<nettime> net neutrality scandal redux

[allan siegel <allan@allansiegel.info>]

Hello,

from Media Matters [16.01.14]: "The Wall Street Journal applauded a 
court decision invalidating the Federal Communications Commission's 
(FCC) net neutrality regulations, spinning the rules as hampering 
innovation and benefitting only "the giants of Silicon Valley," despite 
experts who warned of the damaging impact such a ruling might have on 
the public's access to online content."

In case this passed you by here is a brief bit of background: "The idea 
of "net neutrality" is also called "open internet" because it argues 
that no government or company can regulate the flow of the Internet. 
Advocates say that if left without regulation, large service providers 
will give preferential treatment to larger companies that can pay more. 
Meanwhile, smaller tech companies without deep, corporate pockets, will 
not be able to compete for premium service." [Reuters, 1/14/14]

You betcha, look who is applauding the decision: "Net neutrality travels 
under the guise of ordering Internet service providers like Verizon and 
Comcast not to discriminate against content providers. In reality it's a 
government attempt to dictate how these providers must manage their 
Internet pipes and how much they can charge companies for using those 
pipes… This makes no more economic sense than forcing a cable company to 
charge one price no matter how many channels a consumer subscribes to, 
or saying a retailer can't charge more for two dresses than for one. It 
also means less innovation and slower broadband rollout because Internet 
companies are less sure of their return on investment. [The Wall Street 
Journal, 1/14/13]

And what will be the outcome? TIM WU: It leaves the Internet in 
completely uncharted territory. There's never been a situation where 
providers can block whatever they want. For example, it means AT&T can 
block people from reaching T-Mobile's customer service site if it 
wanted. They can do whatever they want. [The Washington Post, 1/14/14]

And that's not all: "The ruling] means that the major providers of 
high-speed Internet access in the US, who have systematically divided 
markets and tacitly agreed mostly not to compete with one another, can 
treat high-speed Internet access like a cable TV service = they can be 
gatekeepers, charge content providers (any business) for the privilege 
of reaching us, the subscribers - and, of course, charge us. A lot. for 
lousy service compared to, say, Stockholm or Seoul." [Reddit.com, 1/14/14]

A classic Orwellian pincer movement; while the NSA is Hoovering data; 
the telecoms are building dams, toll booths and entrance ramps (and 
exits) for information highways.

best
allan


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org