I'm in. AND I'm a computer geek - I think we need to go wireless. Michael Redler wrote:
> So, do we have a new movement joining the ranks of UFPJ and others - > this time, to build a new internet and bypass the corporate corrupted one? > > > Mike > > */Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote: > > http://snipurl.com/ps1x > Yahoo! News > Opinion > > Key House Panel Defeats Net Neutrality > > Jeff Chester Thu Apr 27, 5:26 PM ET > > The Nation -- The GOP House leadership rejected calls Wednesday to > preserve the Internet's open and democratic nature in the United > States. Phone and cable industry lobbyists breathed a sigh of relief > as the House Energy and Commerce Committee defeated, 34 to 22, an > amendment to a broadband communications bill (known as the > Barton-Rush Act) that would require "network neutrality." Under the > proposal, developed by Massacusetts Democrat Ed Markey and others, > phone and cable companies would have been prohibited from > transforming the Internet into a private, pay-as-you-post toll road. > > Over the past week, there has been a remarkable outpouring of public > and corporate support for network neutrality. SavetheInternet.com, > organized by Free Press and representing dozens of nonprofit groups > and leading Internet experts, helped generate 250,000 signatures in > less than a week for an online petition calling on Congress to > protect the Internet and pass the Markey bill. > > This new group, a collection of unusual bedfellows that runs the > political gamut from Common Cause, the Gun Owners of America and the > Parents TV Council to Craigslist founder Craig Newmark, also spurred > many bloggers to take a strong stand (ranging from the liberal Daily > Kos to the libertarian Instapundit). > > Meanwhile, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, Amazon, eBay and IAC, which > make up the Network Neutrality Coalition, unveiled their "Don't Mess > With the Net" campaign, running ads in Roll Call and The Hill > targeting lawmakers. MoveOn.org's new Save the Internet campaign also > generated many letters and e-mails to members of Congress. > > It is puzzling, though, why Microsoft, Google, Yahoo! and allies have > not unleashed a serious--and very public--nationwide campaign in > support of network neutrality. So far, these giants have worked > cautiously, largely inside the Beltway, reflecting perhaps their > corporate ambivalence about calling on Congress to pass > Internet-related safeguards. Unlike the phone and cable efforts, > there has been no saturation-TV or print-advertising campaign, > something these deep-pocketed digital giants could eaily afford. > > This growing pressure on the Democrats to stand up for an open > Internet helped convince House minority leader Nancy Pelosi to > formally support the call for network neutrality. Consequently, only > five House Commerce Committee Democrats voted with the GOP majority > to kill the digital nondiscrimination plan, including Edolphus Townes > (New York), Albert Wynn (Maryland), Charles Gonzalez (Texas), Bobby > Rush (Illinois) and Gene Green (Texas). Only one Republican committee > member, Heather Wilson of New Mexico, voted in support of the network > neutrality amendment. > > Giants including AT&T (SBC), Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner have > staked their business plans for the Internet based on being able to > control and "monetize" the flow of digital communications coming into > PCs, digital TVs and mobile services. The > Federal Communications Commission--at the behest of the phone and > cable lobby--recently overturned longstanding safeguards requiring > the Internet to operate in a nondiscriminatory manner. The two > industries are spending tens of millions of dollars to fight off any > Congressional safeguard for the Internet that would restore the > nondiscrimination principle. > > Commerce Committee chair Joe Barton and House Speaker > Dennis Hastert have been the chief cheerleaders for the cable and > phone lobby. On Wednesday, Barton derided the call for network > neutrality, claiming that it's "still not clearly defined. It's kind > of like pornography: You know it when you see it." Barton and Hastert > are expected, as early as next week, to successfully pass the bill in > the House without a network neutrality provision. A showdown is now > looming in the Senate Commerce Committee, which is about to take up > its own broadband Internet legislation. A bipartisan network > neutrality amendment, similar to what was just defeated in the House > committee, will be offered by Senators Olympia Snowe and Byron > Dorgan. Public-interest advocates and corporate allies plan to > mobilize an even larger outcry of support for this proposal. > > With midterm elections looming, GOP leaders will come under > increasing pressure to make a choice. Will they continue to back > their few phone and cable industry supporters and keep the open > Internet safeguards off the table? Or will they recognize that a > genuine digital-age protest movement is emerging that could further > harm their party's chances in November? The next few weeks will > reveal whether the "smart mobs" can win over a tiny handful of > communications monopolists. > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Biofuel mailing list >Biofuel@sustainablelists.org >http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): >http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ > > > _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
