NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: How to regulate the internet tap is largely misleading
----- Forwarded message from "Marsden, Christopher" <cmars@essex.ac.uk> ----- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 04:47:33 +0100 From: "Marsden, Christopher" <cmars@essex.ac.uk> Subject: RE: [ NNSquad ] How to regulate the internet tap is largely misleading To: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>, "dave@farber.net" <dave@farber.net> CC: "dana@nycwireless.net" <dana@nycwireless.net> Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB I wrote a letter to the NYTimes explaining that their op-ed was rather misleading. Full disclosure, here it is: Sent: 21 April 2010 17:47 To: letters@nytimes.com Subject: Re Op-Ed 20 April: Europe has passed new network neutrality legislation Dear sir I read with interest your guest op-ed 'How to Regulate the Internet Tap' April 20, 2010. These eminent economists draw useful lessons in trying to achieve transparency and consumer information. However, they miss the essential regulatory message. Europe's ISPs are now subject to new laws (Directives EC/2009/136 and EC/2009/140) that enforce transparency, force them to inform consumers and prevent their blocking Voice over Internet Protocol. Your 'take-away' from the European experience should be that legislation at federal level backed by rigorous federal level oversight of state law enforcement is required to cope with ISP discriminatory and obfuscatory activities, even in the more competitive European market. That this is to be achieved by what we in Europe call 'co-regulation' does not hide the hard law and harder regulatory will to enforce these measures in the consumer's best interest. Sincerely Christopher T. Marsden Senior Lecturer in Communications Law University of Essex See: http://chrismarsden.blogspot.com/2010/04/danger-policy-transfer-in-action-part-2.html ________________________________________ From: Lauren Weinstein [lauren@vortex.com] Sent: 25 April 2010 19:29 To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org Subject: [ NNSquad ] How to regulate the internet tap ----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> ----- Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:18:08 -0400 From: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> Subject: [IP] How to regulate the internet tap Reply-To: dave@farber.net To: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com> Begin forwarded message: > From: Dana Spiegel <dana@nycwireless.net> > Date: April 25, 2010 1:55:46 PM EDT > To: dave@farber.net > Cc: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com> > Subject: Re: [IP] How to regulate the internet tap > > John Mayo is certainly an accomplished professor and author, but I'm > frustrated by his (and his coauthor's) apparent glossing over of one > critical difference between "the EU" and the US. > > Since the EU relies upon and assumes a secondary level of > government--the individual country governments of its members--any > regulation by the EU must take such national governments into account. > It seems that the EU's need to acknowledge and defer to member > governments for more specific regulations is the primary driver for its > decision to regulate lightly. Indeed, the language seems to indicate > that since each country is different, each country needs to enact is own > relevant regulation. > > This is in stark contrast to the US government. The FCC cannot rely on > "member governments" to enact their own regulation. Indeed, state and > local government are specifically limited in the forms of telecom > regulation that they can enact. As a result, however the FCC decides to > regulate, that's that. > > While light-touch regulation is a good and noble theory, this important > difference between the US and EU in terms of how and where such > regulations should be imposed is something that must be taken into > consideration. If the FCC were to enact the same regulations that the EU > enacted, it would be by definition deficient with respect to the level > of citizen protection that each EU nation provides, since the FCC would > not have state-level regulations to rely upon as the EU does for > national regulations. > > -- > Dana Spiegel > Executive Director, NYCwireless > dana@nycwireless.net > +1 917 402 0422 > > ------------------- > NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that advocates for, and > enables the growth of free, public wireless networks > ------------------- > > > > > > On Apr 25, 2010, at 1:14 PM, David Farber wrote: > >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: dewayne@warpspeed.com (Dewayne Hendricks) >> Date: April 21, 2010 4:15:18 PM EDT >> To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <xyzzy@warpspeed.com> >> Subject: [Dewayne-Net] How to regulate the internet tap >> >> How to regulate the internet tap >> NY Times >> Op Ed >> By John Mayo, Marius Schwartz, Bruce Owen, Robert Shapiro, Lawrence >> J. White, and Glenn Woroch >> >> “TRANSPARENCY is non-negotiable,” declared Europe’s new commissioner >> for digital issues, Neelie Kroes, in a speech last week laying out her >> thoughts on net neutrality. “In a complex system like the Internet, it >> must be crystal-clear what the practices of operators controlling the >> network mean for all users.” >> >> Ms. Kroes’s comments reflect the decision made by the European Union >> in November to avoid any of the more extreme regulations that could >> stifle the innovation that has been the hallmark of the Internet. >> Instead, the union chose a more measured approach that emphasizes >> transparency. >> >> <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/opinion/21mayo.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print >> >RSS Feed: <http://www.warpspeed.com/wordpress> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now >> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > > ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message ----- ----- End forwarded message -----