EUDataProtectionSupervisor: No privacy without net neutrality “78. Inspection techniques based on traffic data and inspection of IP payloads, i.e. the content of communications, may reveal users’ Internet activity: websites visited and activities on those sites, use of P2P applications, files downloaded, emails sent and received, from whom, on what subject and in which terms, etc. ISPs may want to use this information to prioritise some communications, such as video on demand, over others. They may want to use it to identify viruses, or to build profiles in order to serve behavioural advertising. These actions interfere with the right to the confidentiality of communications.” http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2011/11-10-07_Net_neutrality_EN.pdf

[Via http://www.laquadrature.net/en/no-privacy-without-net-neutrality ]

Share/Bookmark

Test your internet connection and perform diagnostics

Network diagnostic tool
Test your connection speed and receive sophisticated diagnosis of problems limiting speed.

Glasnost test
Test whether certain applications or traffic are being blocked or throttled on your broadband connection.

Network path & application diagnostics
Diagnose common problems that impact last-mile broadband networks.

Bandwidth test
See how much bandwidth your connection provides

Traffic shaping test
Determine whether an ISP is performing traffic shaping.

Mobile traffic test
Detect whether your mobile broadband provider is performing application or service specific differentiation.

http://www.measurementlab.net/measurement-lab-tools

Share/Bookmark

What is your Position on Internet Freedom Act?

A BILL
To prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from further regulating the Internet.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Internet Freedom Act’.
SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY OF THE FCC.

(a) In General- The Federal Communications Commission shall not propose, promulgate, or issue any regulations regarding the Internet or IP-enabled services.
(b) Exception- The limitation set forth in this section shall not apply to any regulations that the Commission determines necessary–
(1) to prevent damage to the national security of the United States;
(2) to ensure the public safety; or
(3) to assist or facilitate any actions taken by a Federal or State law enforcement agency.
(c) Rule of Construction- Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede, repeal, or negate any regulations regarding the Internet or IP-enabled services that were in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, including any regulations established pursuant to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (47 U.S.C. 1001 note).
(d) General Principles- Congress finds that–
(1) the Internet and all IP-enabled services are services affecting interstate commerce; and
(2) such services are not subject to the jurisdiction of any State or municipal locality.
END

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h96:

Present status: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-96

US citizens: pls support/oppose: https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/hr96

Share/Bookmark

The last thing we need, in my view, is the FCC serving as Internet traffic controller, and potentially running roughshod over local broadcasters who have been serving their communities with free content for decades.

At the end of the last Congress, some members of Congress sought a compromise on net neutrality that would give Washington temporary control of the Internet while we sort this all out.

As far as I’m concerned, there is no compromise or middle ground when it comes to protecting our most basic freedoms.

So our new majority in the House is committed to using every tool at our disposal to fight a government takeover of the Internet…

We’re also going to do what we can to see that no taxpayer dollars are used to fund these net neutrality rules.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/republicans-no-compromise-possible-on-net-neutrality.ars

Share/Bookmark

The Next Net: “The moment the “net neutrality” debate began was the moment the net neutrality debate was lost. For once the fate of a network – its fairness, its rule set, its capacity for social or economic reformation – is in the hands of policymakers and the corporations funding them – that network loses its power to effect change. The mere fact that lawmakers and lobbyists now control the future of the net should be enough to turn us elsewhere. [...]” http://www.shareable.net/blog/the-next-net

Share/Bookmark

Obama’s Commitment to Net Neutrality and an Open Internet: “President Obama is strongly committed to net neutrality in order to keep an open Internet that fosters investment, innovation, consumer choice, and free speech. The announced action by FCC Chairman Genachowski, building on the work of Chairman Waxman’s collaborative effort to craft legislation in this area, advances this important policy priority. [...]” http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/12/01/president-obamas-strong-commitment-net-neutrality-and-open-internet

The announced action by FCC Chairman Genachowski: “[...] Today, the FCC proposed basic rules of the road http://www.openinternet.gov/speech-remarks-on-preserving-internet-freedom-and-openness.html to preserve the open Internet as a platform for innovation, investment, job creation, competition, and free expression. If adopted later this month, these basic rules will mean several things for consumers, namely:

1. Americans have the freedom to access lawful content on the Internet, without discrimination. No one should be able to tell you what you can or can’t do on the Internet, as long as it’s lawful. Our rules will ensure that no central authority—either corporations or government—have the right to decide what you can access on the Internet.

2. You have a right to basic information about your broadband service. Our proposed framework will ensure that consumers have information they need to make informed choices about subscribing or using broadband networks.

3. The Internet will remain a level playing field. The ability for consumers to speak their mind, engage in commerce and innovate without permission from a corporation has enabled the Internet’s unparalled success. Our rules will protect against corporate gatekeepers prioritizing access to one person’s content over another’s. [...]” http://blog.openinternet.gov/?p=362

Share/Bookmark

“This article focuses on grassroots digital activism in the Arab world and the risks of what seems to be an inevitable collusion with U.S foreign policy and interests. [...] U.S official and corporate involvement in the Internet Freedom movement is harmful for that same freedom. I will explain why I consider the new context as extremely dangerous for the digital activism grassroots movement. Many people outside of the U.S, not only in the Arab world, have a strong feeling that the Internet Freedom mantra emitting from Washington DC is just a cover for strategic geopolitical agendas. This Internet freedom policy won’t be applied in a vacuum. At first, it will build upon broader U.S and Western foreign policy and their strategic goals and interests; in other words, it will continue projecting the same Western priorities. Having the U.S and other Western government as major actors in the Internet freedom field could present a real threat to activists who accept their support and funding. A hyper-politicization of the digital activism movement and an appropriation of its “success” to achieve geopolitical goals or please the Washington bubble are now considered by many as the “kiss of death”. In a worst-case scenario, Western funding, hyper-politicization and support could also lead to a brutal alteration of the existing digital activism field and the emergence of a “parallel digital activism” in total disregard to the local Arab context. We should also point out how hypocritical and unequal the online free speech movement is in its support for Internet Freedom of bloggers and digital activists at risk. [...]

Talking about the U.S private sector companies role in supporting Internet Freedom, blogger and activist Alla Abd El Fattah , point out that the best they should do is to continue on developing a free, neutral and decentralized Internet:

If the U.S companies and non profits want to support democracy in the Middle East the best they can do is continue to develop a free neutral decentralized internet. Fight the troubling trends emerging in your own backyards from threats to Net neutrality, disregard for user’s privacy, draconian copyright and DRM restrictions, to the troubling trends of censorship through courts in Europe, restrictions on anonymous access and rampant surveillance in the name of combating terrorism or protecting children or fighting hate speech or whatever. You see these trends give our own regimes great excuses for their own actions. You don’t need special programs and projects to help free the Internet in the Middle East. Just keep it free, accessible and affordable on your side and we’ll figure out how to use it, get around restrictions imposed by our governments and innovate and contribute to the network’s growth.

Oiwan Lam from Hong Kong recommends the same advices. For the business sector, Oiwan suggests that the U.S companies, like Google, should avoid turning the circumvention into guerrilla war:

The development and promotion of circumvention tools is more or less under the imagination of the cold war rhetoric of the GFW (like Lokman Tsui has pointed out in his thesis). I think we need to have more decentralized and sustainable approach to help people in different situation to get access to the Internet. For example, we can encourage universities to provide their partner university students’ in less open societies VPN access or online proxy access. For online activists, they may need more sophisticated tool. For the business sector, commercially run VPN providers will probably be more effective. Instead of turning the circumvention into a guerrilla war, it is better to embed the tools into people’s daily life and work setting.

”

http://samibengharbia.com/2010/09/17/the-internet-freedom-fallacy-and-the-arab-digital-activism/

Cf. http://sites.google.com/a/pressatgoogle.com/internet-at-liberty-2010/home/press-statements

Share/Bookmark