Just one comment on the below for now. The concept of an "emergency report to Congress" in this context strikes me as one notch short of hilarious. Congress lately has been unable to get its act together even on critical issues of national security. Can you *imagine* the speed and cooperation with which Congress would deal with a "net neutrality "emergency"? [Cue the crickets].
Given this fact, it is not obvious to me that such "emergency reports" would inspire involved firms to do much more than dig in and line up the litigation. --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator ----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <[email protected]> ----- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 11:26:17 -0700 From: Dave Farber <[email protected]> Subject: [IP] re VZ Google Announcement Reply-To: [email protected] To: ip <[email protected]> Begin forwarded message: > From: "Hoewing, C. L." <[email protected]> > Date: August 10, 2010 4:50:12 AM PDT > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [IP] re VZ Google Announcement > > Dave: > > This is wrong. First, a broadband provider has to offer an broadband > Internet access service to consumers in order to offer additional services in > the first place. These services had to comply with the nondiscrimination > principles. This also helps ensure that such open Internet connections will > remain available. Second, the additional services cannot be offered or > promoted as if they are broadband Internet access services. Third, if > anything we might do in offering or promoting any additional services appears > to the FCC to be undermining broadband Internet access services, it can issue > an emergency report to Congress detailing its concerns and laying out > recommendations. I think all of this provides a balance that allows for > innovation to take place while promoting broadband Internet access services > at the same time. After all, if the FCC issued such an emergency report, it > would certainly create a lot of pressure very quickly on a provider to change > its practices. > > LINK > > Link Hoewing > Vice President > Internet and Technology Policy > Verizon > 1300 I Street, NW > Washington, DC 20005 > 202-515-2420 > > > From: Dave Farber [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 09, 2010 9:05 PM > To: ip > Subject: [IP] re VZ Google Announcement > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Jason Calacanis <[email protected]> >> Date: August 9, 2010 1:40:04 PM PDT >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: ip <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [IP] VZ Google Announcement >> > >> Dave, >> >> Please tell me if I'm reading Section 5 correctly: it states, basically, >> that net neutrality applies to services that have been introduced to >> customers already, but new services can break net neutrality rules? >> >> So, since YouTube already exists, it can't be run across a faster Verizon >> Network that Google pays for the rights to access? What if Google launches >> YouTube Pro--a completely new service with new offerings. Is that allowed? >> >> What if they make a new service called "Gideo" (a new Google Video), that is >> available in HD only in FIOS homes. Gideo could pay for priority over >> Verizon's new network called FIOS2? >> >> Is this why Verizon stopped investing in Fios? To create a new standard >> outside the NN world? >> >> hmmm..... confused. >> >> http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2010/08/joint-policy-proposal-for-open-internet.html >> Fifth, we want the broadband infrastructure to be a platform for innovation. >> Therefore, our proposal would allow broadband providers to offer additional, >> differentiated online services, in addition to the Internet access and video >> services (such as Verizon's FIOS TV) offered today. This means that >> broadband providers can work with other players to develop new services. It >> is too soon to predict how these new services will develop, but examples >> might include health care monitoring, the smart grid, advanced educational >> services, or new entertainment and gaming options. Our proposal also >> includes safeguards to ensure that such online services must be >> distinguishable from traditional broadband Internet access services and are >> not designed to circumvent the rules. The FCC would also monitor the >> development of these services to make sure they don???t interfere with the >> continued development of Internet access services. >> >> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Dave Farber <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: "Hoewing, C. L." <[email protected]> >>> Date: August 9, 2010 11:31:59 AM PDT >>> To: David Farber <[email protected]> >>> Subject: FW: URGENT - VZ Google Announcement >>> >> >>> Dave: >>> >>> For IP. >>> >>> LINK >>> >>> http://policyblog.verizon.com/BlogPost/742/JointPolicyProposalforanOpenInternet.aspx >>> >>> >>> Link Hoewing >>> Vice President >>> Internet and Technology Policy >>> Verizon >>> 1300 I Street, NW >>> Washington, DC 20005 >>> 202-515-2420 >>> >> Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now >> >> >> >> -- >> --------------------- >> Jason McCabe Calacanis >> CEO, http://www.Mahalo.com >> Office: 310-593-6134 / Mobile: 310-456-4900 >> Blog: http://www.calacanis.com >> Mailing list: http://bit.ly/jasonslist >> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jason >> AOL IM/Skype: jasoncalacanis > Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=125750&id_secret=125750-5bb6cf56 Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=125750&id_secret=125750-6876700a Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message -----
