[Vision2020] FW: Congress: don't fence the Internet!

[Saundra]

For those who want to disregard the email Mr. Nielson just shared because of
its from that "radical" MoveOn.org, here's some info:

-----Original Message-----
From: Consumers Union [mailto:action at consumer.org] 
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 11:56 AM
To: saundra_2003 at adelphia.net
Subject: Congress: don't fence the Internet!


Dear Saundra,

Last week, a Congressional panel gave big telephone and cable companies the
right to block or slow your access to sites and services on the Web.

Because telephone and cable companies, like AT&T and Comcast, own the lines
that connect you to the Internet, they can control where you go and how fast
you get there. Worse, they can block or slow your access to Internet-based
services, like Internet-telephone, music and video downloads, and e-mail
that competes with their own offerings. 

The fight to preserve an open Internet is just getting started! Ask Congress
to prevent big telephone and cable companies from blocking or slowing your
access to Internet services offered by their competitors.
http://cu.convio.net/site/R?i=Xa-m0nUuAnA_9lNZSAiXYQ..

The clash today is really about the next big thing, video that feeds
directly over the internet to either your computer or your television.
Video takes up more bandwidth, and the big companies who own the lines want
to sell you their own video services instead of letting you easily access
offerings from other companies. If they get their way, cheap phone services
or video downloads via the Internet may become a thing of the past. The
article below from this week's San Francisco Chronicle summarizes the issue
nicely.

Take a moment to tell Congress to keep the Internet open for everyone.
Like a freeway, where any car can drive at the speed of traffic, you should
be able to get what you need and go where you need to go without extra
charges or slower service!
http://cu.convio.net/site/R?i=VhyGNtu6YK7Mnc0xR4_-vg..

After you take action, please think of five people who use the Internet and
forward this message to them. Every active Internet user has a strong
interest in keeping the Internet open! Encourage them to join their voice to
yours and tell Congress that the Internet needs to serve everyone equally.

Sincerely,
Morgan Jindrich
HearUsNow.org
A project of Consumers Union
1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 310
Washington, DC 20009-1039

-------------------------------------------------------

THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
(California)      
April 17, 2006 Monday, EDITORIALS; Pg. B4
      
Don't undercut Internet access 

THE WIDE and unbounded Internet could soon be fenced in by cable and phone
firms. Higher prices and less choice may lie ahead under a misguided bill
moving forward in Congress.

A House committee dumped a plan to enforce network neutrality, a clunky term
for an important concept. The phrase stands for an original ideal of
Internet -- equal access and no hidden charges to climb aboard.

On one level, the fight is a battleship clash between consolidating
telecoms, such as Verizon and AT&T, and major Internet services, such as
Google, Yahoo and Microsoft. The standoff is over the next big
thing: video direct to your TV or computer screen.

But the implications reach beyond what movie to watch. The cable and phone
companies, growing bigger with each merger, want to cash in on their
increasing leverage. Faster e-mail might cost more. A net-based company
might pay more for a faster connection to customers.

The big service providers are howling mad at the idea of a toll booth.
Until now, they've had free access and don't want to pay to play, as the
phone and cable guys are inclined to ask. To date, the fight is going
against them, with a Republican-majority House committee rejecting net
neutrality as it draws up a new telecommunications bill.
The full House and Senate are expected to consider the matter later this
year.

There is undue sanctimony on both sides, to be sure. The major Internet
companies, many of them Fortune 500 firms, are using the founding credos of
the open-to-all Internet to dodge a new bill. And the telecoms are using new
muscle to cash in on their networks, not withstanding their talk of
innovation and better service. It's a bottom-line game for both sides.

But down at the consumer level, the impact could be different.
Customers could face one set of services offered by a cable or phone company
-- or a higher-priced list of alternatives from outsiders. If Yahoo was part
of the standard-priced bundle, would you pay more for Google? It would be a
two-tier world, not the even-up access that the Internet offers now. New
upstarts would have a hard time cracking the lineup, while the familiar
names stayed on top.

In Washington, Republican legislators have balked at net neutrality in the
belief that Internet technology is too hard to predict or regulate. Wireless
service, for example, could eclipse the perceived advantage that cable and
phone companies have now in plugging customers into the net. That's
plausible but unlikely, given the huge investment in the nation's hard-wired
Internet network.

The pending legislation went a step further in dodging action on open
access.

The Republican majority on the Energy and Commerce Committee directed the
Federal Communications Commission not to pass rules on net neutrality though
it could take up the problem on a case-by-case basis. This result is lip
service to the idea of keeping the net free and open.

The Internet isn't served by layers of government regulation. But it
shouldn't become a captive of one industry. Net neutrality should be a
guiding principle to guarantee open use.  
      
LOAD-DATE: April 17, 2006; reprinted with permission