Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A NUMBER OF GROUPS and companies are asking the EU to make amendments to proposed net neutrality legislation ahead of a vote tomorrow.
The European Parliament will decide tomorrow whether to adopt new rules designed to protect net neutrality in the EU. The rules, which were decided upon back in June after a late-night meeting in Brussels, came after months of negotiation.
Under the new legislation, paid prioritisation will not be allowed and blocking and throttling will only be allowed in certain circumstances like countering cyber-attacks or preventing traffic congestion.
Since its announcement, various groups and companies have criticised the proposals on a number of fronts, saying it’s full of loopholes that could be exploited.
The biggest one is the inclusion of ‘specialised services’ and how it’s defined. While it said to be used for services that require faster connections like HD video conferencing, the concern is that it could create a tiered system, allowing any company with the funds to pay for faster services alongside the open internet.
Other issues include zero-rating or sponsored connectivity that would see operators not counting data used for certain services. This could create a dependence on certain services prioritised by service providers, giving them an unfair advantage over rivals.
‘Save the internet’
A group of NGOs based in Europe have set up Savetheinternet.eu, highlighting four main areas that should be addressed.
They include the introduction of fast lanes, zero-rating, class-based discrimination (how it allows internet providers to define classes and speed up/slow down connections based on this) and how it defines network congestion (it’s argued the proposed rules would allow providers to slow down traffic at any time).
Also, 36 companies including Kickstarter, Reddit, Netflix, Foursquare, Soundcloud, Tumblr, and Vimeo have penned a letter to the European Parliament expressing their concerns over the proposed legislation.
“These problems jeopardize the future of the startup innovation and economic growth in the EU”, says the letter. “They also create barriers for US startups and businesses seeking to enter the EU market. We believe that the future of the open internet in Europe is at stake and urgent action is warranted”.
We believe the United States Federal Communications Commission’s June 2015 Open Internet Order provides a strong framework to keep the Internet free and open. The Order provides bright line rules to prohibit Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking and slowing down traffic between consumers and websites and from creating online “fast lanes” by charging websites to deliver traffic to their users.
These rules foster innovation, competition, and infrastructure deployment. US companies would have not been able to compete or flourish without it. We want all companies around the world to enjoy the same protections.
Both groups are asking the EU to implement a number of amendments such as clarifying the criteria surrounding specialised services, modify the provisions on traffic management to ensure equal treatment of traffic, offer the freedom to ban zero rating, and ensure that internet providers can’t interfere with the network for discriminatory reasons.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Basically big companies could pay for faster loading times while small companies will be stuck going slow if they don’t pay for the fast lane. Amazon prime could pay to be faster than Netflix (or vice versa) resulting in Netflix losing customers due to slow loading times. I’m sure both these companies could afford the fast lane but no way a start up (new rival to either of these) could. Seriously stifles online competion. You could swap them sites with any others. Done deal/gumtree, Facebook/MySpace rte/journal
Thanks for the explanation, this one was a bit over my head. So basically its the larger companies wanting to create a monopoly on the internet and suppress any new competition. But if the legislation passes, this will be prevented.
That’s it, probably just find another way to do it though.
You know Netflix use Amazons servers on the EC2
Didn’t know that, Swap Amazon for YouTube so or any other of their competitors.
Yes Amazon are huge, the biggest cloud provider to the public in the world for renting virtual computers, a pay as you go system, they’re years ahead of Microsoft which are in that market as well, sure Dropbox use Amazons servers
It could be just me but I have no idea what this artilce is about. Who, what, where, when and why.
My guess is niether does Quinton. A copy and paste hack job of an article.
We need a legal system to deal with hate speech online. Just look at the comments under any traveller related article.
This article is about travellers.? Wow
Oh is that what I said?
We don’t need any form of legislation for hate speech full stop.Incitement to commit a crime, yes but hate speech laws are used to stifle free speech and just a bad idea.
hate speech.. Most people just express their opinion, free speech is aloud.. Travellers, until they sort out their own “house”, i.e pay taxes, send their kids to school, get jobs, contribute to society instead of sponging, robbing etc etc, will always rub the rest of us the wrong way.. Get over it.
Freedom of speech takes second place to the safety of minorities.
Black people, white people, gay people, straight people, men, women, everyone is a target on the internet. I’m not even sure how’d you’d successfully monitor and legislate for that. It certainly would come at a huge price on what is great about the internet. I’m not sure it would be worth it. Let’s try to keep the internet as free and open as possible.
What is net neutrality? https://youtu.be/wtt2aSV8wdw
Free speech is a poor euphemism for bigotry online.
Pray tell us how it does that, without free speech, travellers wouldn’t have access to an open forum to do their whining, just like now.
When did ‘bigotry’ become a crime??
@travellers rights you pc?
Anyone can say whatever they want as long as it causes no offence to anyone else.
well said, Destroyer .
Hate speech is one thing. Being against a concept that you dont agree with is totally different
There is not a lot to say then Travellers Rights…..Plenty of people offended by gay marriage, travellers, black people, women etc etc…lets not monitor free speech on the basis of what people are offended by.
Rubbish, causing offence is subjective.
“Anyone can say whatever they like as long as it causes no offence to anyone else”!?! Jesus fcukin wept….And right there is the problem…It’s almost impossible to have any discussion on any topic without offending “someone else”.. Your idea is a great way to shut down discussion or any criticism, deserved or not, of any group or idea.
” as long as it causes no offence to anyone else”…………..what do you mean by that?
its a slippery slope towards totalitarian censorship…if someone is offended by another views that does not call for violence against or slander them personally then they need to toughen up and grow a thick skin.
Why do people wish to cause offence to others?
How sad that the most liberal cannot see how dangerous they would be if given control.
You don’t cause offence, offence is taken.
why do you feel the need to defend travellers , have they asked you to or is it that they can’t do it for themselves ? i don’t actually hear travellers defending themselves , always seems to be some organisation talking for them instead .
“Anyone can say whatever they want as long as it causes no offence to anyone else.” I’m offended by that comment, Traveller Rights. Why are you trying to limit my right to freedom of expression to conform with your ideas?
get off line then…
No to internet sensor ship.just delete the people that are not nice to you we dont need more laws.education on how to use the internet would be better.
The 5 Ws Journal….basic journalism.
Thanks for bring this up now Journal…. TOO LITTLE TOO LATE!!!
Just means making a law that we are all equal on the internet No fast lanes or shortcuts for special users Bit like the journal we are all equal
Hate speech online proves we are not all equal.
To give you a real world example: this would be like giving DOB’s media has faster access to your computer than a startup media organisation (e.g. The Journal). The rich get richer and the poor get dumbed down….
Are you Gene Kerrigan from the Sunday Independent perhaps
@Travellers rights. If online hate speech bothers you so much then change sites, ;eave social media too. The answer is not trying to control everyone else, the answer is trying to control yourself.
totally not in my sphere of knowledge so I won’t be commenting..
Basically, in the US ISPs (think eircom, upc, etc) are trying to introduce a system of “fast lanes”. What does this mean? It means that they can start charging companies who use a lot of bandwidth to deliver their service (such as Netflix) or have lots of traffic hitting their website (think Amazon). So what? So, if they start getting charged, their customers will be hit with price increases. It also means that certain companies who have warehouses of money can pay for more fast lanes, outpricing lower money earning companies who therefore will not be able to access high speed delivery or traffic, as they can’t afford the fast lanes that Amazon could for example.
More late night meetings can these ovepaid idiots not get out of bed early in the morning and debate these things when the electorate is not asleep?
“foster innovation, competition, and infrastructure deployment” will be a non runner in the good old EU…..
have your say