Save The Internet

[Nathan Bedford Forrest 0]

Of special concern to our American residents. [i hope you've all heard of this anyway, but if you haven't, here we go]

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Quote[/b] ]

What is this about?

This is about Internet freedom. "Network Neutrality" -- the First Amendment of the Internet -- ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites.

But Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are spending millions of dollars lobbying Congress to gut Net Neutrality. If Congress doesn't take action now to implement meaningful network neutrality provisions, the future of the Internet is at risk.

What is network neutrality?

Network Neutrality — or "Net Neutrality" for short — is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet.

Net Neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run the applications and devices of their choice. With Net Neutrality, the network's only job is to move data — not choose which data to privilege with higher quality service.

Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It's why the Internet has become an unrivaled environment for open communications, civic involvement and free speech.

Who wants to get rid of Net Neutrality?

The nation's largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services — or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls — and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

What's at stake?

Decisions being made now will shape the future of the Internet for a generation. Before long, all media — TV, phone and the Web — will come to your home via the same broadband connection. The dispute over Net Neutrality is about who'll control access to new and emerging technologies.

On the Internet, consumers are in ultimate control — deciding between content, applications and services available anywhere, no matter who owns the network. There's no middleman. But without Net Neutrality, the Internet will look more like cable TV. Network owners will decide which channels, content and applications are available; consumers will have to choose from their menu.

The Internet has always been driven by innovation. Web sites and services succeeded or failed on their own merit. Without Net Neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of users will be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is whether we can choose the content and services we want, or whether the broadband barons will choose for us.

Very worrying :S

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Of special concern to our American residents. [i hope you've all heard of this anyway, but if you haven't, here we go]

http://www.savetheinternet.com/

Quote[/b] ]

What is this about?

This is about Internet freedom. "Network Neutrality" -- the First Amendment of the Internet -- ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites.

Very worrying :S

"The land of the free"

It's not required to quote the whole thing to simply make a short "comedy" comment - Placebo

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Freedom is for Iraq and Afghanistan, not the US itself

...

[Garcia 0]

Indeed, USA are cutting quite a lot down on the freedom for them to be the land of the free...

[Nathan Bedford Forrest 0]

lol :P Yep. Although the list of pro-net neutrality folks is fairly interesting.

[dmakatra 1]

The US has always been the land of the free. Free for corporations that is, not the people.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Maybe freedome is simply too expensive for their government...

I allways found the idea of creating a liberal country using control amusing.... (and scary)

[Nathan Bedford Forrest 0]

"Let's force democracy on these people"

That's another good one :P

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Oh damn now I remember, I read about this some time ago. But I thought it was China, not the USA

[klavan 0]

USA likes to export democracy very much........Because they don't know what doing with it.

Klavan

[theavonlady 2]

Attention Europe, check your inboxes:

Quote[/b] ]Idea for Electronic Message Tax Prompts Swift Outcry in Europe

By THOMAS CRAMPTON, International Herald Tribune

Published: June 12, 2006

PARIS, June 11 — A French member of the European Parliament, Alain Lamassoure, recently uttered the dreaded T-word — taxes — in connection with e-mail and mobile phone text messages, and in so doing earned the wrath of the Internet generation.

No matter how remote the possibility may be — or how useful such taxes might be in financing the European Union budget — the mere mention of taxing messages was enough to ignite the blogosphere and industry lobbying groups.

Mr. Lamassoure raised the option of a Europewide tax on e-mail and text messages last month in a working group on ways to finance the European Union's rising costs. As indignant missives filled the message board on Mr. Lamassoure's Web site, he distanced himself from the proposal, saying he had mentioned the idea only as a topic for discussion, not as something he supported.

Any new tax could not move ahead without approval from all of the European Union's 25 national Parliaments, and a message tax in particular is not even at the stage of a formal proposal. Still, some politicians and technology experts say the debate could serve to highlight imbalances between casual users and Internet hogs.

West Europeans spent a total of about 15 billion euros, or $19 billion, sending 157 billion phone text messages in 2005, according to Thomas Husson, a Paris-based mobile phone analyst at Jupiter Research. International Data Corporation has estimated that the number of daily e-mails sent in 2006 — including the 40 percent that are spam — will exceed 60 billion a day worldwide, up from 31 billion in 2002.

Text messages in Europe range from about 0.10 euro to 0.15 euro each when charged individually; a set number of texts is also sometimes part of a monthly subscription. At that price, Mr. Lamassoure said, there is ample room to lower consumer prices and impose a tax of 0.01 euro a message.

E-mail messages — which are not currently counted on a per-unit basis like mobile phone text messages — would initially be more difficult to measure for taxation, Mr. Lamassoure said.

Mr. Lamassoure said he had learned that reaction from Internet users could be swift and harsh. "I appreciate their concern," he said, "but it is absurd to say that my ideas will kill the Internet."

Phone companies and Internet service providers, the companies that would be most affected by the proposed taxes, have reacted harshly as well.

"Taxation of e-mails or Internet flies in the face of principles the E.U. has been trying to support," said Richard Nash, secretary general of the European Internet Service Providers Association in Brussels, in reference to efforts by Europe to encourage the growth of technology. "This is one of the more bizarre initiatives, and it is unlikely to increase the popularity of the European Union if it succeeds."

Yet some in the technology industry say Internet costs are no longer divided equitably among users. Heavy users typically pay the same monthly price as light ones.

"The current system of payments for the Internet made sense when it all started, but the incentives are getting more and more misaligned," said Esther Dyson, a technology consultant.

Ms. Dyson said, for example, that users who consumed more network resources through downloading video should pay more than users who just viewed a few Web sites each day. For e-mail, Ms. Dyson advocates a system in which senders would pay on a graded scale to be certain their messages are delivered. Friends would not pay to send an e-mail, for example, but those who did not know the recipient, like companies sending promotional mail, would pay.

The result, Ms. Dyson said, would be to cut down on spam and make those who send unwanted e-mails bear the cost. "As it stands, the unfortunate recipients of spam pay to receive and store unwanted e-mails," she said. "It only makes sense to have those sending spam pay."

This concept provoked considerable debate in February, when AOL and Yahoo said they had signed up with Goodmail, a Silicon Valley company that charges companies for sending bulk messages that are guaranteed to arrive in users' mailboxes. AOL and Yahoo have been guaranteeing delivery of Goodmail-sponsored messages since May.

"People have become very comfortable with e-mail being a free medium, so there was some surprise that companies would pay to send e-mails," said Richard Gingras, chief executive of Goodmail. "The difference is that consumers view our e-mail as more certain."

[deanosbeano 0]

Quote[/b] ], Ms. Dyson advocates a system in which senders would pay on a graded scale to be certain their messages are delivered. Friends would not pay to send an e-mail, for example, but those who did not know the recipient, like companies sending promotional mail, would pay.

makes good sense to me.

Quote[/b] ]Lamassoure, a member of Jacques Chirac's UMP party, is proposing to add a tax of about 1.5 cents on text or SMS messages and a 0.00001 cent levy on every e-mail sent.

plus

we have been taxed for years , its called VAT and charged at

17.5%.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

@the Idea for Electronic Message Tax

There sure is a lot of idiots around

[blackdog~ 0]

It's nice to see so many non-Americans complaining about the freedoms that those of us who actually are Americans have.

Oh, and the internet only needs to be saved from MySpace. If you eliminate MySpace, all the internet's problems will vanish along with it.

[Colossus 2]

Attention Europe, check your inboxes:

Quote[/b] ]Idea for Electronic Message Tax Prompts Swift Outcry in Europe

By THOMAS CRAMPTON, International Herald Tribune

Published: June 12, 2006

PARIS, June 11 — A French member of the European Parliament, Alain Lamassoure, recently uttered the dreaded T-word — taxes — in connection with e-mail and mobile phone text messages, and in so doing earned the wrath of the Internet generation.

Quote[/b] ]"I insist that these ideas are not on the table for our European work and I have no intention of putting them on the table.

Internet users who felt affected by the press coverage can be reassured."

Vnunet.com

[EiZei 0]

At least there will be no-one lobbying for e-mail tax. Just imagine what damage your average spammer worm would do.

And yeah, bashing the US regarding this issue is pretty stupid considering how badly our own goverments are screwing us over internet issues (data retention anyone?).

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

At least there will be no-one lobbying for e-mail tax. Just imagine what damage your average spammer worm would do.

And yeah, bashing the US regarding this issue is pretty stupid considering how badly our own goverments are screwing us over internet issues (data retention anyone?).

lol, yea.

If you get a e-mail worm... Instead of ruining your computer, you would simply get a bill of 10.000€ simply for spamming various e-mails.

I pay for my domain, and therefor server. Why should I pay for something im allready paying for

Atleast it would never be a reality.

[Mr_Tea 0]

Haha, taxes an e-mail and sms.

They wouldn`t make much money of me.

The idea is totaly stupid.

[vektorboson 8]

The idea of E-Mail tax is not only stupid in a community way - it's also stupid in a technical way...

They seem to forget, that there many more means of communication in the internet world. Take Private Messages in the Forums; take ICQ and others, take chat-rooms, take VOIP.

E-Mail is getting rendered useless through Spam anyway, and if they would really want to tax E-Mail, someone would invent a new communication system.

Btw. politicians would have lots of problems defining what E-Mail is anyway... Everything that is delivered and accessed by POP3, SMTP and IMAP ?

That's just stupid and ignorant...

[Guest Ti0n3r]

They EU should tax knowledge. Everytime you learn something new you'll have to pay $1.

[h - 169]

I'm sure they will eventually try that too...

Or how about taxing every breath you take (no pun intended, sort of..)?

Everybody visiting the EU area would need to pay 0,0001€ for inhaling the EU air and 0,005€ for exhaling.

Exhaling would of course be more expensive because you pollute the air by doing that.

For people living in the EU it would be much more expensive because the use of air, and therefore polluting it, is constant.

In that case inhaling would cost 0,005€ and exhaling 0,01€..

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Well, they allready have costs on the use of solar panels. Which is sort of the same.