Successful Blog

Here is a good place for a call to action.

Net Neutrality 01-02-07

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

AT&T Concession Thoroughly Debunks Key Anti-Net Neutrality Myth [via Anything They Say]

NEWS RELEASE

AT&T’s agreement to Net Neutrality as a condition of their merger with Bell South was a huge victory for Internet freedom. It also debunks a top myth told to the public by Internet freedom opponents like AT&T: that Net Neutrality can’t be defined. It can be – AT&T just did it.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Read on to see how AT&T found a way to do it when it served their financial interests.

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 12-29-2006 — AT&T Gives Way On Net Neutrality

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

AT&T compromise may get merger approved

WASHINGTON — AT&T Inc. has offered a new set of concessions that are expected to satisfy the two Democrats on the Federal Communications Commission and lead to approval of the company’s $85 billion buyout of BellSouth Corp. Approval by the full commission could happen as soon as Friday.

AT&T filed a letter of commitment with the agency Thursday night that adds a number of new conditions to the deal, including a promise to observe “network neutrality” principles, an offer of affordable stand-alone digital subscriber line service and a promise to give up some wireless spectrum.

Final approval still requires a vote of the commissioners, which can happen at any time via computer. The proposed deal is the largest telecommunications merger in U.S. history.

[ . . . ]

Among the promises made by the company:

_An offer of stand-alone, high-speed Internet service to customers in its service area for $19.95 per month. The “naked DSL (digital subscriber line)” offer would allow those who live in AT&T and BellSouth’s service areas to sign up for fast Internet access without being required to buy a package of other services.

_A greater commitment to network neutrality, or nondiscrimination involving Internet traffic. AT&T said it would “maintain a neutral network and neutral routing in its wireline broadband Internet access service.”

_To freeze rates for “special access” customers, usually competitors and large businesses that pay to connect directly to a regional phone company’s central office via a dedicated fiber optic line, for 48 months.

_To “assign and/or transfer to an unaffiliated third party” all of its 2.5 GHZ spectrum currently licensed to BellSouth within one year of the merger closing date.

_To “repatriate” 3,000 jobs that were outsourced by BellSouth outside the U.S. by Dec. 31, 2008, with at least 200 of those jobs to be located in New Orleans.

Ben Scott, legislative director for Free Press, a reform group that has fought the merger, said the network neutrality provision was a “big step forward for the supporters of an open Internet.”

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 10-25-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Net Neutrality Vital to Creative Artists, CV Tells FCC

. . . What is at stake here is nothing less than the future of the Internet, and whether the future Internet will be open or closed to independent and diverse voices and viewpoints. Not just creative voices – all voices. Will consumers retain the freedom to access any website, as they could when government policies were in place that ensured nondiscriminatory access, or will they be restricted to visiting sites approved by – or in business with – the “gatekeeper” that provides high speed Internet access? As creative media artists, we’ve seen this closed business model now being proposed for the Internet take over both broadcast television and cable television. Been there, done that, and seen that it is extremely harmful to diversity, creativity, and free expression. Let’s keep the Internet a real “level playing field.”

The market power of the proposed combined company over Internet content and services, along with recent regulatory and legislative developments, requires that the Commission attach substantial and enforceable conditions to its approval of the transaction to ensure that the Internet remains that real “level playing field.” The companies’ offer to abide by the FCC’s Broadband Policy Statement for a period of 30 months is not merely insufficient; it thumbs its nose at the American public and this Commission. By definition, approval of this transaction cannot be in the “public interest” if the combined company retains the right to ignore and violate after just 30 months the public interest in net neutrality, as expressed in the Commission’s Policy Statement. . . .

Want to know what you can do?
MA Bell Monopoly Versus the Free Internet — Tell the FCC Net Neutrality Is Not Negotiable

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE