CEOs from Google and Verizon Communications on Monday announced a proposal to policymakers for keeping the Internet open.
The companies jointly suggested a legislative framework for consideration by lawmakers. The major breakthrough in the proposal is an agreement that the nondiscrimination clause that the Federal Communications Commission has proposed as part of its regulatory efforts would be enforceable.
“We agree that, in addition to these existing principles, there should be a new, enforceable prohibition against discriminatory practices,” the proposal states. (See entire document embedded below.) “This means that for the first time, wireline broadband providers would not be able to discriminate against or prioritize lawful Internet content, applications, or services in a way that causes harm to users or competition.”
Wat?
Does not protect wireless under an enforceable net neutrality framework, or the future of the internet. Just hard wire, which is rapidly becoming obsolete. Huffington Post … http://huff.to/9tfnUO
Didn’t Verizon try to deny this happened a couple of days ago?
Didn’t the NYT claim that the two of them were attempting the opposite a few days back? More disinfo and FUD I guess.
#2–sargasso==”Google goes Evil.” === excellent post focusing on the “real” story. This consumer benefit takeover by Big Media will occur eventually. Its what Big Business does. Google can be assumed to ultimately work in what it views its own interests.
The deeper story, again being diverted/hid, is the CORRUPTION at the FCC being bought off by Big Business.
Nothing New. Sadly.
Story does not mention what the FCC proposal for “nondiscrimination clause that the Federal Communications Commission has proposed as part of its regulatory efforts would be enforceable.” contains in hundreds of pages.
Yes, nondiscrimination is there and enforceable … for “legal content, legal devices, legal protocols,…”. That FCC proposal is equivalent of Chinese ‘Net laws. What is “legal” is to be determined later, at discretion of non-elected paper pushers appointed by administration in power. It would benefit BigGovt under some administrations and BigBusiness under other. But never, ever the end users.
Real NetNeutrality must be in form of banning Govt. and Businesses any meddling in Internet traffic not in regulating it.
Google = Evil. Has been for a long time. Nice friendly colored logo though.
You people are surprised?
[violation of posting guidelines]
Me too!
Avast Anti Virus keeps reporting s threat has been detected in the object:
offers.mevio.com/assets/budget_logo.gif
Way to go guys! Keep pissing off your readers like “Pissed Off.”
[Total bullshit! Both comments were by the same guy. – ed.]
what is this antvirus you keep mentioning?
linux user for 6 plus years and loving it..
I have no problem with my email taking a few unnoticeable extra seconds to arrive if it means clearer VOIP or non-stuttering video. Maybe they should implement an Ad-Aware type network filter that slows down irrelevant video ads that nobody looks at anyway, yet take up gobs of bandwidth. Maybe they should throttle certain protocols (like P2P and FTP) according to network load, so time-critical services actually work. Personally, I couldn’t care less if it takes you an extra hour to pirate a movie if it means that my Netflix streams uninterrupted. Heck, implement larger buffers for You-Tube so it takes a few extra seconds to start your crappy cat video watching if it means that VOIP and video chat is better.
I might be wrong but this isn’t net neutrality, but the exact opposite.
They want to prioritized Google’s traffic on Verizon’s network, right? How is that net neutrality, if Google is getting special treatment, but the others aren’t?
WTF is wrong with #9?
Images can’t be infected with viruses.
Frag,
Its the java/Adobe used to display it..the Site here displays PART of it, but to SHOW it it needs a ??? program..AVIS prog is infected.