The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

by Matt Stoller, Mon Jun 19, 2006 at 07:50:10 PM EDT

There's some friction on the Senate Commerce Committee.  Ted Stevens is a wily appropriator, and he wants to pass a piece of legislation that rewrites the rules for the telecommunications industry.  As bitter as the argument has been online, it's been worse on the hill.

The top Democrat on the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Monday rejected a proposed compromise on access to high-speed Internet networks and said the effort to pass a broad telecommunications reform bill could fall apart.

Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii said the revised Republican legislation did not go far enough to ensure that Internet network providers cannot discriminate against unaffiliated Web sites or services, an issue known as "Net neutrality."

Inouye also said the Democrats on the committee were worried that the draft bill could help companies evade state consumer protection laws.

....

Stevens offered a compromise last week to try to persuade Democrats on the issue of Net neutrality.

He added a new section aimed at preserving consumers' ability to surf anywhere on the public Internet and to use any Web-based application. But it stopped short of barring network operators from charging for access and service quality.

Ted Stevens has been trying to pass off a 'compromise' on net neutrality, which shows that there is real movement on the issue towards our direction.  We'll see what happens.  The mark up is on Thursday.

Keep making those phone calls to Senators.

Oh, and they still haven't fixed the Craiglist site loading problem for Cox cable customers.  Welcome to a non-neutral net.

Tags: net neutrality, Ted Stevens (all tags)

  • 15 Comments
  • 0 recs
  • Share
  • Permalink

Comments

15 Comments

Shadow_head_small
So much for the HI/AK axis?

When you look at the list of SCC members
you just have to wonder who is up for rolling which logs.

Too much smoke, too many mirrors for me...

by skeptic06 2006-06-19 08:22PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

I have to ask... why does THIS site have an anti-net neutrality advertisement? Is it policy at MyDD to accept ads from anyone who pays for them, even if their mission is fundamentally anti-democracy?

by klangley 2006-06-19 11:17PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Weekly Standard on Net Neutrality
I haven't seen any one comment about it yet.  What do you guys think about the Weekly Standard article arguing about in favor of using eminent domain?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Pu blic/Articles/000/000/012/348yjwfo.asp
 If Silicon valley agreed, that would be a broad coalition.
by medleysoul 2006-06-20 12:48AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: Weekly Standard on Net Neutrality

It's not too often that I find myself praising the writings of a former hedge fund manager writing in the Weekly Standard, but I have to admit this guy's argument is intriguing. While I think it faces real legal and practical implementation problems, it does put the issue in what could be a helpful perspective. Communities have used public domain to take over individuals' homes to build high-end condos to increase their tax base. Why not at least raise the issue in this case?  Here's the gist of Kessler's eminent domain argument:

Here's an idea: Start screaming like a madman and using four letter words--like K-E-L-O. And fancier words like "eminent domain." I know, I know. This sounds wrong. These are privately owned wires hanging on poles. But so what? The government-mandated owners have been neglecting them for years--we are left with slums in need of redevelopment. Horse-drawn trolleys ruled cities, too, but had to be destroyed to make way for progress. How do we rip the telco's trolley tracks out and enable something modern and real competition?

I also posted more excerpts from Kessler's Weekly Standard piece here.

by mitchipd 2006-06-20 09:55AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The 'dumb pipe' ad

Thanks for everything you are doing to lead the push against this internet giveaway, Matt.

I put up a piece about the 'What is the Future of the Internet?' ad on Frameshop.   I am not an investigative reporter, but a if someone could  also tie that ad to a House Republican (or two...or ten), that would be great.

(Frameshop:  Net Neutrality and the 'Dumb Pipe' Ad)

by Jeffrey Feldman 2006-06-20 04:12AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

Matt, I think the telcos will be far more subtle in their implementation of Access Tiering and I don't think the Stevens bill does anything to protect NN they way I see it playing out:

I subscribe to Verizon's FiOS 15mbps plan.  Verizon could strike a deal with someone like MSN to give subscribers an addition 5mbps (no additional charge to the subscriber) of bandwidth for exclusive use of MSN services.  The MSN service will perform much better than the competition because of this and over time I will stop using the competition and just use MSN.

I say that is what the Non Net Neutral internet will look like.  They won't touch or degrade anything in my 15mbps plan but they will offer "value added" bandwidth for the exclusive use of their partners.

Why even bother having NN legislation if it is not going to address the method of Access Tiering most likely to be used by the telcos?

by redbanktom 2006-06-20 04:37AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Just got off the phone with Kay Hutchison's ofc

She has not issued a statement on this yet, because she's waiting to hear from constituents. She's got a Dem challenger, Barbara Radnofsky, who's very credible this year, so I'm sure that helps.

Wonder how many other Senators still have their fingers in the wind to see which way it's blowing.

CALL!!!!

by boadicea 2006-06-20 06:48AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

Matt -- you didn't think you'd get through a whole thread without a Hands Off "shill" showing up to point out your errors, did you? Anyway...

Have you noticed that Craig Newmark is NOT blaming Cox for the problem with his site? And have you noticed that even though he supports your position on net neutrality, he doesn't cite this as an example of non-neutrality? It's just a technical problem, although a bit one, and it isn't Cox's fault.

Here's Craig: http://www.cnewmark.com/archives/000623. html

And as I'm sure you know, but your readers might like to also, here is ZDNet's networking columnist calling you a liar:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=249

by LookMaNoHands 2006-06-20 11:06AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

The ZDNet piece does provide what seems to be a reasonable explanation of what happened with Craigslist (admittedly over my head technically).  And it suggests that much of the responsibility may lie with Craigslist, in terms of ways the issue could have been addressed more quickly.  It'd be nice to hear a response at this same technical level from Craigslist.  Most of us non-techies have no way of evaluating these issues. This doesn't, however, change the relevance of the NN debate, only perhaps of the specific Craigslist problem.

by mitchipd 2006-06-20 11:21AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

Mitch, we disagree on NN, but you're probably the most intellectually honest guy on the other side. People like Stoller and Tim Karr are just making your whole side bad.

by LookMaNoHands 2006-06-20 12:02PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

I never claimed that Cox was blocking Craiglist intentionally.  Your side asserted that I said that, which was a lie.

As usual.

by Matt Stoller 2006-06-20 08:34PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

Matt,
You wrote,
"As bitter as the argument has been online, it's been worse on the hill."

Then you provide a block quote without anything I can see as "bitter... or worse." Are you reading between the lines? Were you there, and so saw things that don't appear in this report? Or am I blind and failing to pick up on subtle cues of bitterness and worse? Aren't these the same two Senators known for scratching each other's backs on bills such as ANWR drilling? What are you seeing that I'm not?

Bob in HI

by Bob Schacht 2006-06-20 02:33PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Isn't This Really about VOIP?

Isn't what's really going on here is that while net neutrality is a problem for small websites owners...the "compromise" arises from the fact that Verizon et al want a way to wrest business away from Vonage and others?

by risenmessiah 2006-06-20 03:08PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

the skippy challenge

we are not trying to be jerks here, but we think this is a very important point.

everyone in blogtopia (and yes, we coined that phrase!) knows how much we love and admire and respect the other blogs on our roll, many of whom gave us support in our early days.

but many of those same ads are still running the "save the internet" ad, which, as we all know, is financed by the telco's, is completely against net neutrality, and, to the casual surfer (ie, someone who comes to blogs and fdl for the first time) actually quite persuasive.

this seems to us to be an incredibly short-sighted and stupid move.

the agonist and my left wing have permanent disclaimers on their blogs by the ad.

annatopia and steve gilliard have pledged to donate the money the get from the ad to savetheinternet.com.

skippy refuses to run the ad.

if it was only a matter of editorial choice versus ad revenue (tho we pretty much eviscerate that argument here), then we would just leave it at "to each their own, and who are we to say anything?"

but on this specific issue, it comes down to taking short term profit instead of long term problem solving.  blogs who run the ad are taking money from the very people that want to limit our ability to access our audience (and visa versa).

thus the skippy challenge:  we call upon the blogs currently running the ad to to either (a) put up a permanent disclaimer next to the ad for as long as the ad runs, or (b) donate the amount of money you received from the ad revenue to savetheinternet.com.

to show my good faith, skippy international will donate to savetheinternet.com the total amount of ad revenue that we would charge for three months, had we taken the ad.

granted, skippy's revenue is not as big as most of those other blogs.  but at this point, every little bit going to savetheinternet.com will help us in this matter.

and for everyone else, call your senators, tell them to support s.2917, and visit savetheinternet.com.

by skippy 2006-06-21 03:18PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Re: The Stevens Push Against Net Neutrality

"welcome to a non-neutral net"? Even Craig has said that the Cox problem has nothing to do with net neutrality - why do you act like it does?

by dem1 2006-06-21 06:42PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------