[2672] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Seth Johnson: Brigner flunks on NN [Net Neutrality]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (PRIVACY Forum mailing list)
Sat Apr 7 12:45:42 2012
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 09:29:56 -0700
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Message-ID: <20120407162956.GA28731@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
From: PRIVACY Forum mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
----- Forwarded message from Seth Johnson <seth.p.johnson@gmail.com> -----
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 06:49:40 -0500
From: Seth Johnson <seth.p.johnson@gmail.com>
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Brigner flunks on NN
To: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>
Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
Brigner flunks on NN:
http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=3159
(A good group of ISOC NY folks met up with Brigner in the Club Acela
room in Penn Station. He mentions the Google-Verizon pact in a way
that one might easily think suggests he was involved in it. He takes
a "deregulation helps Verizon's engineers" line on NN, Joly MacFie
alludes to an ISOC statement regarding NN, Joe Plotkin sets the NN
discussion off in the right place, with good follow up by others
including David Solomonoff. I would have asked him whether he was
involved in GOOG-VZN, as there was indeed an advance in the policy
discussion wrought by that deal and NN advocates missed a chance to
use that to get the FCC on a productive track. However, Brigner
doesn't get it. He thinks the reclassification of Internet as an
information service was good, and that that "is working" -- which it
is, for Verizon. He says "if it stops working," there will be a
policy discussion on that and ISOC will be in the middle of that. And
he says legislators aren't going to "let the Internet be abused by
ISPs" -- all very, very telling statements. He then addresses a
question about what layer he's talking about when he characterizes the
issue in terms of regulation by moving immediately to decrying
regulation of apps -- without addressing the character of the IP
layer, let alone competition among ISPs [and end users] based on their
access to lower layers. He then jumps to the lower layer "legacy
regulations" which he calls a "major threat" to services and apps and
protocols running on the network -- which they are, for a
communications incumbent that decides it also wants to be an app [or
Internet] provider. And he extols the fact ISOC has a group for
dealing with regulating apps. Brigner completely outlines the
colonization of ISOC, even if he personally doesn't think he's taking
an incumbent line.)
----- End forwarded message -----
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org
Founder:
- Data Wisdom Explorers League: http://www.dwel.org
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren / Twitter: http://vortex.com/t-lauren
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
