How to access this image.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Websites
On these sites you can find more information on Internet Neutrality:
Federal Communications Commission
Center For Democracy & Technology
Federal Communications Commission
Center For Democracy & Technology
Common Cause – Holding Power Accountable
Article on congressional legislation for internet neutrality
Synopsis of The Net Neutrality Debate: The Basics
The article gives a basic explanation of the debate that is going on about net neutrality between the deregulators and the openists. The article itself is made of five parts. The deregulators which include the cable, phone, and Internet companies want the internet deregulated so they can charge people on a pay as you go, tier type basis. The openists want the system we already have and regulations to keep these big companies under control. The article goes through the terminology and the major players in the debate.
The first part defines what net neutrality means and how it has different definitions to different groups of people. The second part describes the players involved and the terminology used in the net neutrality debate. The third section describes where the debate started from and who brought to the forefront. The fourth section tells of the dilemma caused by the debate. The fifth and final section gives some solutions to end the debate and to keep it from coming up again.
Why is it a big deal if there are only a few companies that control the internet, wouldn’t it be less confusing?
The first part defines what net neutrality means and how it has different definitions to different groups of people. The second part describes the players involved and the terminology used in the net neutrality debate. The third section describes where the debate started from and who brought to the forefront. The fourth section tells of the dilemma caused by the debate. The fifth and final section gives some solutions to end the debate and to keep it from coming up again.
Why is it a big deal if there are only a few companies that control the internet, wouldn’t it be less confusing?
Synopsis of Dueling Data
This article is a look into how net neutrality is relevant to the average person. It starts out with a story about how the authors son was able to have a book read to him by his grandparent via a webcast. This is the event that got his mind rolling on the issue of net neutrality. In the article the author goes on to discuss the implications of having neutrality or not having it.
To begin his debate he talks about Comcast and their pursuit in slowing down person two person (P2P) traffic. According to him Comcast has gotten in trouble for slowing down and stopping P2P traffic because some of some files being copywrited. If a file has a copywrite it is illegal to share and distibute. This would include things like music and sites like LimeWire. The author goes on to describe the implications this type of activity would have on education and cable-internet-phone companies.
If companies are allowed to stop P2P traffic, what would be the problem?
To begin his debate he talks about Comcast and their pursuit in slowing down person two person (P2P) traffic. According to him Comcast has gotten in trouble for slowing down and stopping P2P traffic because some of some files being copywrited. If a file has a copywrite it is illegal to share and distibute. This would include things like music and sites like LimeWire. The author goes on to describe the implications this type of activity would have on education and cable-internet-phone companies.
If companies are allowed to stop P2P traffic, what would be the problem?
Synopsis of article: Point/Counterpoint -- Network Neutrality Nuances
This article presents opposite points of view on internet neutrality. The two authors joust with each other on the issue of whether the internet should become a competitive venture between cable and phone companies or remain the way it is with consumers paying one price for equal access to all that can be offered. If the internet did become competitive there is evidence that certain kinds of information/sites would be blocked, whether it was considered offensive to the company (a form of censorship) or threatening (competition). On the other side, we are presented with the opinion that openness and transparency coupled with regulations would keep companies from hurting or denying consumers all around access.
A few times the authors find themselves in agreement. Their common ground deals with the user being able to access what they wish and that the internet remains a viable and highly creative venue. The FCC with its current and potential future regulations is depicted as either fairly inept or conclusively all-powerful. The argument against the FCC points out their lack of technical knowledge regarding the intricacies of the web. The argument for net neutrality is more solid especially as it contains several examples of shady dealings already happening among the provider companies and paints a vivid picture of how bad this could get in the future.
To access this article from UWO library site:
1. Go to library home page and click on Academic Search Complete
2. Click in box next to the Ebsco host logo
3. Type in: internet in the first box
4. Type in: neutrality in the box just below
5. Scroll down and click the little box for Scholarly Journals
6. Click on Search
7. You will see a list of articles -- go down to #7.
Question:
Do you think that the big phone and cable companies would be open and transparent about their practices – for example, eliminating access to certain sites?
A few times the authors find themselves in agreement. Their common ground deals with the user being able to access what they wish and that the internet remains a viable and highly creative venue. The FCC with its current and potential future regulations is depicted as either fairly inept or conclusively all-powerful. The argument against the FCC points out their lack of technical knowledge regarding the intricacies of the web. The argument for net neutrality is more solid especially as it contains several examples of shady dealings already happening among the provider companies and paints a vivid picture of how bad this could get in the future.
To access this article from UWO library site:
1. Go to library home page and click on Academic Search Complete
2. Click in box next to the Ebsco host logo
3. Type in: internet in the first box
4. Type in: neutrality in the box just below
5. Scroll down and click the little box for Scholarly Journals
6. Click on Search
7. You will see a list of articles -- go down to #7.
Question:
Do you think that the big phone and cable companies would be open and transparent about their practices – for example, eliminating access to certain sites?
Synopsis of "No Tolls on The Internet"
We already pay to use the internet, but without internet neutrality we could end up paying each time we try to google something, view you tube, enjoy facebook, or a blog. This nasty plan is being drummed up by large companies like AT&T and Verizon so that they can shut out all the smaller entities and siphon millions of dollars off of us. Their plan is to charge those who want to provide any type of information to the web. If the entity does not pay up then the large companies will cut them away from access by you and me.
The large phone companies have tons of professionals and lobbyists working for them and promoting their cause to Congress. At the other end of this activity is a huge grassroots group on the web called savetheinternet.com and they are organized and fighting for freedom and equality regarding the web. This is a touchy situation because Congress seems vulnerable to the wiles of the greedy and manipulative corporations.
Question: Are you concerned enough about this issue to check out the site savetheinternet.com?
Synopsis of Regulating the Internet Net Neutrality: A user’s guide
This article provided an introduction to net neutrality (regulating the internet). The net neutrality debate is often famed as having just two sides. On one side are the operators, for example, AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast, who argue that those who make high use of and profit from the Internet should pay for that use. The other side is more complex and consists of service providers, for example, Google, Intel, and Amazon (to name a few), who state that access tiering threatens the core values and social usefulness of the Internet and that governments must get involved to prevent access tiering from occurring. The authors show that net neutrality is not simple but is a complex issue that must link the public interest with legal, practical and commercial considerations. And, when all is said and done, there is no “correct” position.
The access tiering model, which is the subject of the net neutrality debate, is an attempt to adjust the Internet’s default settings by placing control of the network in operators’ hands and allowing them to set the price for access. Competitors fear being unable to compete. Non-commercial entities fear being unable to pay. With control of the Internet comes power; access tiering is potentially a very powerful form of control. At the writing of this article (2006) there had been few examples of operators actually engaging in access tiering to date.
There is no incentive for operators to access tier, as their consumers want access to the entire Internet. If access tiering is allowed “youTube.com” may no longer be accessible. Net neutrality requirements do not appear practical or desirable. The question that can be asked is, should the Internet be regulated, and if so, how?
Regulating the Internet
How to get to this article?
Step 1: Go to UWO homepage.
Step 2: Under Titan Services on the right hand side scroll down to Polk Library.
Step 3: In the List of Library Search Tools scroll to ScienceDirect
Step 4: In the “All fields” box type in Net neutrality: A user’s guide.
Step 5: Click on the article.
The access tiering model, which is the subject of the net neutrality debate, is an attempt to adjust the Internet’s default settings by placing control of the network in operators’ hands and allowing them to set the price for access. Competitors fear being unable to compete. Non-commercial entities fear being unable to pay. With control of the Internet comes power; access tiering is potentially a very powerful form of control. At the writing of this article (2006) there had been few examples of operators actually engaging in access tiering to date.
There is no incentive for operators to access tier, as their consumers want access to the entire Internet. If access tiering is allowed “youTube.com” may no longer be accessible. Net neutrality requirements do not appear practical or desirable. The question that can be asked is, should the Internet be regulated, and if so, how?
Regulating the Internet
How to get to this article?
Step 1: Go to UWO homepage.
Step 2: Under Titan Services on the right hand side scroll down to Polk Library.
Step 3: In the List of Library Search Tools scroll to ScienceDirect
Step 4: In the “All fields” box type in Net neutrality: A user’s guide.
Step 5: Click on the article.
Synopsis of Why You Should Care About Net Neutrality
Right now if you go onto the Internet you are basically able to look at any webpage without any extra costs or exceptions. Internet subscribers sign up for service expecting they will get access to the entire Internet. Would it be foolish for a broadband provider to deliver anything else? The Internet is free and accessible for anyone to start up his or her own pages and applications. Currently you could create any webpage you want without interference. The pages online that become popular do so because Internet users find the services provided by the pages to be important.
Overall there is really no central control over the Internet. Although, this could change now since the Internet has switched from being run by dial-up to broadband companies. When the Internet used to be run by dial up it ran across telephone wires and benefited from rules that the phone companies had to deliver all Internet traffic without discrimination. These broadband carriers do not need to follow these non-discrimination rules.
Due to the fact that broadband carriers do not need to follow rules regarding non-discrimination this might create a problem. For example, if a new application is working poorly or slowly, is it because the new application is just not that good or is it the broadband provider interfering with its delivery? Consumers can’t really tell what’s going on, and the market can’t provide an effective check. Also, consumers don’t have a large number of broadband providers from which to choose. Does the Internet’s openness as we know it rest on thin ice so that there could someday be an access charge to Facebook and Twitter?
How to get this article?
Step 1: Go to abcnews.com
Step 2: In the search box type “Why you should care about net neutrality”
Step 3: Click on article.
Why you should care
Overall there is really no central control over the Internet. Although, this could change now since the Internet has switched from being run by dial-up to broadband companies. When the Internet used to be run by dial up it ran across telephone wires and benefited from rules that the phone companies had to deliver all Internet traffic without discrimination. These broadband carriers do not need to follow these non-discrimination rules.
Due to the fact that broadband carriers do not need to follow rules regarding non-discrimination this might create a problem. For example, if a new application is working poorly or slowly, is it because the new application is just not that good or is it the broadband provider interfering with its delivery? Consumers can’t really tell what’s going on, and the market can’t provide an effective check. Also, consumers don’t have a large number of broadband providers from which to choose. Does the Internet’s openness as we know it rest on thin ice so that there could someday be an access charge to Facebook and Twitter?
How to get this article?
Step 1: Go to abcnews.com
Step 2: In the search box type “Why you should care about net neutrality”
Step 3: Click on article.
Why you should care
Synopsis of The Last Mile: Service Tiers Versus Infrastructure Development and the Debate on Internet Neutrality
The idea of net neutrality has some basis in the idea that in order to have the internet, one needs two components. One is a line, and the other is an internet provider. This article talks about telephone companies and how they relate to the idea of infrastructure. Last mile has to do with the telephone and cable. The advent of broadband technology broad a change in the way the internet was thought about. Internet providers now want to discriminate between Internet applications and charge service providers (Google being an example). With the rise of net-neutrality, it would become illegal to discriminate between internet applications.
Gone would be the days of an open access policy. This applied to the telephone companies, but with the rise of this legislation, broadband companies might not have this open access policy. There is a section in the article discussing SBC users. They want to use the internet pipes of a user for free, event though the user has to pay for it, a lot of SBC users are not liking this too much. This article talks about service tiers, which talk about different forms of payment/ revenue to keep costs low. I believe Time Warner cable’s service might be an example of a tier. As of right now, according to the article, neutrality is not that widespread, but if legislation passes it will have to become widespread. The article discusses the new internet, which would apply anti-discrimination on internet applications. This would be a more fair use of internet services.
Should internet providers discriminate against internet applications, or should the neutrality law be set into motion?
The Last Mile
Go to UW Oshkosh home,
Click on Polk Library
Click on Academic Search Elite
Type in Internet Neutrality
Gone would be the days of an open access policy. This applied to the telephone companies, but with the rise of this legislation, broadband companies might not have this open access policy. There is a section in the article discussing SBC users. They want to use the internet pipes of a user for free, event though the user has to pay for it, a lot of SBC users are not liking this too much. This article talks about service tiers, which talk about different forms of payment/ revenue to keep costs low. I believe Time Warner cable’s service might be an example of a tier. As of right now, according to the article, neutrality is not that widespread, but if legislation passes it will have to become widespread. The article discusses the new internet, which would apply anti-discrimination on internet applications. This would be a more fair use of internet services.
Should internet providers discriminate against internet applications, or should the neutrality law be set into motion?
The Last Mile
Go to UW Oshkosh home,
Click on Polk Library
Click on Academic Search Elite
Type in Internet Neutrality
Synopsis of Couldn't Care Net
It will first be important to note that three major websites are pushing for net neutrality. Those are MSN, eBay and Google. Now with that I will talk about the article. The article in general discusses the issue of net neutrality in terms of it being a federal issue, with the presidential candidates all having some sort of view on it. The article itself seems to lean toward net neutrality. The article discusses a website called “SavetheInternet,” which is a website geared towards net neutrality and its importance. Net neutrality according to this article is that it is equal time given to all facets of the internet, without discriminating, or showing partiality to any one website, etc. This also has to do with the idea of interfering within the scope of the network, deciding who can connect and who cannot. Those advocating want to see legislation that would forbid any interference.
In the article there is a debate. One is in favor of net neutrality (Tim Berners-Lee), and the other is against it (John Chambers). Tim Berners-Lee believes that because we pay for the internet, there should not be any discrimination over who can connect to the web and who cannot.
The price tag should be attached to the web, not to us. (Perhaps cite quote in blog?). He believes that a neutral web is important to our society today (Paraphrase). The other view by John Chambers suggests that with the continual advancement and growth of the internet, it is important to give quality services to people over the www. There needs to be regulation, especially when problems occur. He believes that net neutrality would only compound the problem.
Would you be for or against legislation that would place a net neutrality system over the www?
Go to UW Oshkosh home,
Click on Polk Library
Click on Academic Search Elite
Type in Internet Neutrality
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)