You are here
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2008-01-22 11:34
Network World has a great piece: "Open Access not as important to wireless consumers as QoS, pricing, survey finds" which exposes the Google-led tech industry's push for open access as a not-so-subtle tech-industrial policy.
This survey is important evidence exposing the tech industry's attempt to pass net neutrality/open access legislation/regulation as an thinly-guised tech industrial policy.
The tech industry has done a good job of cloaking their openness campaign as what consumers want most -- because that serves their Washington industrial policy agenda.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2008-01-17 18:46
You wouldn't know that if you only listened to the many wireless and America bashers, organized by Google and the New American Foundation, who are gathering for a wireless/America bash-fest on Capitol Hill next week, January 22nd, called "Free my phone!"
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2008-01-16 17:55
Tim Wu is losing credibility fast.
Mr. Wu please calm down. Put away any sharp objects and please listen to some reason.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Wed, 2007-12-12 17:13
Larry Downes produced an outstanding analysis for ZDNet today which he entitled "Save Internet Freedom -- From Regulation."
I strongly recommend it as it is one of the most cogent and persuasive pieces I have read in a long time on the subject.
He does a great service by putting the issue into much clearer context -- vis-a-vis other industries and past attempts to regulate where the government shouldn't have.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-12-06 12:51
I always enjoy learning about a new fresh take on an old issue.
Kudos to Dr. Daniel Ballon who wrote a great editorial on net neutrality for The Hill newspaper: "Net neutrality punishes everyone for Comcast's actions."
He recounts a great analogy about how "neutral" networks on Black Monday, the stock market crash of October 19, 1987, was made worse by a traffic jam of orders that couuld not be managed in an orderly fashion to keep the stock market functioning and open.
At its core, the policy of net neutrality, that all traffic is always treated equally no matter what is -- unreasonable, unwise, and irrational.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-11-27 13:43
Verizon's announcement that it will allow customers to choose any app and/or any device on its entire network in 2008 is proof positive that competitive market forces best serve consumers, not rigid net neutrality regulation or legislation.
I see three big takeaways from the Verizon announcement: consumer protection/reliability; market discipline, and more diversity of consumer choice.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Tue, 2007-11-13 13:27
The Big Government advocates who try to paint the U.S. as falling behind in broadband so they can justify an activist National Broadband Policy -- have a huge and embarassing hole in their argument -- the U.S. lead in wireless/mobile broadband, including U.S. leadership in transitioning prime analog TV spectrum to mainstream digital broadband use.
This U.S. world leadership in transitioning prime spectrum to optimal consumer use is powerful evidence of the superiority of our broadband policy approach, which embraces market forces more than just about any other major country in the world.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Thu, 2007-11-08 13:22
If Professor Tim Wu is the "Father" of net neutrality, since he named the issue in 2002, I guess Gigi Sohn can be called the "Mother" of net neutrality because in 2002 her organization, Public Knowledge, birthed the original political manifesto on this type of thinking: "Saving the Information Commons."
Yesterday Ms. Sohn, the Mother of net neutrality, participated in a conference call for left-leaning bloggers to indoctrinate them into the right and wrong way to blog about FreePress/Public Knowledge's petition to the FCC on Comcast's network management.
Ted Hearn of MultiChannel News had a great story on this: "Sohn to bloggers: target Inouye"
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-11-05 17:27
First, the petitioners ignore the reason the FCC exists in the first place -- the absolute necessity for some network management in order for communications systems to function as needed.
Second, the petitioners ignore that "reasonable network management" of communications is directly analogous to reasonable traffic management of our roadways.
Submitted by Scott Cleland on Mon, 2007-11-05 10:59
Tim Wu, the "father of net neutrality" because he made up the term a few years back, was surprisingly candid in a CNET article that: "the whole net neutrality issue is really about a power struggle."
I also found another candid quote by the Moveon.org/FreePress folks that also tells us what they are up to: