"Second, well, of course all providers are happy to use Wikipedia (Zero) as a door opener to get the customer used to different treatment of data (which is a clear violation of net neutrality)."
Exactly this. Net neutrality means that the pipes are totally dumb, not favoring -any- service over any other in any way. Not Netflix, not Youtube, not Amazon, and not Wikimedia. Anything that says "Data from this source will be (treated|priced) differently than data from another source" is a violation of net neutrality. Period. That does not mean the definition is inadequate. The definition is there to ensure the pipe -stays dumb-, and that preferential treatment is never accepted. Todd On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Jens Best <jens.b...@wikimedia.de> wrote: > 2-3 short remarks to your arguments, Marc: > > First it's kind of interesting that net neutrality which is very clear in > its definition becomes "overly simplistic and unrealistic" and "inadequate" > the moment it collides with an organisations own interests. Isn't that > quite an coincidence? ;) > > Principles of a free and open web are to be acknowledged by Websites with > good causes the same way they are to be respected by Websites with more > commercial causes. Wikipedia Zero is a brand product, in its last > consequence it belongs to the WMF, it is not public good. > > Second, well, of course all providers are happy to use Wikipedia (Zero) as > a door opener to get the customer used to different treatment of data > (which is a clear violation of net neutrality). Why? Well, they all know, > that they are selling "dump pipes" and the "dump pipe"-Business (incl. > mobile) needs to develop new way of making money out of it. > So therefore, they have to establish a world where different data can be > treated differently (money-wise) - and here Wikipedia comes in well-handy. > It's an established brand with maximum of "positive karma", run by the > people, for the people - it's a wet dream for every marketing executive of > any provider. Using Wikipedia Zero isn't primarily for making a different > against the competition, but to get people used to unequal handling of > data. > > Therefore Wikipedia Zero, apart from all the good intentions it was started > with, was to reconsidered. Net neutrality is under attack globally. Every > country where net neutrality will be already diminished in an early state > of broad (mobile) use is lost for a really free and open web. This > shouldn't be something supported by the movement. Of course, we have to > think about good and practical ideas how to spread free knowledge, but we > shouldn't put our cause in collision with a much more deeper principle of a > web where the rules of the market aren't superior to everything. > > > best regards > > Jens Best > > 2014-11-30 18:14 GMT+01:00 Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org>: > > > On 11/30/2014 11:08 AM, MZMcBride wrote: > > > I think it's difficult to argue that Wikipedia Zero is > > > not, at least in the strictest sense, a violation of net neutrality. > > > > That's perfectly true, but because the traditional definition of "net > > neutrality" (and, by extension, the definition of what violates it) is > > by and large overly simplistic and unrealistic. > > > > Factors that should be taken into account but aren't include the nature > > of the preferential treatment, its exclusivity (or lack thereof), > > conflict of interest, and competitive landscape. > > > > One would be hard pressed to argue that giving non-exclusive free access > > to a public good to a population in need is harmful (beyond slippery > > slope arguments), just as it would be clear that a media conglomerate > > giving exclusive free access from an ISP they own to their media is > > clearly wrong. > > > > What makes Wikipedia Zero clearly okay, IMO, is that *any* provider is > > welcome to approach us and set it up; and we require nor demand any sort > > of exclusivity. Whether they chose to do so is obviously driven by > > their business objectives (publicity, competitive advantage, and so on) > > -- but their business decision affects them and only them. They cannot > > hinder their competition from doing so or not as they will, nor gain an > > advantage they cannot get as well. > > > > So it's clearly neutral in the "equally available" sense of the term. > > And it remains neutral in the "competition" sense of the term since they > > are welcome to zero-rate any other service they wish alongside ours. > > > > And, finally, it's also neutral from a conflict-of-interest point of > > view. The Wikimedia Foundation (and movement, for that matter) has no > > stake in the competitive landscape of telco providers, and and they have > > no interest in Free online encyclopedias. They gain nothing by favoring > > us over other educational resources, and we favor no provider over > > another (albeit our immediate efforts do seem directed mostly at those > > where the population would benefit the most - which is reasonable). > > > > So yeah, this is probably not "net neutrality" as it is generally > > defined - but I would argue it means that the definition itself is > > inadequate. > > > > -- Marc > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > < > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>