Fw: Don't let gatekeepers control your Internet

[Guest guest]

" Magginkat " <magginkat

Fri, 12 May 2006 09:55:53 -0500

[GranniesAgainstGeorge] Fw: Don't let gatekeepers control

your Internet

 

 

 

 

 

Make a phone call today to demand a Congressional Investigation into

this treasonous Administration & it's crimes.... Demand that

Bush/Cheney be impeached & removed from office.

Toll Free to Congress -888-355-3588, 888-818-6641 or 800-426-8073

 

It's Impeachment Time !

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/806547876

 

Hear Us Now!

 

In the last few weeks, hundreds of thousands of Internet users sent

letters asking Congress to prevent big telephone and cable companies

from blocking or slowing your access to Internet services offered by

their competitors. Consumers Union activists alone sent nearly 100,000

letters!

 

And yet, Congress has refused to include any provisions to save the

Internet in the massive telecommunication bill--the COPE Act--it

continues to push forward. This could be a disaster for the Internet

as we know it.

 

" The companies hope, for instance, to charge so that its

site loads faster than Google's, or to make rival Net-phone firms like

Vonage pay to use their broadband pipes. The first idea is akin to a

gas station charging a Chevy driver more than a Honda driver. The

latter is like AT & T putting static on your line when a Verizon

customer calls. Neither is exactly competitive. " --The Peoria (Ill.)

Journal Star (full article below)

 

We can't let that happen. Tell Congress, any bill that passes must

protect the open Internet!

 

The COPE Act passed out of committee and will go to the full House of

Representative for a final vote next week with nothing in it to

protect the Internet from the tactics of telecommunications giants.

Meanwhile, a recently introduced Senate bill likewise fails to protect

your right to unfettered Internet access.

 

But there is good news. An alternative bill that would keep the

Internet open and free, the " Network Neutrality Act of 2006, " was

recently introduced in the House. Lawmakers need to know that you

expect them to keep the Internet, neutral, open and free.

 

Send a letter right now to tell Congress that you don't want cable and

telephone companies to put tollbooths and speed bumps on the Internet!

 

This will only take a few moments, and when you finish please forward

this message to all your friends and acquaintances who use the

Internet so that they can take action, too. The Internet is too

precious to turn over to the telephone and cable companies.

 

Sincerely,

Morgan Jindrich

HearUsNow.org

A project of Consumers Union

1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 310

Washington, DC 20009-1039

 

----

 

The Peoria (Ill.) Journal Star

May 8, 2006 Monday 12:21 PM EST

Editorial

 

HEADLINE: Telecom network a Web of confusion

 

The last major federal telecommunications act passed in 1996, back

when Google was but a fledging research project. Suffice it to say,

much has changed in online commerce and content. The Internet moves

quickly. Congress, however, moves slowly - as in 30k dial-up modem

slow. When the House finally does hunker down, it takes a powder on

one of the Net's hottest debates. That would be " network neutrality, "

a vague term that belies a simple concept.

 

Proponents argue that Internet service providers (ISPs) shouldn't have

a say in which Web sites surfers visit or how fast those sites load.

Providers, such as SBC/AT & T, merely supply the network with which to

access the Internet and must remain neutral over its speed and

content. An amendment to the Communications Opportunity, Promotion and

Enhancement Act delineating such a standard recently died in a House

committee. That's an unfortunate failure; the Senate shouldn't

hesitate to take up the matter in its own telecom bill.

 

Bloggers have been buzzing about the need for neutrality since SBC and

BellSouth executives floated the idea of a " tiered " Internet. The

companies hope, for instance, to charge so that its site loads

faster than Google's, or to make rival Net-phone firms like Vonage pay

to use their broadband pipes.

 

The first idea is akin to a gas station charging a Chevy driver more

than a Honda driver. The latter is like AT & T putting static on your

line when a Verizon customer calls. Neither is exactly competitive.

 

Without neutrality, there are other foreseeable effects. An ISP that

sells music could make iTunes slow to a crawl. A big-box retailer

could muscle out small guys by paying to have its site more

accessible. Firms that use one company for Net access but another for

online conferencing could witness speed disintegrate. Most disturbing

is the threat to free speech. While ISPs maintain that they won't

tinker with content, it may be hard to resist. Time Warner recently

purged a mass e-mail critical of AOL, and a major Canadian Internet

company prevented customers from visiting the site of its employee

union. That's like a paperboy ripping out pages of a newspaper.

 

As telecoms merge and concentrate power, fewer companies will control

access to the Internet. They are certainly entitled to make money.

However, they want to move beyond charging rs and start

charging Web sites simply for being online. Absent a neutrality

standard, a few big companies could skew Net access beyond recognition.

 

Some of this can be so complex, especially for those not born in the

computer age, that it can be difficult to wade through. But we all

understand that competition is good. If America is entering the era of

Internet regulation, it would be advisable if Congress erred on the

side of competition and passed " network neutrality. " Go ahead and

Google it.

 

Reprinted with permission, The Peoria (Ill.) Journal Star.

 

 

 

 

 

http://BuzzardsRoost.aimoo.com

http://www.GranniesAgainstGeorge.us