Net neutrality amendment dies / Telecommunications bill goes to Senate without provision sought by Web firms

June 30, 2006 by Mary Wynne-Wynter 

This is sad, but could be worse.  And it could get worse.  Its too hard to cut through the mumbo-jumbo as expressed in this WSJ article:

While the underlying themes of "equality of access" and
"stifling regulation" are relatively simple, everyone on both sides is
struggling to explain the issue.

"I’m trying to figure out a way to shorten ‘proscriptive government
controls over products and services delivered over the Internet’ into
one or two words. It ain’t easy!" a Hill aide groused recently.
Republican Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska told a group of cable executives
last week, "The more I seek to find what the problem is, the harder job
I have of trying to define it."

When a problem is overwhelming I look at it first in simplistic
terms. Without net neutrality the owners and controllers of the
networks will have increasing control over the content that flows over
those networks. Think radio over the last 15 years. Network TV. The
music business. Consolidation can stifle art, culture, competition and
communication.

Nobody really understands the net long-term effect of rejecting net
neutrality. So the pols should leave the Internet alone until it is
understood.

And watch this: Before the Music Dies   

Net neutrality amendment dies / Telecommunications bill goes to Senate without provision sought by Web firms:
"In a dramatic tie vote Wednesday, a U.S. Senate committee rejected an
amendment that would have preserved the status quo of equal pricing for
all Internet traffic, an issue known as network neutrality. Although
the net neutrality amendment did not…"

(Via SFGate: Business & Technology.)

Filed under: Consciousness, career, going solo
Tagged:
Comments: None