I agree. In particular wrt point two, I think it would be good to remind
the authors of what we said in the 2010 November ACTA resolution, and
repeated ever after, that we reminded
"the Commission that it is precluded by the 2003
Inter-Institutional Agreement from supporting self- and
co-regulatory mechanisms where fundamental rights, such as the right
to freedom of expression, are at stake".
http://euwiki.org/w/index.php?title=ACTA%2FNovember_diffs&diff=15711&oldid=15710
You're simply not allowed to abandon fundamental rights to be upheld by
voluntary commercial agreements. Kind of Rule of Law basics.
There were a couple of traffic managements amendments floating around in
the Telecoms Package, but they never took off, maybe you like AM2 and
AM7 (from a non-supported AM-package)?
http://euwiki.org/2002/22/EC/THIRD_READING_TARGET/Amendments
Best regards.
//Erik
On 12/07/12 18:30, James Losey wrote:
> We're both looking at the same report. While the report does not some
> problems transparency, I didn't see it provide other concrete solutions.
>
> Recommendations for Government and the European Commission (from p. 8/51)
>
> 1 Need to consider ways to expand the existing
> regulatory framework by the principles of nonblocking and
> non-discrimination to ensure the
> internet remains an open platform
> 2 If a self-regulatory or co-regulatory solution is a
> preferred option, it must have a robust, builtin compliance and
> enforcement mechanism
> alongside independent verification, oversight
> and sanctions, complaint handling and redress
>
>
> The report aslo recommends OfCom work on methods to compare
> traffic management between services, rather than work on restricting
> types of traffic management that will be harmful to the open internet.
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Linus Nordberg <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> Vilken rapport syftar du på?
>
> Jag har inte läst hela rapporten från Consumer Focus, men får
> intrycket
> att den tvärtom är kritisk till de som påstår att transparens skulle
> lösa alla problem
>
>
> The findings of the research showed that
> increased transparency for traffic management
> alone is unlikely to safeguard effectively the
> principle of the open internet and prevent
> discriminatory restrictions online.
> (s. 5)
>
>
> Yet policy makers believe
> increased transparency about the term
> can safeguard the principle of the open
> internet, drive switching and enhance
> competition in the broadband market.
> (s. 4)
>
>
> Yet these efforts to improve transparency raise
> concerns. Specifically, there are questions over:
> ●● consumers’ ability to understand and determine
> the extent of traffic management practices, and
> their impact on their internet access
> ●● which part of the online chain is at fault
> (for example, broadband provider, content
> provider or end users’ equipment and
> software)
> ●● what is genuine traffic management and what
> is unfair practice
> (s. 5)
>
>
>
> James Losey <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote
> Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:44:20 +0100:
>
> | A major problem with this report is the suggestion that
> transparency is a
> | sufficient approach to addressing concerns over network management.
> |
> | J
> |
> | On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Patrik Wallström
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> |
> | > Brittiska Consumer Focus har sammanställt en undersökning av
> konsumenters
> | > uppfattning av operatörers traffic management. Åtminstone
> summeringen är
> | > intressant att läsa för den oinsatte:
> | >
> | >
> | >
>
> http://www.consumerfocus.org.uk/files/2012/11/Lost-on-the-broadband-super-highway.pdf>
> | > "Overall, our research found that consumers
> | > have very limited awareness of the term ‘traffic
> | > management’. Consumers do not understand the
> | > term, find it difficult to access relevant information
> | > and, when they do, struggle to understand it.
> | > The research indicated that without explaining
> | > traffic management and its impact on the user
> | > experience, any information provided is not
> | > meaningful to consumers and is therefore not
> | > taken into consideration. The research found no
> | > difference in perceived transparency between
> | > BSG and non-BSG signatories."
> | >
> | > ...
> | >
> | >
>
>
