NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: Civil Rights Groups Wants P2P Throttling to Preserve Rights (or something like that)
Brett's WISP lacks a conflict of interest inherent in CATV ISPs and
TelCo ISPs. That fact, added to sufficiently explicit and complete
disclosure, does make the discrimination more acceptable to me.
Before jumping into the pool with Brett, at least one assumption I'd
like to study is the necessity of P2P blocking on WISPs. As Lauren
has mentioned before, it seems irrational that an FTP upload at the
customer's upload speed is significantly better for the network than a
P2P upload at the same speed. (And I reject the "hundreds of
connections" argument since all but 4 of them are idle at any moment
in time.)
Robb Topolski
[ Please steer technical arguments regarding P2P (vs. FTP or
whatever) to the Forum ( http://www.nnsquad.org/forum )
for now. I will not keep sending out more "P2P is good
because" and "P2P is bad because" messages on the list for
the time being. Robb and Brett are welcome to continue
this thread on the Forum and notable points there will be
summarized on the list. Thanks.
-- Lauren Weinstein
NNSquad Moderator ]
----------
On 3/7/08, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.net> wrote:
> Vint:
>
> To echo your message:
>
> Our users voluntarily choose to use our service. We tell them in
> advance that our Terms of Service prohibit P2P and that our network
> will throttle or block it automatically -- and that, inasmuch as
> possible, we do not want to look at the content. Google seems to
> assert the right to inspect people's e-mail on the basis of a
> "click wrap" agreement that most users do not read at all and few
> would read all the way down to the end, where there is a very vague
> disclosure of Google's practices:
>
> >17.1 Some of the Services are supported by advertising revenue and
> >may display advertisements and promotions. These advertisements
> >may be targeted to the content of information stored on the
> >Services, queries made through the Services or other information.
> >
> >17.2 The manner, mode and extent of advertising by Google on the
> >Services are subject to change without specific notice to you.
> >
> >17.3 In consideration for Google granting you access to and use of
> >the Services, you agree that Google may place such advertising on the Services.
>
> What's more, you inspect the contents of e-mail in an attempt to
> block spam, which requires far deeper inspection than we ever do to
> block network abuse.
>
> How can you, as a representative of Google, repudiate our ISP for
> enforcing our terms of service and maintaining the quality of our
> service (which we spell out clearly to customers) when you do
> things that are much more invasive?
>
>
> --Brett Glass
>
>
> At 03:35 PM 3/7/2008, Vint Cerf wrote:
>
> >Brett, these users voluntarily choose to use the gmail
> >application. We tell them in advance that we will select
> >advertising based on the message contents. You seem to assert the
> >right to inspect my packets even if all I am using is your packet
> >transport service. V
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Brett Glass <nnsquad@brettglass.com>
> >To: Vint Cerf; Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
> >Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org <nnsquad@nnsquad.org>
> >Sent: Fri Mar 07 14:21:24 2008
> >Subject: Re: [ NNSquad ] Re: Civil Rights Groups Wants P2P
> >Throttling to Preserve Rights (or something like that)
> >
> >At 12:59 PM 3/7/2008, Vint Cerf wrote:
> >
> > >the issue is whether I am using Brett's email services or not, as I
> > >see it. He is right to resist abuse of email relays. He is also right
> > >to limit total consumption. but I am not comfortable with the idea
> > >that he could inspect my packet content and decide on the basis of
> > >protocol or content what I can send.
> >
> >Vint:
> >
> >I find this highly ironic. As we are all aware, Google not only
> >inspects the contents of GMail users' highly personal e-mail but
> >uses them to target advertising at them. Certainly, this is far
> >more egregious than simply monitoring (and no more than we need
> >to!) to stop abuse.
> >
> >--Brett Glass
>
>
--
Robb Topolski (robb@funchords.com)
Hillsboro, Oregon USA
http://www.funchords.com/