Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["christian stalberg" <cstalberg AT web-analysts.net>]

-----Original Message-----
From: moderator AT PORTSIDE.ORG [mailto:moderator AT PORTSIDE.ORG] 
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 12:48 AM
To: PORTSIDE AT LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG
Subject: Bits & Bytes Special Edition: Broadband

Bits & Bytes Special Edition: Broadband

Nan Rubin

Special to Portside

One of the biggest technology and economic policy issues of our day has been
getting a lot of press lately, because of a recent court ruling called the
`Comcast/Bit Torrent Decision.'

Comcast, America's largest internet service provider, was sued by a customer
in 2007 for `throttling' his service - that is, deliberately slowing it down
because he was downloading large video files. Comcast did not refute the
charge, but instead, challenged the legal basis of the FCC to regulate the
supplying of service in the first place.

After 3 years of knocking around, the D.C. Circuit Court agreed with
Comcast. This was a stunning and unexpected decision, which has called into
question two important and interrelated policies with far-reaching political
and economic impact -

*

Aggressive Federal Broadband Policy - Obama launched this critical
technology initiative in an effort to deploy fast internet service, to meet
the universal need (especially for rural and low-income communities) to have
access to high-speed broadband infrastructure.
Millions in stimulus funds are being allocated to roll this out across the
country.

*

Network Neutrality -This will either protect equal access to interactive
uses of the internet, or allow internet service providers (ISPs) like
Comcast to be the sole gatekeepers of the 2-way traffic on the broadband
high-speed channels (or `pipes'). The Comcast decision throws this debate
into sharp relief.

In light of this threat, an immediate broad-based grassroots campaign was
launched sending millions of messages to the FCC to assert its right to
regulate.
The FCC responded not by backing off as feared, but by signaling it will
reclassify broadband Internet access as a "Title II Universal Communications
Service" which is well-established as falling under FCC jurisdiction.

"By doing so, the FCC maintains its authority and reaffirms its commitment
to carry out the consumer protections, broadband subsidies, Universal
Service Fund reforms, competition policies, open Internet/net neutrality
protections, and plans to expand wireless access in the communities that
need it most that are detailed in the recently released broadband plan."

http://www.pitchengine.com/1m-grassroots-voices-propel-fcc-to-propose-new-op
en-internet-rules/62576/

There is a lot of analysis and commentary on these issues - here are a few
excerpts, with links to the complete articles. Stay tuned, as the lines
being drawn are shaping up as a battle that might well land in Congress. (PS
- Comcast was just voted by Consumerist as the Worst Company in America!)

http://consumerist.com/2010/04/congratulations-comcast-youre-the-worst-compa
ny-in-america.html

* * * * *

An introductory video, produced by Appalshop in Whitesburg KY

http://appalshop.org/channel/2010/dial-up-rocks.html

and another, from the Center for Media Justice in Oakland, CA.

http://centerformediajustice.org/2009/12/17/our-voice-in-our-language/

* * * * *

CWA: US broadband speeds 15 years behind South Korea, Slow like molasses in
winter

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/26/us_15_years_behind_south_korea/

By Gavin Clarke in San Francisco

Broadband is only inching forward in the US, with the country calculated to
be 15 years behind speed leader South Korea. It is also behind France,
Portugal, and Iceland.

That's according to research from the Communications Workers of America,
which said internet speed in the US increased by just 1.6Mbps between 2007
and 2009.

The union's report also found the slowest speeds in the Southern and Western
states of the US. Former governor Sarah Palin's Alaska has the slowest
connection speeds of 2.3Mbps, beating Idaho, Arkansas, South Carolina and
Mississippi in the race to the bottom.

CWA has set up a broadband advocacy site -- http://www.speedmatters.org/

* * * * 

Comcast decision threatens net neutrality, fairness to consumers D.C.
Circuit rejects FCC authority to regulate internet carriers' controls on
data

By Stephanie Young

Harvard Law Review

http://www.hlrecord.org/opinion/comcast-decision-threatens-net-neutrality-fa
irness-to-consumers-1.1373263

* * * * *

FCC: Comcast Decision Casts a Shadow On Broadband Plan

http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/07/fcc-comcast-decision-casts-a-shadow-on-broa
dband-plan/#ixzz0n5Ad7vu0

by Evelyn Rusli

The FCC acknowledged that the court's decision on the Comcast deal could
hamper their national broadband plan. General Counsel of the FCC, Austin
Schlick says that the court's ruling that the FCC does not have the
authority to enforce net neutrality was an "important ruling."

"It undermines the legal approach the FCC adopted in
2005 to fulfill its statutory duty of being the cop-on- the-beat for 21st
Century communications networks."

* * * * * 

Is it high noon for net neutrality at the FCC?

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/05/end-days-for-net-neutrality-
at-the-fcc.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

By Matthew Lasar

The net neutrality troops are up in arms over a Washington Post report
suggesting that the Federal Communications Commission wants to throw in the
towel, more or less, when it comes to regulating ISPs like Comcast. Sources
at the agency have told the Post's Cecilia Kang that FCC Chair Julius
Genachowski "wants to keep broadband services deregulated," presumably
standing pat following a DC Court decision striking down the agency's 2008
rebuke of Comcast for P2P throttling.

Genachowski "is leaning toward keeping in place the current regulatory
framework for broadband services but making some changes that would still
bolster the FCC's chances of overseeing some broadband policies,"
according to the article.

The report brought a quick and alarmed response from the reform group Free
Press. "We simply cannot believe that Julius Genachowski would consider
going down this path," declared Josh Silver. "It will undermine the FCC's
ability to protect consumers from price-gouging and invasions of privacy."

On the other hand, net neutrality foe Randolph May of the Free State
Foundation suddenly has admiring words for the FCC's Chair, comparing him to
frontier wagon master Seth Adams in the 1950s TV series Wagon Train.
Genachowski is facing a "Wagon Train moment," May suggests. "Presumably, his
scouts have considered potential perils and offered their assessments of
various options. But like the wagon master, in this instance the decision is
his."

But that's just one prospect. To help the agency summon its courage
regarding this vexing matter, three professors have written a letter to the
FCC outlining ways to regulate ISPs in the wake of the DC Circuit's rebuke
of the use of the Communications Act's Title I "ancillary authority"
provisions. They're Tim Wu of Columbia University, Susan Crawford of the
University of Michigan, and Marvin Ammori of the University of Nebraska (Wu
and Ammori have both been associated with Free Press). They urge the FCC to
apply Title II of the Act to ISPs' last-mile services.

* * * * * Obama FCC Expected to Abandon Net Neutrality, Universal Internet

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/obama-fcc-expected-to-aba_b_561418
.html

Josh Silver, Free Press

On Sunday, the Washington Post reported that the Federal Communications
Commission is expected to abandon its pledges to protect Net Neutrality and
to ensure universal, affordable broadband. The story cites anonymous
insiders confirming that FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is "leaning toward"
siding with the most powerful phone and cable lobbyists on a crucial
decision: whether the FCC will have any authority to protect an open
Internet and make it available to all.

It is a testament to the phone and cable industry's overwhelming influence
that they seem to have convinced the nation's communications agency to swear
off authority to protect Americans' right to open communications. But it is
stunning that Genachowski would even contemplate allowing it to stand, given
President Obama's repeated pledge to ensure fast, affordable, universal
Internet broadband for every American.

* * * * *

Why FCC Regulation of Broadband Matters to NYC Communities of Color

http://peoplesproductionhouse.org/programs/digital-expansion-initiative/122-
network-neutrality/539-why-fcc-regulation-of-broadband-matters-to-nyc-commun
ities-of-color

Written by Kristofer Ríos, People's Production House

As it stands, broadband service in New York is already limited, expensive,
and in most areas only offered by one service provider. The lack of choice
in Internet service providers in the Bronx, Brooklyn, and in Manhattan
already makes it very difficult for New Yorker's to afford decent broadband
service. Without regulation of broadband networks New Yorkers now face the
possibility of even more expensive Internet. This will only expand the
already wide divide between those who can afford Internet access and those
who can't.

More importantly, without regulation we lose Network Neutrality, the one
principle that ensures free exchange of content and open access to broadband
networks. Without Network Neutrality service providers are able to restrict
access based on how much you pay, block the content they disagree with, or
meter service based on usage.

Without regulation, all consumers are at risk of paying more for access and
content. But for communities of color, the situation is even more serious.
For too long have our voices been marginalized and drowned out by commercial
media. Now we risk losing the power and usefulness of digital media and the
Internet; tools that have lead to community empowerment and to a more
diverse media landscape.

* * * * *

Yes We Won't?

Submitted by amalia_deloney, Center for Media Justice and Steven Renderos,
Main Street Project

http://mag-net.org/content/yes-we-won%E2%80%99t

As Latinos, we understand the harm caused to our communities when we are
treated like second-class citizens, we need only look to Arizona.  Our
community recently witnessed Governor Jan Brewer (AZ), sign SB1070 into law.
You know, the one that establishes Juan Crow in Arizona by giving local law
enforcement carte blanche to question anyone they believe to be
undocumented.  We voiced our emphatic opposition to this law through
petitions, art, music and demonstrations.  All of these actions were
facilitated through the Internet.  The tools of an open net: web casting,
Twitter, online petitions, file-sharing, Instant Message and even basic
e-mail make it possible for millions of people in our community to have a
voice beyond their immediate surroundings.  This amplified voice through the
Internet is our new democracy, one that doesn't make the distinction between
"legal" and "illegal".  That's what is at stake for us in the fight for net
neutrality.

_____________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that
will help them to interpret the world and to change it.

Submit via email: moderator AT portside.org Submit via the Web:
portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives:
portside.org/archive