I must be missing something. What and how are ISP's blocking or possibly blocking that may infringe on free speech? Certainly not PTP traffic. -RickG
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 9:14 PM, John Vogel <jvo...@vogent.com> wrote: > Jack, > > I do agree that you have been fairly clear, and I wasn't so much > addressing you as being the one conflating the two issues. > I think you have a good understanding of the two issues, and are > reasonable in how you are addressing them. I am somewhat concerned that > free speech was at the forefront of your endorsement of the FCC's > upcoming proposal re Net Neutrality. As I said before, I don't think > free speech is really the issue, either from the standpoint of the ISPs, > nor of those who have been arguing for Net Neutrality, although some > argue for NN primarily on the basis of free speech, which is where I > think the issues have been conflated. > > The most visible cases I can recall that caught the attention of the > News Media as well as the FCC were trade issues, rather than free speech > issues. A phone company disallowing VoIP on their data networks, Cable > companies disallowing IPTV on from possibly competing TV companies, etc. > are trade issues. P2P is harder to portray as a trade issue. (Are there > any ISPs who would block P2P to protect their own music business?) But.. > P2P is still not really a free speech issue, although it is sometimes > presented as such. > > The FCC proposes to regulate ISPs to ensure that they do not > inhibit/impair the "*free flow of information AND CERTAIN APPLICATIONS" > (quoted from the AP story, emphasis mine). We do have constitutional > guarantees regarding free speech, and the Federal government is charged > with regulating Interstate commerce, but there is no constitutional > right to pass IP packets in any amount, frequency, volume, or direction > you may choose, over anybody's IP network which you may choose. > Advocating that you do under the free speech clause is inappropriate > IMNSHO. :) > > As far as my network goes, and I suspect that most ISP's would be > similar, I don't care if you use FTP, HTTP, TELNET, SSH, or Real Audio > 40kps stream to receive the speech populary known as "I have a dream" by > Martin Luther King. I might have an issue if you decide to download the > HDTV version, and then do likewise for every political speech made since > then. But... that has nothing to do with free speech. But, if the FCC > decides that I must allow you to stream the HDTV video file, and that I > cannot as an ISP interfere with that stream in a manner that makes it > uncomfortable for you to view (constant buffering) under the guise of > free speech guarantees, I have a big problem with that. > > I also have a problem with a certain application that is designed to > consume every available network resource in an effort to gain an > advantage over other users of the network in file download times. Again, > not speech related, but often portrayed as a free speech issue. > > Jack, I know you know the difference, and this isn't really directed at > you. But you were the one who brought the free speech issue into it AFAICT. > > John > * > Jack Unger wrote: >> Hi John, >> >> Yes, there are two issues at play however I don't believe I have >> conflated them. I think I've been quite clear that there is an issue >> of bandwidth and there is an issue of content. >> >> On bandwidth, every ISP (in my opinion) should already be managing >> bandwidth and limiting bandwidth so that customers get what they >> contract for and not any more than what they contract for. >> >> On content, no ISP (again, in my opinion) should be able to be the >> "decider" and choose what content they will pass and what content they >> won't pass. >> >> If ISPs practice active bandwidth management then they should not need >> to practice content management. ISPs should not be able to tell me (or >> you) what we can or can't send or who we can or can not send it to or >> receive it from. >> >> I think I stated that very clearly. Do you agree? >> >> Respectfully, >> >> jack >> >> >> John Vogel wrote: >>> Free speech itself is not so much the issue, as presented by most who >>> would argue for net neutrality, but rather application/traffic type. If >>> it were not for the change in the way network traffic has evolved, >>> moving from a bursty/intermittent type of traffic to a constant, high >>> bit rate streaming, there would probably not be much of an issue, as >>> most ISPs don't really care so much what you say or view over their >>> networks. Those ISPs who have fallen afoul of the NN advocates have done >>> so primarily because they were attempting to address a particular type >>> of traffic pattern, rather than whatever content may have been >>> transmitted in that traffic pattern. (e.g. bittorrent, lots of >>> connections, constant streaming at high bandwidth utilization) >>> >>> Although I hesitate to use analogies... If I own a public restaurant, I >>> reserve the right to refuse service to anybody who is determined to >>> converse with other patrons in that restaurant by shouting everything >>> they say, Likewise, if they choose to communicate using smoke signals, >>> (cigarette or otherwise) I or the State/City have rules regarding that, >>> and will restrict their speech in that manner. What they are >>> communicating is immaterial. While they DO have a right to free speech, >>> arguing that they should be allowed to communicate that speech via smoke >>> signals, and subsequent complaints about the infringement of their free >>> speech right by restricting the way in which they choose to communicate >>> is somewhat disingenuous. >>> >>> There are really two different issues in play here. Conflating them >>> under the banner of free speech does not address both issues adequately. >>> >>> John >>> >>> Jack Unger wrote: >>> >>>> The government is actually protecting your freedom to access any >>>> Internet content you choose and your freedom to say whatever you want to >>>> say. >>>> >>>> The arguement that you can just move to another ISP is false because, as >>>> most WISPs know, many rural citizens don't have ANY ISP or maybe just >>>> one wireless ISP to choose from therefore they can't just "move to >>>> another ISP if the first ISP doesn't like what they have to say and >>>> shuts them off. Further, even if you have more than one ISP, how are you >>>> going to get the news or get your opinions out if BOTH ISPs (or ALL >>>> ISPs) disagree with your opinion and shut you off. >>>> >>>> Your arguement is like saying "I enjoy Free Speech" right now but I >>>> don't want the government to interfere in order to protect my Free >>>> Speech when AT&T doesn't like what I have to say and shuts my Internet >>>> service off. If AT&T wants to take your Free Speech away then you are >>>> saying to the Government "Hey, let them take it! I'd rather lose my >>>> freedom then have you telling AT&T what to do. STOP protecting my Free >>>> Speech right now!!!". >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> What I don't like about it is another case of the government telling me >>>>> what to do. More regulations is less freedom. If someone doesn't like >>>>> the way ISP A operates, move to ISP B. If they don't like ISP B, find >>>>> ISP C, or start ISP C, or maybe you shouldn't be doing what you're >>>>> wanting to in the first place. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> Mike Hammett >>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>>> http://www.ics-il.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Jack Unger >>>>> Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:38 PM >>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Net Neutrality >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Congress and the FCC would define "reasonable". It's their job to write >>>>> the laws and make the rules. >>>>> >>>>> Net neutrality (NN) is about "free speech". NN would prohibit your >>>>> carrier from delaying your packets or shutting off your service because >>>>> they didn't like what you had to say or what web site you wanted to surf >>>>> or post to. NN is "anti-censorship" therefore NN is "pro-freedom". >>>>> >>>>> If you write a letter to your local newspaper, the editor can refuse to >>>>> print it. WITHOUT Net Neutrality, your carrier can decide to block your >>>>> packets. Net neutrality is about remaining a free nation. What's not to >>>>> like about that? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Josh Luthman wrote: >>>>> Who's definition of unreasonable... >>>>> >>>>> On 9/19/09, Jack Unger <jun...@ask-wi.com> wrote: >>>>> The proposal doesn't say you have to provide unlimited bandwidth. >>>>> Reasonable network management policies are allowed. >>>>> >>>>> Robert West wrote: >>>>> Another unfunded mandate. If I were to provide net neutral broadband >>>>> the >>>>> price would be $120 per meg. Maybe my customers would understand if I >>>>> explained how it's net neutral. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On >>>>> Behalf Of Blair Davis >>>>> Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2009 2:02 PM >>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>> Subject: [WISPA] Net Neutrality >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It's back.... >>>>> >>>>> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,552503,00.html?test=latestnews >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. >>>>> Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" >>>>> Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 >>>>> www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. >> Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" >> Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 >> www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
