[Sam]

Just read this post here: http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/26/fcc-net-neutrality/.

It seems that we are actually going to see net neutrality which is brilliant from a freedom of speech/ transparency point of view. What are your thoughts?

[Scouten]

I am very happy about this. Mainly because cable providers can't give someone priority over other people, and can't charge more or slow down their bandwidth for using websites such as Netflix. But the thing is, the internet will also become more regulated by the government, which does change things.

[ksridharprasad]

Hi Friends,

Now itself I have open the link seen the procession of enthusiasts with banners and play cards about internet.

[cmoneyspinner]

Just read this post here: http://www.engadget.com/2015/02/26/fcc-net-neutrality/.

It seems that we are actually going to see net neutrality which is brilliant from a freedom of speech/ transparency point of view. What are your thoughts?

* * My thoughts. It's 2017. A lot has happened and is happening.

For the sake of those who may not understand what this discussion is about I copied this definition found in the Google search results.

net neu·tral·i·ty
(noun) the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites.

Hopefully, by supplying this definition, all of us who participate in this discussion, will start out on the same page.

The top story of May 2, 2017, approx 3PM CST is:

Net neutrality redux: The battle for an open net continues
https://www.cnet.com/news/net-neutrality-redux-the-battle-for-an-open-net-continues/

This is certainly a topic that should be followed for any user of the Internet. I know this isn't going to be a simple “come and let us reason together” discussion that will be resolved quickly and the end result will make everybody happy happy!

So here's my question on the matter. It's a “lesser of two evils” type of question.

Not sure what it is going on in other parts of the world, but in America, the majority of the citizens believe in the ideal of net neutrality.

WE don't want a government blocking or limiting access and in effect, blocking FREEDOM of the citizens and taking away their rights! No more than we want the government blacking out the transmission of programs on television or the radio. TV, radio, Internet ... it's all the same. It's about communicating and about informing The People.

WE also don't want businesses trying to control access, so they can EXTORT MONEY from customers! I think our financial and economic crisis is PROOF of our reasons why. We know what corporate CEOs are capable of!! "Corporations are people, my friend." No Mr. Romney, my friend. CEOs are the people that run corporations and companies, who make poor (or possibly "crooked") decisions that cause business closures, massive layoffs, unemployment, etc. and even cause banking institutions to go under! - institutions that are supposedly "too big to fail" - and somehow these "people" walk off into the sunset filthy rich!!

Yes. It would be nice government and business could come together and work things out for the benefit of the lowly consumers.

So the question to the citizen/netizen/consumer is:
Which entity would you rather have the authority to regulate your Internet access? The government OR a business? It has to be regulated. But what's the best way?

Speak up, speak out, and speak loudly!!

Back to you, @Sam.

[Sam]

Which entity would you rather have the authority to regulate your Internet access? The government OR a business? It has to be regulated. But what's the best way?

It should not be up to internet service providers or the government to favour particular content. However, clearly there is content and actions that a majority can agree we don't want online.

In New Zealand, I can very much appreciate that we have a firewall that blocks child pornography, but it would be better if those sites where it was shared were shut down. I'm not sure whether your personal internet access has to be regulated... but perhaps it does because of the difficulty in shutting down hidden services (TOR).

Ideally there would be an international internet arbitration court / mediator set up in multiple regions. They would/could hear cases on:
- Illegal content (internationally agreed illegal content).
- Domain trademark infringement.
- Counterfeits.
- Domain squatting.
- International hacking and DDOS.
- Espionage (corporate and government).

The issue is that it requires governments to agree on a whole range of (difficult) topics:
- What constitutes illegal content. My personal view is that freedom of speech only ends when a physical crime has or will be committed e.g. hate speech is not a crime but planning an attack on a mosque would be. It should not be the government who polices freedom of speech. The public does a good job of doing that e.g. blasting an actor for fat shaming: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment ... d=11848230.
- Copyright infringement. There has to be a balance which best encourages innovation. How long should copyright last? I personally feel that shorter copyrights are better. In New Zealand, copyright lasts 50 years or 50 years from when the author dies. Here's an interesting table of copyright lengths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ht_lengths.
- Trademarks... when are they violated? How long do they last?
- Patents... and patent trolls

etc. etc.

[cmoneyspinner]

@Sam - Safety and protection of people, especially children, is KEY – just as much on the Internet as anywhere else.

I'm not tech savvy. Didn't graduate from Geek University. There's a lot I don't know. But here is what I think everybody needs to understand.

The Internet is no different from somebody sitting in my house. There are rules of etiquette, ways to treat people courteously and show respect, etc. etc.

I think if we approach cyberspace “law and order” in the same way we approach our private personal space and our behavior in public places, we stand a better chance of coming up with laws, rules and regulations that protect us.

Speaking of child pornography, what about the darknet? View the darknet, if used for criminal purposes, the same way you view the Mafia or organized crime activities. Go after them!! Be relentless in your pursuit!

Nothing is really different about the Internet and the physical world, except that people think they are invisible and can get away with committing unlawful acts. But it's all in their head! Going back to what I said. We need to regulate!

I think our government officials should take the lead. Why? Because they make the laws, with input from the citizenry, of course. But I think our private citizens and businesses who know what lack of control can lead to … profit-wise and otherwise ... should play an integral role in working with political and government officials regarding the FAIR and NEUTRAL provision of Internet services.

The Internet is a great tool and resource. Far better than the telephone, TV and radio. Let's make the best use of it. Harness its power. That's all I'm saying.

[thisnthat]

I didn't think it was quite a done deal. I'll have to read your link when I have more time.

I just know that Mozilla is still seeking signatures (or was a couple days ago) for a letter writing campaign in support of it.

[cmoneyspinner]

I didn't think it was quite a done deal. I'll have to read your link when I have more time.

I just know that Mozilla is still seeking signatures (or was a couple days ago) for a letter writing campaign in support of it.

* * Net Neutrality is still a HOT BUTTON TOPIC! Even if they pass laws that are not in favor of the general public, people won't just accept it and give up the fight. Are you kidding? That'll mark the beginning of the battle!