On 4/20/06, Jim Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know. If the Internet should be free, then why not food and water? > It's certainly more of a necessity! ;-)
Food and water are free. You just have the option to buy fuller featured versions (like McDonald's and Coca-Cola) :-) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > > Of Dana Spiegel > > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 5:08 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [nycwireless] Fwd: Congress is selling out the Internet > > > > > > Dear MoveOn member, > > > > Do you buy books online, use Google, or download to an Ipod? > > These activities, plus MoveOn's online organizing ability, > > will be hurt if Congress passes a radical law that gives > > giant corporations more control over the Internet. > > > > Internet providers like AT&T and Verizon are lobbying Congress hard > > to gut > > Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Net > > Neutrality prevents AT&T from choosing which websites open > > most easily for you > > based > > on which site pays AT&T more. Amazon.com doesn't have to > > outbid Barnes & Noble for the right to work more properly on > > your computer. > > > > If Net Neutrality is gutted, MoveOn either pays protection > > money to dominant Internet providers or risks that online > > activism tools don't > > work > > for members. Amazon and Google either pay protection money or > > risk that their websites process slowly on your computer. > > That why these high-tech pioneers are joining the fight to > > protect Network Neutrality [1]--and > > you > > can do your part today. > > > > The free and open Internet is under seige--can you sign this > > petition letting your member of Congress know you support > > preserving Network Neutrality? Click here: > > > > http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7355-3566631- > > h60jchVLX1e9.A7zdEdFew&t=4 > > > > Then, please forward this to 3 friends. Protecting the free > > and open Internet is fundamental--it affects everything. When > > you sign this petition, you'll be kept informed of the next > > steps we can take to keep the heat on Congress. Votes begin > > in a House committee next week. > > > > MoveOn has already seen what happens when the Internet's > > gatekeepers get too much control. Just last week, AOL blocked > > any email mentioning a coalition that MoveOn is a part of, > > which opposes AOL's proposed "email tax." [2] And last year, > > Canada's version of AT&T--Telus--blocked their Internet > > customers from visiting a website sympathetic to workers with > > whom Telus was negotiating [3]. > > > > Politicians don't think we are paying attention to this > > issue. Many of them take campaign checks from big telecom > > companies and are on the > > verge > > of selling out to people like AT&T's CEO, who openly says, > > "The internet can't be free." [4] > > > > Together, we can let Congress know we are paying attention. > > We can make sure they listen to our voices and the voices of > > people like Vint > > Cerf, a > > father of the Internet and Google's "Chief Internet > > Evangelist," who recently wrote this to Congress in support > > of preserving Network > > Neutrality: > > > > My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great > > damage to the > > Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits > > network > > operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of services > > and to > > potentially interfere with others would place broadband > > operators in > > control of online activity...Telephone companies cannot tell > > consumers > > who they can call; network operators should not dictate > > what people > > can do online [4]. > > > > The essence of the Internet is at risk--can you sign this petition > > letting > > your member of Congress know you support preserving Network > > Neutrality? Click here: > > > > http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7355-3566631- > > h60jchVLX1e9.A7zdEdFew&t=5 > > > > Please forward to 3 others who care about this issue. Thanks > > for all you do. > > > > --Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic > > Action > > team > > Thursday, April 20th, 2006 > > > > P.S. If Congress abandons Network Neutrality, who will be affected? > > > > * Advocacy groups like MoveOn--Political organizing could be > > slowed by a > > handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups > > to pay > > "protection money" for their websites and online features to work > > correctly. > > * Nonprofits--A charity's website could open at snail-speed, and > > online > > contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can't pay > > dominant > > Internet providers for access to "the fast lane" of Internet > > service. > > * Google users--Another search engine could pay dominant Internet > > providers like AT&T to guarantee the competing search > > engine opens > > faster than Google on your computer. > > * Innovators with the "next big idea"--Startups and entrepreneurs > > will > > be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay > > Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The > > little guy > > will be left in the "slow lane" with inferior Internet service, > > unable > > to compete. > > * Ipod listeners--A company like Comcast could slow access > > to iTunes, > > steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned. > > * Online purchasers--Companies could pay Internet providers to > > guarantee their online sales process faster than competitors > > with lower prices--distorting your choice as a consumer. > > * Small businesses and tele-commuters--When Internet companies > > like AT&T > > favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more > > affordable > > providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet > > phone calls, > > and software that connects your home computer to your office. > > * Parents and retirees--Your choices as a consumer could be > > controlled > > by your Internet provider, steering you to their > > preferred services > > for online banking, health care information, sending photos, > > planning > > vacations, etc. > > * Bloggers--Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio > > clips--silencing citizen journalists and putting more > > power in the > > hands of a few corporate-owned media outlets. > > > > To sign the petition to Congress supporting "network neutrality," > > click > > here: > > http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7355-3566631- > > h60jchVLX1e9.A7zdEdFew&t=6 > > > > P.P.S. This excerpt from the New Yorker really sums up this > > issue well. > > > > In the first decades of the twentieth century, as a national > > telephone > > network spread across the United States, A.T. & T. adopted a > > policy of > > "tiered access" for businesses. Companies that paid an > > extra fee > > got > > better service: their customers' calls went through > > immediately, > > were > > rarely disconnected, and sounded crystal-clear. Those > > who didn't > > pony > > up had a harder time making calls out, and people calling them > > sometimes got an "all circuits busy" response. Over > > time, customers > > gravitated toward the higher-tier companies and away > > from the ones > > that were more difficult to reach. In effect, A.T. & T.'s policy > > turned it into a corporate kingmaker. > > > > If you've never heard about this bit of business > > history, there's a > > good reason: it never happened. Instead, A.T. & T. had to abide > > by a > > "common carriage" rule: it provided the same quality of > > service to > > all, and could not favor one customer over another. But, while > > "tiered > > access" never influenced the spread of the telephone > > network, it is > > becoming a major issue in the evolution of the Internet. > > > > Until recently, companies that provided Internet access > > followed a > > de-facto commoncarriage rule, usually called "network > > neutrality," > > which meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network > > neutrality > > was considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that > > Michael > > Powell, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one > > of the > > basic rules of "Internet freedom." In the past few > > months, though, > > companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to > > scuttle it. > > In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers > > could receive > > what BellSouth recently called "special treatment," and > > those that > > don't could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth > > customers may > > find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than > > YouTube.com, and > > that > > the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run more smoothly. Tiered > > access will turn the providers into Internet gatekeepers [4]. > > > > Sources: > > > > 1. "Telecommunication Policy Proposed by Congress Must Recognize > > Internet > > Neutrality," Letter to Senate leaders, March 23, 2006 > > http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1653 > > > > 2. "AOL Blocks Critics' E-Mails," Los Angeles Times, April > > 14, 2006 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1649 > > > > 3. "B.C. Civil Liberties Association Denounces Blocking of > > Website by Telus," British Columbia Civil Liberties > > Association Statement, July 27, 2005 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1650 > > > > 4. "At SBC, It's All About 'Scale and Scope," BusinessWeek, > > November 7, 2002 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1648 > > > > 5. "Net Losses," New Yorker, March 20, 2006 > > http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1646 > > > > 6. "Don't undercut Internet access," San Francisco Chronicle > > editorial, April 17, 2006 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1645 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dana Spiegel > > Executive Director > > NYCwireless > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.NYCwireless.net > > +1 917 402 0422 > > > > Read the Wireless Community blog: http://www.wirelesscommunity.info > > > > > > -- > > NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ > > Un/Subscribe: > > http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ > > Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/ > > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 268.4.4/320 - Release > > Date: 4/20/2006 > > > > > > -- > NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ > Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ > Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/ > -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
