<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>CircleID: Net Neutrality</title>
		<link>http://www.circleid.com/</link>
		<description>Latest Net Neutrality related postings on CircleID</description>
		<dc:language>en</dc:language>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2008, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2008-08-29T10:37:00-08:00</dc:date>
		
		
		<item>
			<title>ISP Deep Packet Inspection Remains a Probable Option, Despite Controversies</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/isp_deep_packet_inspection_probable_option/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/isp_deep_packet_inspection_probable_option/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A US firm was among ISPs operating in Argentina that recently received orders from the country's Department of Justice to put a stop to all local traffic visiting a particular gambling website operating without a license. An anonymous source, according to Ian Lamont of The Industry Standard, has said that Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) was floated as a possible option to accomplish this task although later not implemented due to high costs. Lamont reports: "The DPI approach would be troubling on a number of levels. First, any ISP using DPI is going beyond a government mandate to simply block traffic to a particular site. The ISPs would actually be peering inside their customers' Web traffic without their knowledge." Although DPI wasn't used in this particular case, "it will probably be considered in the future as a way to take offensive or illegal sites offline." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/isp_deep_packet_inspection_probable_option/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-19T15:50:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>privacy</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Lawrence Lessig&apos;s Reaction to McCain&apos;s Technology Plan</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88192_lawrence_lessigs_reaction_mccain_technology_plan/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88192_lawrence_lessigs_reaction_mccain_technology_plan/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In reaction to U.S. republican presidential candidate <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/john_mccain_technology_policy_statement/">John McCain's release of his technology policy statement</a> on August 14, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig">Lawrence Lessig</a> has released a video presentation criticizing the tech plan for lack of change to important issues such as broadband penetration declines in the country. Early during the video presentation, Lessig has this to say: "...the single most important fact about internet's development in last decade has been the extraordinary decline United States has faced with respect to our competitive partners. We started the Bush administration at no. 5, we will end at no. 22. And the question anybody should be asking about internet policy here, is why we did so poorly and what change there might be to reverse that decline..." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88192_lawrence_lessigs_reaction_mccain_technology_plan/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-19T11:14:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>The McCain Campaign&apos;s &quot;Technology&quot; Message</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88178_mccain_campaign_technology_message/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88178_mccain_campaign_technology_message/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I look at this as the ideas of Mike Powell and Meg Whitman, and a lot of unimportant wordsmithing. Before the Dublin (Erie) IETF I wrote one for one of the top three DCCC targeted races. You, or One, or I (isn't voice fun) tries for ideas that matter, and then try to connect the dots, for the semi-literate staff of a candidate who needs clue, e.g., to make effective calls to the DNC's major contributor lists for area codes 415, 408, 650 and 831. I mention Dublin because ages ago Scott Bradner's plan for Harvard, decent bandwidth everywhere and location transparency was, in just a few pages, a revolutionary policy document then, and now, and I was happy to see Scott again and let him know that two decades later I still remembered seeing policy stated with confidence and clarity. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88178_mccain_campaign_technology_message/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-17T20:33:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>regional_registries</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>John McCain Unveils His Technology Policy Statement</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/john_mccain_technology_policy_statement/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/john_mccain_technology_policy_statement/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[U.S. republican presidential candidate John McCain has unveiled his <a href="http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/CBCD3A48-4B0E-4864-8BE1-D04561C132EA.htm">technology policy statement</a>. The statement includes candidate's positions on major tech issues such as Net neutrality, patent protection and piracy, broadband availability, and privacy and particularly focuses on increased innovation, intellectual property protection, and preserving technology through market forces. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/john_mccain_technology_policy_statement/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-15T12:04:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>McCain&apos;s Tech Policy</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88151_mccain_tech_policy/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88151_mccain_tech_policy/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was hoping that <a href="http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/CBCD3A48-4B0E-4864-8BE1-D04561C132EA.htm">McCain's Tech Policy</a> would emphasize and extend the two McCain pro-Internet initiatives -- the McCain Lautenberg Community Broadband Act and Spectrum Re-regulation, neither of which have yet seen the light of day -- but it doesn't. In the first case, it makes a vague nod in the direction of "market failure and other obstacles." In the second, it treats spectrum policy as a done deal; now that we can surf the Web in coffee shops, we're done. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88151_mccain_tech_policy/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-15T11:09:01-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Blocking or Metering Broadband Access is a False Choice, Says New Report</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88894_blocking_metering_broadband_false_choice/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88894_blocking_metering_broadband_false_choice/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[n a report released today by the Free Press, Derek Turner, Research Director argues that, in light of <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/">recent FCC ruling against Comcast</a>, it is a "false choice" to believe that "because application blocking is out of bounds, providers now will be forced to use some type of 'metering' to control network congestion." In other words, if ISPs are not allowed to block applications, then usage-based pricing is NOT their only other viable option, asserts Turner. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88894_blocking_metering_broadband_false_choice/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-08T09:40:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Google&apos;s Cerf Offers Alternate Strategy to Metered Broadband Billing</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/cerf_alternate_strategy_broadband_billing/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/cerf_alternate_strategy_broadband_billing/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In follow up to <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/">Friday's FCC ruling against Comcast</a>, Vint Cerf, Google's Chief Internet Evangelist questioned what a reasonable approach would be for broadband networks to manage their Internet traffic? "The real question," he says, is not whether broadband networks need to be managed, "but rather how." Cerf has also expressed concerns over metered billing and suggests "transmission rate caps" instead. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/cerf_alternate_strategy_broadband_billing/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-04T21:27:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Hunting Unicorns: Myths and Realities of the Net Neutrality Debate</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88112_myths_net_neutrality_debate/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88112_myths_net_neutrality_debate/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In many ways, the emotionally charged debate on Network Neutrality (NN) has been a lot like hunting Unicorns. While hunting the mythical horse could be filled with adrenalin, emotion, and likely be quite entertaining, the prize would ultimately prove to be elusive. As a myth, entertaining; but when myths become reality, then all bets are off. The Network Neutrality public and private debate has been filled with more emotion than rational discussion, and in its wake a number of myths have become accepted as reality. Unfortunately, public policy, consumer broadband services, and service provider business survival hang in the balance. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88112_myths_net_neutrality_debate/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-04T08:31:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category><category>privacy</category><category>voip</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>FCC&apos;s Comcast Ruling Inconsistent and Incoherent</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88103_fcc_comcast_ruling_inconsistent_incoherent/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88103_fcc_comcast_ruling_inconsistent_incoherent/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After voting on the Comcast order today, Kevin Martin and his Democratic Party colleagues issued press releases telling us how they saved the Internet from Comcast's discriminatory practices, but they've failed to release the actual order they adopted and subsequently re-wrote. Commissioner McDowell wasn't allowed to see the revised order until 7:00 PM the night before the meeting. Rumor has it that high-level spin doctors are still trying to remove all the rough edges, inconsistencies, and factual errors. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88103_fcc_comcast_ruling_inconsistent_incoherent/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-01T15:43:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>broadband</category><category>internet_governance</category><category>law</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>p2p</category><category>policy_regulation</category><category>voip</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>EFF Releases New Tool for Internet Users to Test ISP Interference</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/eff_tool_test_isp_interference/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/eff_tool_test_isp_interference/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In light of <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/">today's FCC ruling</a> against Comcast, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has released a software tool dubbed, "<a href="http://www.eff.org/testyourisp/switzerland">Switzerland</a>," for internet users to check ISP interference of their connections. Fred von Lohmann, EFF Senior Intellectual Property Attorney says: "The sad truth is that the FCC is ill-equipped to detect ISPs interfering with your Internet connection. It's up to concerned Internet users to investigate possible network neutrality violations, and EFF's Switzerland software is designed to help with that effort. Comcast isn't the first, and certainly won't be the last, ISP to meddle surreptitiously with its subscribers' Internet communications for its own benefit." <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/eff_tool_test_isp_interference/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-01T14:36:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Comcast and the Internet</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today the FCC is condemning Comcast's practices with respect to P2P transmissions.I'm happy for FreePress and Public Knowledge today, and I know they have achieved a substantial change in the wind. The basic idea that it's not okay for network access providers to discriminate unreasonably against particular applications is now part of the mainstream communications discourse. That has to be good news. I'm concerned on a couple of fronts. The FCC has taken the view that it can adjudicate, on a case-by-case basis, issues that have to do with "Federal Internet Policy." They used that phrase several times... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/88110_comcast_and_the_internet/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-01T10:18:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>law</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>FCC Reprimands Comcast for Internet Traffic Throttling</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Comcast has been ordered to change how it manages its broadband network after U.S. communications regulators concluded some of its tactics unreasonably restrict Internet users who share movies and other material. In a precedent-setting decision, the five-member Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to uphold a complaint accusing Comcast of violating the FCC's open-Internet principles by improperly hindering peer-to-peer traffic. <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/fcc_reprimands_comcast_internet_throttling/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-08-01T10:06:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Another Wrong&#45;Headed WSJ Editorial</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87313_wrong_headed_wsj_editorial_fcc/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87313_wrong_headed_wsj_editorial_fcc/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Those wacky editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal just cannot seem to get the facts straight about network neutrality and what the FCC has done or can do on this matter. In the July 30, 2008 edition (Review and Outlook A14), the Journal vilifies FCC Chairman Kevin Martin for starting along the slippery slope of regulating Internet content. The Journal writers just seem to love hyperbole, and are not beyond ignoring the facts when they do not support a party line. Here are a few examples from the editorial... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87313_wrong_headed_wsj_editorial_fcc/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-31T13:44:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>p2p</category><category>wireless</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>Vint Cerf Caught Off Guard, Nevertheless Says What Needs to Be Said About Our Misguided Policy</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/87246_vint_cerf_caught_off_guard_fortune_brainstorm/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/87246_vint_cerf_caught_off_guard_fortune_brainstorm/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This morning's mail brought news of a 3 minute 45 second video clip of very candid and very outstanding remarks from Vint Cerf. Vint says very clearly what needs to be said and what needs to be grasped and acted on by the new president and congress next year... My observation is that in my opinion it is not the lighting that is unusual but rather the camera angle. It looks like interviewer is seated with his camera pointed up. The camera is looking at Vint's chin. Consequently I sent Vint an email: "you knew you were being recorded - surely? I hope: in any case the good deed is done... thank you sir." Vint replied with permission to quote... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/87246_vint_cerf_caught_off_guard_fortune_brainstorm/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-24T18:32:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category>
		</item>
		
		<item>
			<title>All Major U.S. Senate Democratic Challengers Announce Support for Net Neutrality</title>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.circleid.com/posts/senate_democratic_challengers_support_net_neutrality/</guid>
			<link>http://www.circleid.com/posts/senate_democratic_challengers_support_net_neutrality/</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Eevery single U.S. Democratic challenger with more than $500k in cash on hand has announced their support for net neutrality, reports Matt Stoller of OpenLeft -- "This is a milestone for the fight for internet freedom." Also noted is that, with the exception of three individuals, there is no organized telecom or cable money going to any of these candidates. Included in the report are statements reacting to this news from Senator Byron Dorgan, Speaker Pelosi, FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Google public policy director Alan Davidson, and Columbia Law Professor Tim Wu... <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/senate_democratic_challengers_support_net_neutrality/">More...</a>]]></description>
			<dc:date>2008-07-24T15:21:00-08:00</dc:date>
			<category>internet</category><category>access_providers</category><category>broadband</category><category>net_neutrality</category><category>policy_regulation</category><category>web</category>
		</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>