FTC Abandons Net Neutrality

[MatrixEscape]

he Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has decided to abandon net neutrality and allow telecoms companies to charge websites for access.

The FTC said in a report that, despite popular support for net neutrality, it was minded to let the market sort out the issue.

This means that the organisation will not stand in the way of companies using differential pricing to make sure that some websites can be viewed more quickly than others. The report also counsels against net neutrality legislation.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/06/ftc-abandons-net-neutrality/


Noam Chomsky on Microsoft and Corporate Control of the Internet

snip ...

In the United States, around the turn of the century, through radical judicial activism, the courts changed crucially the concept of the corporation. They simply redefined them so as to grant not only privileges to property owners, but also to what legal historians call "collectivist legal entities." Corporations, in other words, were granted early in this century the rights of persons, in fact, immortal persons, and persons of immense power. And they were freed from the need to restrict themselves to the grants of state charters.

That's a very big change. It's essentially establishing major private tyrannies, which are furthermore unaccountable, because they're protected by First Amendment rights, freedom from search and seizure and so on, so you can't figure out what they're doing.

Snip ...

It's a form of tyranny. But, that's the whole point of corporatization -- to try to remove the public from making decisions over their own fate, to limit the public arena, to control opinion, to make sure that the fundamental decisions that determine how the world is going to be run -- which includes production, commerce, distribution, thought, social policy, foreign policy, everything -- are not in the hands of the public, but rather in the hands of highly concentrated private power. In effect, tyranny unaccountable to the public. And there are various modalities for doing this. One is to have the communication system, the so-called information system, in the hands of a network of, fewer or more doesn't matter that much, private tyrannies.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=1408

I am wondering if larger numbers of people here who think that they are going to find real and legitimate solutions in the media and lobby-influenced arena of game show politics, can see behind the corporate veil yet?

[msongs]

1. will democrats will DO something as they rake in $$ from telecom giants? suuuuure they will nt

[R_M]

2. The Internet is the Democratic Party's talk radio.

This is why they want to regulate the Internet. They don't want anyone who is not a right wing kook to have a voice.

[Taverner]

3. Unfortunately yes

They want to shut us down

[MatrixEscape]

4. I think, upon deeper investigation ...

you might find that the problem is much deeper and more pervasive than the imaginary line between two political parties.

They function like interdependent polar opposites across a spectrum of moneyed influence that represent the literal tip of the iceberg of plutocracy/oligarchy with an autocratic peak that appears to be tyrannical and acting autonomously in the public eye, at least. Rogue Presidents and their Administrations are a great strategy and seem to work well as a diversionary tactic in the 21st Century, it seems. We all tend to fall for that based on our assumptions and misinformation we bark and howl at the titular straw man who would be King. We take comfort in having a deserving icon, (no matter how angry our invectives) and wear the blinders that perspective gives us without a nod or a wink. Meanwhile, the corporate Huns rape and pillage and party on, though they do keep it toned down, so we don't call Klatuu and Gort for some Cosmic policing.

I think of Abbot and Costello, or Laurel and Hardy, here. Both teams had contrasting personalities that worked well for comedy and were very entertaining in an enduring way. Yet, individually, those comedians really lacked luster or impact.

The only people or voice that is shut down, (or muffled by the the background white noise of a flood of information) is that of We The People and the common person -- more so now that they move to solve that pesky, "Internet" problem.

Politicians, (of the kind the system will tolerate and allow) have a secured voice and an projected image and, with enough money and backing, they get plenty of attention, regardless of their affiliation to the Tweedledee or Tweedledum party. Following the money and carefully considering their alliances, caste, and actual impact or effect on vital issues is most important now, more than ever.

The status quo has ruled and will continue to do so in much more officiant and restrictive ways if there are no corresponding checks and balances provided on the individual and community-oriented level. That would take sacrifice of an appropriate kind, (as opposed to the kind we are asked to make) bravery, and consistent awareness, action, even over generations.

[jimshoes]

5. Perhaps it's time to bust

the monopolies again. What's it going to take. This is what is bad about lack of competition.