Christian Engström, Pirat

18 mars 2014

Nätneutraliteten hotad efter omröstning i EU

Filed under: Net Neutrality — Christian Engström @ 12:39

Industriutskottet ITRE i EU-parlamentet höll en viktig omröstning om nätneutralitet på internet idag. Tyvärr gick det dåligt, vilket innebär att nätneutraliteten är hotad i Europa.

Nu hänger det på hur det går i omröstningen i plenum under nästa Stasbourg-session den 14-17 april.

Pressmeddelande från den politiska gruppen Greens/EFA (där jag och Amelia ingår som oberoende ledamöter):

Electronic communications: EP vote would threaten principle of net neutrality

The European Parliament’s industry committee today voted on proposed EU legislation on electronic communications (the Single Digital Market package).  The Greens/EFA group expressed concern about the vote, notably its implications for net neutrality. After the vote, Greens/EFA e-communications spokesperson Amelia Andersdotter stated:

“Today’s vote would seriously threaten the principle of net neutrality in the EU. A centre-right majority has regrettably supported proposals by the Commission, which would essentially give large providers the all clear for discriminating against users as they see fit. This flies in the face of previous commitments by the Commission to guarantee net neutrality and ensure a level playing field for all online services and users. We will urge MEPs to vote differently when Parliament as a whole votes on the text in plenary (1).

”Today’s vote has produced an incoherent patchwork and it is hard to see how EU governments in Council could take this chaotic outcome as a serious basis for negotiations. This could delay some of the clearly positive provisions of the draft legislation, for example on eliminating data roaming charges. We will now push for this to be rectified when MEPs vote as a whole in plenary.”

(1) The European Parliament plenary vote is foreseen for its April session (14-17 April).

Läs också aktivistorganisationen EDRI’s kommentarer

…………

Andra om ämnet: La Quadrature du Net,

9 kommentarer

  1. Excellent! Governmental or federal institutions should not interfere with how private telecom companies operates their networks or sets pricing for their services.

    Kommentar av Jan Andersen — 18 mars 2014 @ 14:06

  2. Går det att kolla hur andra MEP:s från Sverige röstade någonstans, eller skedde det genom handuppräckning för att inte sabotera deras chanser att bli omvalda i maj?

    Kommentar av Jens Bäckman (@czw) — 18 mars 2014 @ 14:39

  3. @ Jan Andersen: In principle I agree about the fact that the pricing should be up to the telecom companies, but the principle of net neutrality should be regulated by governmental and federal institutions. If you don’t see it as a questions of freedom on the internet look at it as a question of the possibility for smaller companies having a fair opportunity to compete with the larger richer companies on the same terms!

    Kommentar av Pontus — 18 mars 2014 @ 14:48

  4. @Pontus – and how do those windmills look from where you are standing?

    How much regulation viz-a-viz neutrality have we had since NFSnet was gradually converted into the free and open Internet we have today? How much have this lack of regulation prevented start-ups from transforming themselves from two guys in a garage to mega corporations?

    Kommentar av Jan Andersen — 18 mars 2014 @ 18:12

  5. @Jan´: That is totally a none-question, Just ask yourself were we would be without net-neutrality, no Google (started by two guys in a garage fighting Yahoo and Alta Vista), no Facebook (started by two guys in college), no Ebay, no Amazon, no Spotify and if we take the net-neutrality away from the innovators to come noone to challenge theese big boys with even greater products because noone will be able to be seen or get the bandwidth their product possibly require because they simply couldnt afford it!

    Kommentar av pontus — 18 mars 2014 @ 20:44

  6. @Jan Anderson Today more and more Independent and local Internet operators are bought up and controlled by the big media and production conglomerates, like the forthcoming merger between Comcast and Time Warner Cable in U.S, http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21598997-american-regulators-should-block-comcasts-proposed-deal-time-warner-cable-turn-it.

    In Sweden we have the big bully Telia trying to acquire the possession of independent Internet operators, http://www.expressen.se/ekonomi/telia-vill-ha-kommunala-stadsnat/

    Kommentar av Dennis Nilsson — 18 mars 2014 @ 22:10

  7. There are a lot of services that can be forseen to need special treatment from the network. Especially services that people are supposed to rely upon for important task.
    One commonly known example is emergency calls. Emergency calls are being handled with priority in all networks handling voice applications. But in a strict net neutral environment you watching the latest gossip on YouTube is equally important as that emergency call. That is clearly unsatisfactory and proves there needs to be exceptions to strict net neutrality.

    Other types of applications where bandwith availability or quality of service needs to be ensured are the emerging tele medicine field or inter-vehicle communications. How do you secure these parameters if you cannot buy it?

    Even in common day to day situations prioritization is essential to ensure working services – think of the morning commute with a thousand people in the same subway train set tring to access their digital newspaper, or the end of the movie they didn’t finish last night, or trying to start ahead by making a few calls – or think of the football stadium with 50,000+ people sharing videos and images or calling friends. Bandwith over the air is not unlimited. Because different applications are more or less sensitive to bandwith demands or quality of service priorization is the only way to ensure a working service level for all types of services.

    And that’s really the essence of the argument. Why shouldn’t there be differentiation when clearly applications differ in their requirements? It seems only natural.

    Lastly, there was no big inter-government descition to make IP the de fact global standard for data communication. That means it can also be replaced if lawmakers make it to unuseful. We are infact doing it already when moving from IPv4 to IPv6.

    And a new protocol wouldn’t necessary be neutral to begin with. Other network protocols have discrimination built right in. All it takes is a big enough economic incentive to start the migration and it will happen, as long as you are backwards compatible to the end user the operators can do whatever they want.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 19 mars 2014 @ 0:34

  8. Tjäder: But a serious risk of eliminating net neutrality is that you sacrifice the protections we currently have against the net becoming segregated.

    We open for a situation where ISPs do not simply discriminate by throttling specific bandwidth, but even start offering tiered levels of access to the net in general. The situation can arise when ISPs start selling packages which allow access only to a select set of websites. This is not a disaster in itself, but if it becomes standard procedure we have a big problem because then we have segregated the network into a free ”true” internet, and a strictly corporate controlled internet.

    Kommentar av Brooke — 20 mars 2014 @ 18:11

  9. […] namnet Connected Continent. Grundförslaget som ligger säger nej till nätneutralitet, eftersom vi förlorade omröstningen i industriutskottet ITRE (som är ansvarigt utskott för den här […]

    Pingback av Viktig omröstning om nätneutralitet i EU-parlamentet torsdagen den 3 april | Christian Engström, Pirate MEP — 2 april 2014 @ 13:32


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Blogga med WordPress.com.

%d bloggare gillar detta: