NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad

NNSquad Home Page

NNSquad Mailing List Information

 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ NNSquad ] Re: FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National Broadband Plan


There are a lot of interesting characterizations going on in this exchange.

A few things jumped out at me as I read it:

1) Bennett was actually quite careful to identify Chris Bowers ("Net
Roots") with a "faction" of the network neutrality movement, not the
movement as a whole; something you'd expect in any large political
movement. While it's clear to me that the vast majority of the people
working for net neutrality legislation have taken a position more
aligned with the Wu/Lessig approach, I think it's fair to say there
are still those who would prefer to see something akin to "all packets
are equal" legislation (though there's still a lot of room within that
description for a number of different positions). Whether or not Chris
Bowers et al. are members of this faction, I have no idea.

2) The characterization of "all packets are equal" as somehow a
misrepresentation or misunderstanding of the End to End principle is
decidedly up for argument and fails to address the subtleties of the
positions most of the people on this list are familiar with. Moreover,
the overuse of "stupid" to refer to a neutral network (even an "all
packets are equal" network) is an unfortunate turn of phrase - though
we'll almost certainly have to suffer it's abuse further.

3) I don't think anyone has ever claimed common carrier regulation (of
anything, from railroads to airlines to telecoms) has prohibited
differentiated pricing. I doubt there's a myth there to bust. Though
the internet was still vastly more egalitarian prior to Brand-X and
legislation exempting it from telecoms regulation.

It'd be nice to see some more substantive discussion on this list,
instead of the usual "spin" from the usual suspects.

Mischa

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 2:44 PM, George Ou<george_ou@lanarchitect.net> wrote:
> Net Neutrality proponents for years have been trying to say that Net
> Neutrality is the fight against Net Censorship all the while using bogus
> examples of net censorship. ÂMoreover, many of the Net Neutrality activists
> have claimed and continue to claim that the Internet is supposed to be
> stupid as they misrepresent and misunderstand the End to End principle.
> Some of the Net Neutrality bills like Wyden completely outlawed
> prioritization, while others bills made prioritization technology impossible
> to implement by making it illegal to charge for the service and do the
> necessary budget enforcement since you can't base decisions on the source or
> destination.
>
> So no Lauren, it's not just some "hack" argument which is a real cheap shot
> against Bennett on your part. ÂBennett has been taking his position on
> principle without pay for several years. ÂI don't see you referring to
> others LONG TIME hacks as "hacks" and it shows your obvious bias. ÂThe
> assertion that Net Neutrality would make the Internet stupid is an accurate
> and deserved one. ÂEven Larry Lessig has had to come out and say that he
> opposes Net Neutrality bills like Markey because it outlaws differentiated
> services on differentiated pricing. ÂTim Berners-Lee has always believed
> that differentiated pricing are perfectly acceptable, but he's willing to
> compromise his own principles and support regulation that would in fact
> outlaw differentiated pricing.
>
> The Internet and broadband even under common carrier regulation never
> prohibited differentiated pricing and service levels. ÂThis is a myth
> propagated by Net Neutrality regulation proponents to create a version of
> the Internet that never actually existed.
>
>
>
> George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org
> [mailto:nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of
> Lauren Weinstein
> Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 11:07 PM
> To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
> Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: FCC Hires Industry Shill to Develop US National
> Broadband Plan
>
>
>> From: Richard Bennett <richard@bennett.com>
>> Date: August 29, 2009 7:47:24 PM EDT
> ....
>> The concern of the "net roots" faction Bowers represents seems to be that
> a
>> diverse and talented FCC team will not endorse the simplistic vision of
>> "all packets are equal" internetworking they've been trying to foist off
> on
>> the American people since the net neutrality debate started.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, claiming that net neutrality advocates are
> insisting that "all packets are (or should be) equal" is the same sort
> of inaccurate, derogatory canard used by the political hacks who have
> been trying to equate end of life counseling with "Nazi-like death
> panels."
>
> In both of these sorts of situations, the individuals making such
> claims know (or should know) full well that they are spouting
> self-serving bosh that misrepresents the actual positions of their
> adversaries.
>
> --Lauren--
> NNSquad Moderator
>
>
>



-- 
Mischa Beitz
http://mischa.beitz.org