[270] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] DOJ Ridicules Network Neutrality -- Proof That It's
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Sat Sep 8 15:31:43 2007
Message-Id: <200709081844.l88IiieZ012659@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:44:44 -0700
From: privacy@vortex.com
Reply-To: PRIVACY Forum Digest mailing list <privacy@vortex.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: privacy-bounces+privacy-forum=mit.edu@vortex.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
DOJ Ridicules Network Neutrality -- Proof That It's Needed Now
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000285.html
Greetings. In a filing at the FCC two days ago, the Department of
Justice -- apparently with spare time on its hands while waiting for
Gonzales to clear out his desk and move on to the lecture circuit --
came out strongly against Network Neutrality:
( http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/September/07_at_682.html ).
With so much DOJ disarray these days and so many critical issues that
have been left to molder, one might ask how they even managed to
pull these utterly specious arguments together.
Actually, it's pretty obvious that they didn't even really have to
write the text themselves -- it's essentially a word-for-word
parroting of the standard anti-neutrality propaganda from the
telco/cable/ISP public relations machine. It even repeats the
ludicrous example of different classes of delivery services at the
U.S. Postal Service. Apparently we have to say it yet again --
network neutrality doesn't mean that you can't have different
classes of service, only that you shouldn't be allowed to
discriminate unfairly in the provision of services.
And of course they also echo the balderdash that there's no need for
neutrality rules until after anti-neutrality damage has been done.
This is much the same sort of reasoning that the FAA has used to
delay ordering the fixing of known plane problems until after deadly
crashes. Oops!
That DOJ would be so firmly in bed with the anti-neutrality gang
shouldn't be at all surprising, considering the department's "night
moves" with those same shady cohorts for illegal wiretapping
programs, the revealed scope of which seems to expand almost daily
(including today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/washington/09fbi.html ).
Let me put it this way -- given DOJ's recent track record, the fact
they've come out so firmly against net neutrality should be proof
enough that there's a lot of merit to the neutrality concept.
And for that roundabout and unintentional boost for pro-network
neutrality arguments, perhaps we should actually thank DOJ for their
input, after all.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com or lauren@pfir.org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
http://lists.vortex.com/mailman/listinfo/privacy
