One of the effects I’ve experienced from thinking a lot more about the Enron case is having a greater suspicion that corruption permeates our government. It’s hard to ignore the hand that the government had in providing the Enron (and other companies) the means to take advantage of Californians, and their unwillingness to act against Enron while they watched the pillaging occur. Not that I’ve ever been Pollyanna about government, but I’ve always tried to start by giving officials the benefit of the doubt.
The first thing that comes to mind in this light is the fight right now over Net Neutrality. The short of the issue is that telecoms (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner, etc.) are starting to abuse their control over delivery of content via the Internet. They want to start setting subjective pricing for companies that provide services over the Internet, and control which sites load faster than others.
For example, if Time Warner decided they wanted to create a service to compete against one of mine, they could ensure that my site uses the “slow lane” while their site loads quickly for users. That is, unless I wanted to pay out the ears for my site to use the “express lane”. This goes far beyond me paying X dollars for each Gb of transmission where I pay more for 10Gbs than I do for 5Gbs.
You can learn more about the issue at SaveTheInternet.com. A couple juicy tidbits from their FAQ that shows you what could become commonplace if the telecoms move full steam ahead:
- In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
- In April, Time Warner’s AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com — an advocacy campaign opposing the company’s pay-to-send e-mail scheme.
Earlier this month an amendment to prevent the telecoms from doing this was voted down in Congress. Why? Was it because Congress really felt that allowing the telecoms this freedom is good for American citizens and the growth of business? Or was it because the telecoms spent millions of dollars lobbying Congress to defeat the amendment? Isn’t it apparent that these telecoms will profit considerably from holding companies at ransom, at the expense of stifling Internet entrepreneurship? Why is this even remotely acceptable?
The fight goes to the Senate right now. There are some people in government who aren’t puppets of big business. Let’s hope there are enough.
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 3 comments }
This is a critical issue to contact our legislators about. There are enough people who really care about this issue to make a difference, and I really think they will listen. The problem is that the telecoms have $$ and people working on this full time. All you need to do is give them a quick call, email, or letter. Just a couple of minutes is enough to make them aware.
You do know who your representative and senator are, don’t you?
I agree. I contacted Burton and Lugar through savetheinternet.com via email, and sent my snail mail letter out to Bayh today.
Okay, that was informative.
I’m clearly behind on this item—although aware of it at a cursory level, I admittedly didn’t realize the extent to which it seems to have permeated the corporate and political realms. Although I could’ve guessed as much. Unlike our esteemed author I have difficulty affording political power mongers much benefit but I’m awfully liberal in my distribution of doubt.
Thanks for the quick links Brock, although I know my representaive/senator that was certainly thoughtful if not efficient of you to provide me a clear path.
Comments on this entry are closed.