« Dave Winer on Pulver TV | Main | Fall 2006 VON Conference Update: »
July 07, 2006
Here's One for the Net Neutrality Irony Files - "Do as we say, not as we do"
The US House of Representatives will not support Net Neutrality, but a congressional subcommittee passed, by acclamation, a bill that would essentially require Net Neutrality of other countries and companies abroad. Maybe, if this bill were to impose the same obligations on the US and US-based companies that Congress would impose on other nations and foreign companies, the bill could fill our domestic Net Neutrality needs. It is good to see that Congress recognizes the need to maintain the integrity of the open Internet - at least abroad, where liberty (not to mention American hegemony, corporate influence and market reach) compel it.
News.com: Perspective: Let global online freedom ring?
A commentary on the Global Online Freedom Act of 2006 (HR 4780), a bill "to promote freedom of expression on the Internet, to protect United States business from coercion to participate in repression by authoritarian foreign governments, and for other purposes." The bill provides the following statement of policy for the United States to: "Promote the ability of all to access and contribute information, ideasand knowledge via the Internet, and to advance the right to receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers as a fundamental component of United States foreign policy"; "Use all instruments of United States influence, including diplomacy, trade policy and export control, to support, promote and strengthen principles, practices and values that promote the free flow of information"; and "Prohibit any United States business from cooperating with officials of Internet-restricting countries in effecting political censorship of online content." The bill proposes a process whereby the President would designate certain foreign countries as "Internet-restricting" regions that are "directly or indirectly responsible for a systematic pattern of substantial restrictions on Internet freedom during the preceding one-year period."
***
I think it is important to give the issue a little context. As we Americans celebrated our independence this week, the North Koreans tried to challenge our independence by testing missiles in order to gain the capability to launch a nuclear strike at the U.S. Our first line of defense consists of the 30,000 U.S. troops stationed on the ground in South Korea. But we had an IP Communications near miss last week that was dodged at just the last minute. Officials decided to temporarily lift the decision to block VoIP which would have blocked our troops stationed in South Korea from communicating. Donald Rumsfeld says it took him just about a minute to learn of the Korean launch tests. But imagine what would have happened if the communications that our troops rely upon for much of their communication had been blocked just days earlier. As the President and the Senate contemplate the message we send in response to North Korean missile test, we also need to ponder the response we send to the still pending decision to block VoIP services and block our troops ability to communicate. It should come as no surprise that when the US Senate spoke last week on Net Neutrality, they launched a powerful message heard by Internet users and providers around the globe (nearly as powerful a message as Kim Jong Il's missile launch) that it is OK to block Internet freedom, VoIP, and our troops ability to call home. There is still an opportunity for Senator Stevens and those on the Commerce Committee to speak out and send their own message to be heard round the globe that VoIP blocking and extraction of tolls on the Internet puts our national security at risk and can never be tolerated under any circumstances.
Tags: Congress, Net Neutrality, Jeff Pulver
(c) 2006 Jeff Pulver. All Rights Reserved.
(This blog posting is copyright protected by Jeff Pulver. Portions of this blog posting may be quoted or abstracted if attributed.)
Share this post:
Digg |
del.icio.us |
Reddit |
Newsvine |
Google Bookmark |
Yahoo MyWeb |
StumbleUpon
Posted by jeff on July 7, 2006 06:40 AM | Permalink
Additional resources: Watch PrimeTime TV Shows | Watch the Jeff Pulver Show | Jeff's Qik Videos
Comments
OK...if that is what you think net neutrality is, why don't you demand HR 4780 be applied to the US? The Markey amendment went much, much further in its regulations.
If less restrictive regulations ensure net neutrality in your view, why support more restrictive ones?
Posted by: MnZ at July 7, 2006 05:10 PM