[311] in Privacy_Forum
[ PRIVACY Forum ] Rogers Replies re Web Ambushing: White is Black,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (privacy@vortex.com)
Fri Dec 14 16:02:48 2007
Message-Id: <200712142021.lBEKLFLl017073@chrome.vortex.com>
To: privacy-list@vortex.com
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 12:19:55 -0800
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
Rogers Replies re Web Ambushing:
White is Black, Up is Down, Ignorance is Strength
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000342.html
Greetings. Since the controversy was touched off last weekend
( http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000337.html ) regarding Rogers of
Canada's testing of a system to modify the content of Internet
traffic by inserting their own messages into Web data streams,
Rogers has been busy at damage control.
Their take on all this, in both public statements and in replies to
outraged customers that have been forwarded to me, is
straightforward in an Orwellian "Newspeak" sort of way.
Rogers' view appears to be that it's perfectly acceptable for them
to insert additional content of their own choosing into the private
communications between Web services and those services' users on a
widespread basis, and that they don't consider their actions to be
modifying content at all -- despite the fact that the look of
received pages is changed in major ways, such as by pushing
significant parts of the original Web pages to the bottom of the
display screen or off the displayed area entirely, adding logos for
competitors onto the original sites' pages, and so on.
By Rogers' sort of twisted interpretation, if the postal service
steamed open letters, stuffed in their own announcements,
promotional and third party materials, resealed the envelopes, and
*then* delivered them, this wouldn't be modifying or tampering
with the mail. Insanity.
The same sort of Bizarro World party line is echoed over at the
"unlimited potential of In-Browser Marketing" PerfTech equipment
site, where text (reportedly added after this controversy began, I'm
told) also takes the view that splicing all manner of ISP-provided
content into users' Web communications isn't "modifying content" at
all.
It isn't even necessary to get into the technical intricacies of the
Network Neutrality debate for most Internet users to intuitively
recognize that the most basic function of an ISP is to completely
and accurately pass Web services' data to users, and vice versa --
no more, no less.
The sort of Felliniesque content modifications reasoning that ISPs
appear poised to widely inflict onto the Internet is an affront to
the intelligence of their subscribers, and a gross interference with
communications (from both business and personal standpoints) that
cannot be tolerated.
Even Big Brother would have had trouble getting people to buy into
such unadulterated ISP-based nonsense, whether it's in "1984"
or the early 21st century.
ISPs continue to unwittingly provide the best examples of why
Network Neutrality is so important. Thanks, guys!
--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
Co-Founder, NNSquad
- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.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
