net-neutrality; TAGED under ‘GNU License’ (My perspective – nobody owns the Internet -and nobody should own it – especially big business that already make HUGE profits) – OBVIOUSLY; It is more complicated than that, .. (As usual, – the more I dig around, the more complicated this gets, and the fuzzy-bits intrude) – [MORE fuzzy-bits]
THIS EXPLIANS (In part) >>> Best video yet on Net Neutrality <<<
THE FCC (and what role they play?)
The Second Computer Inquiry is the second proceeding in the FCC trilogy The Computer Inquiries, which created the FCC’s policy of regulating the way in which telecommunications carriers’ networks are opened up and made available to enhanced services (aka computer networks).
Some background information on this topic; As I have often questioned, (As an interested observer) ‘Is the Internet already tiered?’ – Meaning; Should carriers be able to sell multi-tiered access to heavy users? OR; They are already doing this!
From the laymans point of view – It already IS multi-tiered, for those prepared to PAY-MORE, they get a FASTER connection.
THIS-DEBATE; ‘Net Neutrality’ – is MORE about the users ability to upload their own content, and THAT RIGHT is under threat from the like of big telco companies (AT&T verizon, and Cablevision) wanting to take away that ability, and turn the Internet into a ‘One-directional-medium’, more LIKE radio and TV.
PASTED BELOW; Is an outline from opposingviews.com – which points to ‘summer-2005′, as being [QUOTE] “The separation of the physical communications layer from the content and applications layers was a cornerstone of telecommunications law–putting control of the Internet in the hands of the users at the edges“
[THE IMPORTANT BIT - QUOTE Cont'd] , .. “but in the summer of 2005 — under intense pressure from phone and cable lobbyists — the FCC removed this cornerstone.”
ARTICLE; Net Neutrality is the Internet’s First Amendment
Save the Internet (Most of it pasted below – but not all)
Almost 40 years ago, the Federal Communications Commission was confronted with the question of how to handle the transmission of data over telecommunications networks. When a federal court broke up Ma Bell in 1982, it required the Baby Bells to provide nondiscriminatory interconnection and access to their networks. These decisions to require the communications network to treat information service in a nondiscriminatory manner was the key building block of the Internet — it’s First Amendment.
Under these protections, the physical wires over which data and information flow were treated differently than the data and information themselves. When network owners can’t mess with the content, the content market remains free and vigorously competitive. This separation of the physical communications layer from the content and applications layers was a cornerstone of telecommunications law–putting control of the Internet in the hands of the users at the edges but in the summer of 2005 — under intense pressure from phone and cable lobbyists — the FCC removed this cornerstone.
In the years since then, these network owners have openly declared that they intend to build business models based on discrimination, extorting money from online content and applications providers and favoring the Web sites and services that they own or with whom they strike special deals. This plan violates the fundamental principle of nondiscrimination that has been law for generations, and which gave us a free-flowing Internet that allows the best ideas to emerge on their own merits.
From a technical prepective; http://www.worldofends.com/ (A nice simple approach to the Internet)
Advocates of Net Neutrality are not promoting new regulations. We are attempting to restore tried and tested consumer protections and network operating principles that made the Internet a great engine for free speech and innovation. By passing Net Neutrality legislation we’re restoring under law the open Internet’s most fundamental principle.
Posted by Gordon Danson 
