enough to protect the ability of users to share.

“It falls short of true network neutrality in that it fails to tell the ISPs that they can’t examine the data to check for unauthorized copying. It fails to tell the ISPs that they can’t punish their customers based on what their customers are transmitting.”" 'via Blog this'

TeleFrieden: New Video Streaming Options and Network Neutrality

TeleFrieden: New Video Streaming Options and Network Neutrality: "The 2015 Open Internet Order generally prohibits paid prioritization and establishes a “no-unreasonable interference/disadvantage” standard for ISP treatment of upstream traffic, like that flowing from content sources.  This probably means that the FCC will want to make sure that specialized routing arrangements are technically necessary on quality of service grounds and not simply a construct to favor traffic of affiliates, or surcharge payers.  Sponsored data arrangements also fit into this category.


Does an ISP simply partition generic bandwidth and call it a specialized network, or does the ISPs really and truly do something by way of dedicated, management?  Bear in mind that some way, somehow the FCC has avoided having to examine the functions and services performed by proxy server/CDN companies like Akamai.  Does an ISP simply have to show it operates like Akamai, but extends the value added, specialized features for the link downstream to end users?" 'via Blog this'

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

UPDATE Budget 2015 - Osborne recycles old broadband plans

UPDATE Budget 2015 - Osborn Pledges to Deliver 100Mbps Ultrafast Broadband - ISPreview UK: "On the 100Mbps commitment the Government has said that it “wants to maintain the principle that intervention should be limited to that which is required for the market to function effectively. In the case of ultrafast broadband, this market is only just beginning to emerge.” But they do claim to have identified a number of areas where “action can help support”, such as by employing the aforementioned UK Guarantees Scheme, but it still sounds as if they’re trying to claim credit for work done by the private sector.

Otherwise almost everything else boasted about today references projects and strategies that have already been announced before." 'via Blog this'

Friday, March 13, 2015

What Net Neutrality Rules Mean for Consumers

What Net Neutrality Rules Mean for Consumers | Re/code: "Broadly, the rules are as previously advertised. They prohibit broadband providers (wired and wireless) from blocking or throttling legal Internet content. They also don’t allow broadband providers to offer paid, prioritized fast-lane services to content companies.

But there are plenty of smaller provisions tucked into the text that could have an impact on consumers’ Internet service. Here are a few things that could soon change for consumers (based on a quick read) along with excerpts from the rules:" 'via Blog this'

The Process of Governance: The FCC

The Process of Governance: The FCC: "Ultimately, a final version is presented to the Commissioners for signoff by all of the Commissioners who voted in favor of the order.  Until this is done, the Order is not public because it doesn’t fully reflect the full and final views of the Commission.  Once the final version has been approved, it is – as the Open Internet Order will be – released to the public on the FCC’s web site.

The goal, of course, is to release the final order as soon as possible. But speed is not the only – or even the utmost – goal. The rulemaking process of the FCC was designed by Congress, and is executed by the Commission, to produce rules that will stand the test of judicial review – and of time." 'via Blog this'

Monday, March 09, 2015

Julia Reda – Net neutrality is a “Taliban-like issue”, says Europe’s top digital policymaker

Julia Reda – Net neutrality is a “Taliban-like issue”, says Europe’s top digital policymaker: "Here we’ve got, particularly in Germany, Taliban-like developments. We have the Internet community, the Pirates on the move, it’s all about enforcing perfect uniformity. They talk about “the evil industry”. It’s not about the industry, it’s not about the CEO and his salary. If you want to have real time road safety, our lives are at stake, this has to have absolute priority with regards to quality and capacity." 'via Blog this'

Thursday, March 05, 2015

Access on "the wolf in sheep's clothing" Council net neutrality proposal

Blog | Access: "The Council of the EU has disappointingly changed its position over the past few weeks. While the Council was on the right track towards Net Neutrality in January, making slow but measured progress, several EU member states pushed forward a proposal that radically shifted the direction of the negotiations. As a result, Net Neutrality has now been gutted everywhere in the text that was introduced by the Council today. Not only does the proposal enable the creation of slow and fast lanes by allowing paid prioritization and discriminatory practices such as “zero-rating” schemes, but the proposal also introduces loopholes that could authorise the blocking by Internet Service Providers of legal content, contradicting the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Council therefore appears ready to not only ignore the EU human rights framework and the right to freedom of expression of EU citizens, but also to severely compromise competition and innovation in the EU digital economy." 'via Blog this'

Letter to the Ministers of the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council (TTE) concerning TSM

Letter to the Ministers of the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council (TTE) concerning TSM: "weakened proposals on net neutrality go against the European Parliament’s repeated calls for clear definitions. We must ensure consumers are protected, innovative start-ups can develop and competition on the open internet is fair.


We call on you to adopt proposals that put an end to roaming charges as soon as possible, and to have clearly defined net neutrality rules for Europe. Your decisions are of vital importance not only for the Telecoms Single Market, but also for the Digital Single Market. We have no time to lose in building future proof single markets for telecoms and the digital economy." 'via Blog this'

EU annoys industry and activists with net neutrality proposal

EU annoys industry and activists with net neutrality proposal • The Register: "If approved by the European Parliament, the law would apply from 30 June 2016. Getting parliamentary approval, however, may prove tricky.

Dutch MEP Marietje Schaake, of the left-leaning Democraten 66 party, said the proposals were “disappointing to the point of insulting”. Schaake’s home country is the only one in the EU to have a national net neutrality law. And it’s being enforced: both KPN and Vodafone were fined in the Netherlands in December.

“The council wording is vague and this is a problem. Ambiguity and uncertainty create loopholes. We need clear principles and definitions. These are not in the council text, and I don’t think that’s an accident. The council will face a huge fight to get this wording approved,” warned Schaake." 'via Blog this'

Monday, March 02, 2015

Here’s how other countries are addressing net neutrality

Here’s how other countries are addressing net neutrality - MarketWatch: "Levy noted that the U.S. doesn’t treat ISPs as common carriers, unlike a lot of countries debating net neutrality.

If ISPs in the U.S. were treated as common carriers, like telecom operators, they would be subject to Federal Communications Commission regulations, and thus possible net neutrality rules. This treatment is essentially what the president proposed the FCC do, on Monday.

Levy also said not treating ISPs as common carriers is one of the reasons, “the U.S. is a step behind in a lot of ways,” with regard to net neutrality." 'via Blog this'