seaeagle
Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 5748
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:56 am Post subject: FTC abandons net neutrality |
|
|
FTC abandons net neutrality - vnunet.com
| Quote: |
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has decided to abandon net neutrality and allow telecoms companies to charge websites for access.
The FTC said in a report that, despite popular support for net neutrality, it was minded to let the market sort out the issue.
This means that the organisation will not stand in the way of companies using differential pricing to make sure that some websites can be viewed more quickly than others. The report also counsels against net neutrality legislation.
"This report recommends that policy makers proceed with caution in the evolving dynamic industry of broadband internet access, which is generally moving towards more, not less, competition," FTC chairman Deborah Platt Majoras wrote.
"In the absence of significant market failure, or demonstrated consumer harm, policy makers should be particularly hesitant to enact new regulation in this area."
The report has caused outrage in the online community. Many are worried that any abandonment of net neutrality will harm competition, since it will allow big companies to outspend start-ups.
"Mostly the FTC suggests ways that the telephone and cable companies could have new ways to make money from content and applications providers," said Art Brodsky, of internet advocacy group Public Knowledge.
"Or lower-income subscribers could be charged lower prices, subsidised by 'prioritization revenues' much as supported email services now provide free email accounts. Nowhere is there discussion of what the consumer gets out of the deal." |
Free Press : We Still Need Net Neutrality Legislation
| Quote: |
We haven’t heard much about net neutrality legislation lately. That could be because the current Congress might actually be able to pass it, and opponents like AT&T and Verizon are laying low, spreading lobbying money, and trying to wait out that shocking possibility. That makes the Federal Trade Commission’s anti-net neutrality announcement last week even more puzzling. Was it intended as a warning from the Bush administration to Congress to back off, or was it yet another shake of the money tree?
The news story about the FTC report notes that “the FTC sided with high-speed Internet providers such as AT&T and Verizon,” and trotted out once again hollow justifications like “such rules could stifle innovation” and “”This report recommends that policy makers proceed with caution in the evolving, dynamic industry of broadband Internet access, which generally is moving toward more — not less – competition,” which it probably didn’t even think up itself, but copied from industry propaganda.
The paradox is that these providers have been working very hard to stifle innovation and move toward less competition for years – take their well-funded resistance, at both national and state levels, to public WiFi and similar local initiatives, for example. U.S. Internet service providers deliver less service for higher prices than many other countries around the world. In April, when the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet held hearings on broadband in this country versus others, the committee heard that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) had just lowered the United States to the number 15 spot on the list. (continues) |
It looks like a two-tiered Internet may soon be on it's way. |
|
General