[173572] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Jul 28 14:50:06 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <53D59918.90402@bennett.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 11:45:37 -0700
To: Richard Bennett <richard@bennett.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Astroturfing doesn=92t require a fake organization, just fraudulent use =
of an organization claiming to be grass roots.
I guarantee you that the majority of the communities represented by =
those organizations probably don=92t even understand the issue. Of those =
that do, I suspect that if you polled them, you=92d find most of the not =
backing the position contained in the document.
Somehow, the anti-internet-freedom collection of monopoly/oligopoly =
interests managed to coopt the leadership of those organizations into =
this astroturf.
Owen
On Jul 27, 2014, at 5:28 PM, Richard Bennett <richard@bennett.com> =
wrote:
> So we're supposed to believe that NAACP and LULAC are phony =
organizations but pro-neutrality groups like Free Press and Public =
Knowledge that admit to collaborating with Netflix and Cogent are legit? =
Given their long history, I think this is a bit of a stretch.
>=20
> It's more plausible that NAACP and LULAC have correctly deduced that =
net neutrality is a de facto subsidy program that transfers money from =
the pockets of the poor and disadvantaged into the pockets of =
super-heavy Internet users and some of the richest and most profitable =
companies in America, the content resellers, on-line retailers, and =
advertising networks.
>=20
> Recall what happened to entry-level broadband plans in Chile when that =
nation's net neutrality law was just applied: the ISPs who provided free =
broadband starter plans that allowed access to Facebook and Wikipedia =
were required to charge the poor:
>=20
> "A surprising decision in Chile shows what happens when policies of =
neutrality are applied without nuance. This week, Santiago put an end to =
the practice, widespread in developing countries =
<http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/29/twitters-emerging-market-strategy-includ=
es-its-own-version-of-a-facebook-zero-like-service-called-twitter-access/>=
, of big companies =93zero-rating=94 access to their services. As Quartz =
has reported =
<http://qz.com/5180/facebooks-plan-to-find-its-next-billion-users-convince=
-them-the-internet-and-facebook-are-the-same/>, companies such as =
Facebook, Google, Twitter and Wikipedia strike up deals =
<http://qz.com/69163/the-one-reason-a-facebook-phone-would-make-sense/> =
with mobile operators around the world to offer a bare-bones version of =
their service without charging customers for the data.
>=20
> "It is not clear whether operators receive a fee =
<http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/29/twitters-emerging-market-strategy-includ=
es-its-own-version-of-a-facebook-zero-like-service-called-twitter-access/>=
from big companies, but it is clear why these deals are widespread. =
Internet giants like it because it encourages use of their services in =
places where consumers shy away from hefty data charges. Carriers like =
it because Facebook or Twitter serve as a gateway to the wider internet, =
introducing users to the wonders of the web and encouraging them to =
explore further afield=97and to pay for data. And it=92s not just =
commercial services that use the practice: Wikipedia has been an =
enthusiastic adopter of zero-rating as a way to spread its free, =
non-profit encyclopedia."
>=20
> =
http://qz.com/215064/when-net-neutrality-backfires-chile-just-killed-free-=
access-to-wikipedia-and-facebook/
Actually, I don=92t see this ruling as such a bad thing.
> Internet Freedom? Not so much.
We can agree to disagree. I don=92t think leveraging one semi-captive =
audience to build a captive audience for other companies is a good =
thing. It reduces the potential for new entrants to compete on an even =
footing. (Not that there aren=92t already plenty of barriers to =
competing with Facebook and/or Google, but adding cross-subsidies from =
TPC shouldn=92t be an additional one.
Owen
