Daten-Freiheit?
Daten-Freiheit?
DRM, TC/TCG/TCPA/Palladium/NGSCB/LaGrande und Vorratsdatenspeicherung sind alles heiß diskutierte Themen und Schlagworte – auch in Deutschland.
Ein Blick über den Tellerrand hinaus aber zeigt, daß es an anderen Orten auch gut zur Sache geht: Beispiel USA und die Net neutrality regulation
. Letztere besagt abstrahiert gesprochen: sämtlicher Internet Datenverkehr muß gleich behandelt werden, unabhängig von Ursprungs- und Ziel-Ort/-Punkt.
(Stichwort: China, Blogging, Google – rings a bell, eh?!).
Im US-Senat wurde demnach ein Vorschlag eingebracht, der per Gesetz die Daten-Freiheit in Nordamerika sichern sollte – und gestern (zu Gunsten, Vorteil und Bereicherung der Breitband-Provider, Anm. d. Autors) abgelehnt wurde.
Und bevor ich in den selten gewünschten und oft bereuten rant Modus verfalle, lasse ich lieber Ron Knox von der Merry Band of Noend’sters zur Senats-Entscheidung und zum Thema Daten-Freiheit in den USA zu Wort kommen (Achtung, Ink-lish and long):
Subject: net neutrality is dead – thanks for all your disinterest
„WASHINGTON–A U.S. Senate panel narrowly rejected strict Net neutrality
rules on Wednesday, dealing a grave setback to companies like eBay, Google
and Amazon.com that had made enacting them a top political priority this year.
By an 11-11 tie, the Senate Commerce Committee failed to approve a
Democrat-backed amendment that would have ensured all Internet traffic is
treated the same no matter what its „source“ or „destination“ might be. A
majority was needed for the amendment to succeed.“
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6089197.html
To all of those who could not have cared less, congratulations, you have
the government you deserve, by and for big corporate lobbyists. And now get
ready for the Internet that you deserve too – because if COPE is allowed to
pass intact, it’s HD cable tv for everyone, all the time. Isn’t that what
you want, consumers? Just to sit in front of screens and get pushed to?
It’s too bad, it was so close. The only thing left is to try and kill the
bill or offer a floor resolution but that’s doubtful as it has so many
beholden to it (and the all that telco money).
But of course, I’m just overreacting, just as I did in 1999 and 2000 when I
said we were being taken over by a lawless coup of corporate shills and
gangsters that will stop at nothing. Good thing that was just a paranoid
fantasy. These Republicans really do have our best interests in mind, really.
Now let’s all just sit back and shut up and let them do things they need to
do for us. Because reigning them in is just „premature and unnecessary“.
„This vote complicates Internet companies‘ efforts to convince Congress of
the desirability of extensive new regulations, especially after the House
of Representatives definitively rejected the concept in a 269-152 vote on
June 8.
Republican committee members attacked the idea of inserting Net neutrality
regulations in a massive telecommunications bill, echoing comments from
broadband providers like AT&T and Verizon, which warned the rules were
premature and unnecessary. Alaska’s Ted Stevens, the committee chairman,
accused his colleagues of „imposing a heavy-handed regulation before
there’s a demonstrated need.“
What’s more, Republicans warned, adding the regulations would imperil the
final passage of the broader telecommunications bill, which is the most
extensive set of changes since 1996. „This is absolutely a poison pill,“
said Nevada Republican John Ensign.
Democrats had rallied behind an amendment, adapted from a standalone bill
they offered in May, which would have barred network operators from
discriminating „in the carriage and treatment of Internet traffic based on
the source, destination or ownership of such traffic.“ That could have
prevented Verizon from inking deals to offer high-definition video and
prioritizing that on its network, for instance.
Without new rules prohibiting such practices, „we’re giving two entities,
the Bells and cable, the power to be able to cut deals, and that will
change the relationship of entrepreneurs to the Internet and to the
financial marketplace,“ said John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat.
The concept of network neutrality, which generally means that all Internet
sites must be treated equally, has drawn a list of high-profile backers,
from actress Alyssa Milano to Vint Cerf, one of the technical pioneers of
the Internet. It’s also led to a political rift between big Internet
companies such as Google and Yahoo that back it–and telecom companies that
oppose what they view as onerous new federal regulations.
By a 12-10 vote, senators also rejected a second amendment that was
broader. The amendment, proposed by Hawaii Democrat Daniel Inouye, included
not just Net neutrality anti-discrimination language but also addressed
topics such as video franchising and universal service.
Then, by a 15-7 vote, senators voted to send the broader telecommunications
bill–called the Communications, Consumer’s Choice, and Broadband
Deployment Act–to the full Senate for a vote. Its fate there is hardly
assured, though a Net neutrality amendment is likely to be offered in any
floor vote.
In a statement after the votes, Verizon urged the Senate to act swiftly on
the bill, claiming that delays in boosting video competition will cost
consumers billions of dollars a year in higher cable bills.
But Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said Wednesday that he would seek
to prevent a floor vote on the telecommunications bill because it did not
include extensive Net neutrality regulations. „I will object to any further
action on this telecommunications bill until it includes a strong net
neutrality provisions that will truly benefit consumers and small
business,“ Wyden said, a promise that has teeth because the Senate often
works through unanimous consent.
The Republican-backed bill does include some Net neutrality regulations. It
would, for instance, create an „Internet consumer bill of rights“ to be
policed by the Federal Communications Commission. That would permit
punishment of network operators who interfere with their subscribers‘
ability to access and post any lawful content they please, to use any Web
page, search engine or application (including voice and video programs),
and to connect legal devices to the network.
Stevens defended those rules against Democrats who charged they were not
extensive enough. If companies like Google, Microsoft and Amazon.com got
their way, Stevens warned, „our costs for individual access to the
(Internet) will double.“
All the Republican committee members except Olympia Snowe of Maine voted
against the more regulatory Net neutrality amendment. All the Democrats
voted for it. The amendment was sponsored by Snowe and Byron Dorgan, a
Democrat from North Dakota.“
Abschließend bleibt da doch bloß festzuhalten:
Die Gedanken sind frei!
Noch Fragen?