Net Neutrality to End in the US?

Net neutrality: internet 'rules' get go ahead in the US for first time

The new rules also prevent providers from blocking lawful content but still let them ration access to their networks.

The Federal Communications Commission approved the "Open Internet" order after FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's plan got the support of fellow Democrats Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn.

The rules aim to strike a balance between the interests of Web service providers, content companies and consumers, but some industry analysts think a court challenge is still likely.

At issue is whether regulators need to guarantee that all stakeholders continue to have reasonable access to the Internet, a principle often called "net neutrality," or whether the Internet is best left to flourish unregulated.

The two Republican commissioners at the agency opposed the measure saying it was unnecessary and would stifle innovation. Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker told an FCC open meeting that they believed the rules would fail in court.

High-speed Internet providers like Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications can "reasonably" manage their networks under the rules and perhaps charge consumers based on levels of Internet usage.

The rules, to be somewhat looser for wireless Internet, could help cable companies in competition with plans by Microsoft Corp, Google and Amazon.com to deliver competing

UK Communications Minister Ed Vaizey will be watching closely after he expressed his preference for a tiered system earlier this year but then clarified that he did not think ISPs should be able to prioritise one provider's content over another.

He is currently under pressure from several internet heavyweights such as eBay and Skype to preserve net neutrality and enshrine them into law to maintain an "open internet".

Democrat senator Al Franken said last week that the vote would decide "the most important free speech issue of our time".

He said: "Imagine if Comcast customers couldn't watch Netflix, but were limited only to Comcast's video-on-demand service. Imagine if a cable news network could get its website to load faster on your computer than your favourite local political blog. Imagine if big corporations with their own agenda could decide who wins or loses online.

"The internet as we know it would cease to exist."

The new regulations are expected to be challenged in court.

Internet Porn Block Not Possible?

The latest assault on men's sexuality from the sexual trade union (feminism) is an end to net neutrality and an opting-in scheme for internet pornography, smuggled into government policy under the pretence that it's about protecting children.

Net neutrality should be recognised as a key issue for the Men's Rights Movement - without the total and anonymous freedom of speech that the internet provides, men would never have come together to air their grievances, being so stifled in real life by the pervasive and perverse influences of political correctness and woman-worship.

Any attack on net neutrality is an attack on men's ability to speak their minds about the injustices done to them safely - that is, without losing their jobs or being thrown in prison.

Feminists talk a load of nonsense about safe spaces; the truth is that the internet is men's safe space, and it is the only safe space we have.

Accordingly, this news should be met with great enthusiasm.

Internet porn block 'not possible' say ISPs

Government plans to block pornography "at source" are unlikely to prove effective, say ISPs.

The proposal to cut off access to pornographic material was floated by Culture Minister Ed Vaizey in an interview with the Sunday Times.

The government is talking to ISPs to set up a meeting at which the proposal will be discussed.

But, say experts, technical challenges mean any large scale filtering system is doomed to failure.

Legal issues

A spokesman for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, confirmed Mr Vaizey's plan to talk to ISPs about setting up an age verification scheme to govern access to pornographic sites.

"This is a very serious matter," said Mr Vaizey. "I think it's very important that it's the ISPs that come up with solutions to protect children."

"I'm hoping they will get their acts together so we don't have to legislate, but we are keeping an eye on the situation and we will have a new communications bill in the next couple of years."

In response to the government proposal, Nicholas Lansman, secretary general of the Ispa industry body, said: "Ispa firmly believes that controls on children's access to the internet should be managed by parents and carers with the tools ISPs provide, rather than being imposed top-down."

Mr Lansman said its members provided parents with many different means of controlling what is accessible via the computers in their homes.

"Online safety is a priority issue for the internet industry and ISPA will be discussing the options available to protect children with Government," he said.

"ISPs currently block child abuse content which is illegal and widely regarded as abhorrent," said Mr Lansman. "Blocking lawful pornography content is less clear cut, will lead to the blocking of access to legitimate content and is only effective in preventing inadvertent access."

BT, the UK's largest ISP, said it would be "happy" to take part in any discussion of the issues, but added: "There are many legal, consumer rights and technical issues that would need to be considered before any new web blocking policy was developed."

Filter failure

"Unfortunately, It's technically not possible to completely block this stuff," said Trefor Davies, chief technology officer at ISP Timico.

He said the sheer volume of pornographic material online and the number of ways that people access it, via the web, file-sharing networks, news groups, discussion boards and the like, made the job impossible.

While some proponents of a national pornographic filtering scheme cite the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) as an example of how such a scheme might work, Mr Davies said it was not a good guide.

The IWF circulates a list to ISPs of sites found to be hosting illegal images of child sexual abuse.

However, said Mr Davies, the IWF draws up its list largely using information passed to it by the public. In addition it only tackles illegal content found on websites.

Such a system would not work if it was used to deal with millions of porn sites, chat rooms and bulletin boards, he said.

Experience with filtering systems, he said, shows that they are a very blunt tool that often blocks access to sites that could be useful.

"You end up with a system that's either hugely expensive and a losing battle because there are millions of these sites or it's just not effective," he said.

"The cost of putting these systems in place outweigh the benefits, to my mind," he said.

Mr Davies also feared that any wide-scale attempt to police pornographic content would soon be expanded to include pirated pop songs, films and TV shows.

"If we take this step it will not take very long to end up with an internet that's a walled garden of sites the governments is happy for you to see," he said.

'Child protection'

His comment was echoed by Jim Killock, chair of the Open Rights Group which campaigns on digital liberties issues.

"This is not about pornography, it is about generalised censorship through the back door," said Mr Killock.

"This is the wrong way to go," he said. "If the government controlled a web blacklist, you can bet that Wikileaks would be on it."

Miranda Suit, co-chair of Safer Media, which campaigns to make media safe for children, told the BBC that the pornography available on the internet was "qualitatively and quantitatively" different from any that has gone before.

Ms Suit cited a report compiled by the US conservative think tank The Witherspoon Institute which suggested that easy access to pornography was damaging some young people.

"Children are becoming addicted in their teens to internet pornography," she said. "They are being mentally damaged so they cannot engage in intimate relationships."

Safer Media backed the government call to block pornography "at source", said Ms Suit.

"What we are talking about is censorship to protect our children," she said.

Give it a rest, Ms Suit. The only thing you're trying to protect is your own feelings. The very same forces of female jealousy behind Prohibition, the criminalising of men who solicit prostitutes, and the forever-expanding legal definitions of rape are to be found once again behind the plans to end net neutrality. The most fundamental point of agreement between traditionalists and feminists is this - that male sexuality is something which must be restrained, bridled, controlled, or even (in the case of feminists) eradicated - and certainly never satisfied.

UK Government Plans to Censor Internet: Won't Somebody Think of The Children!

Telegraph: Internet pornography curb by the Government

Internet pornography could be blocked from entering the homes of people with children, under plans being considered by the Government.

Ed Vaizey, the communications minister, has called a meeting with the country’s biggest broadband providers, including BT, Virgin Media and TalkTalk, to explore changing how pornography gets into homes.

Instead of using parents having to choose to stop access to explicit websites, through parental controls, a block will be placed at source, meaning adults will have to specifically opt-in to receive the images.

The move is designed to prevent children from being exposed to sex at an early age and follows warnings about the hidden impact of pornography.

However many technology experts said the plans were unworkable even if the broadband providers signed up to a voluntary code.

It relies upon the Government or the internet service providers themselves having a comprehensive and up-to-date list of pornographic websites.

Critics also argued that the move would be "censorship through the back door" and could end up restricting access to many legitimate websites.

The attempt by Mr Vaizey to curb access to online pornography comes as an increasing number of televisions are being sold which allow viewers to watch internet sites through the screens.

Mr Vaizey said: “This is a very serious matter. I think it is very important that it’s the ISPs (internet service providers) that come up with solutions to protect children.” “I’m hoping they will get their acts together so we don’t have to legislate, but we are keeping an eye on the situation and we will have a new communications bill in the next couple of years.”

A spokesman for Virgin Media said: “We already have an opt-in approach on mobiles. We’re able to block sites, so it would be possible to do the same on the internet. It is just about finding the right approach.”

Daily Mail: Porn, keep out! Parents to be allowed to block computers from receiving sexual imagery

Internet pornography sites will be automatically blocked from home computers unless households request access under an ‘opt-in’ system.

Ministers want to reverse the current situation in which such sites are accessible to anyone surfing the internet, including children, unless a lock is installed.

Under the plans, those who want access to pornography sites would have to ask their broadband firm to make them available.

The Coalition is hoping to persuade Internet firms to devise this system voluntarily, but would legislate if they fail to comply.

The move, under discussion at the Business, Innovation and Skills Department comes as families are increasingly using the family TV set to view websites.

Ministers are to meet broadband providers including BT, Virgin Media, and TalkTalk in the new year.

The plan is to allow parents to 'opt out' of the sites and they will then be blocked at the source, rather than using conventional parental controls.

Adults who wish to view the material would have to choose to 'opt in'.

Following their decision, homeowners would then be able to choose what sites they receive in a cinema style guide, such as U for all ages, or 18 for adults.

The move comes as some of Britain's biggest broadband providers prepare for talks with Communications Minister Ed Vaizey.

Representatives from TalkTalk, BT and Virgin Media are to meet Mr Vaizey to discuss how they can stop pornography being seen by youngsters.

The Communications Minister told the Sunday Times: ' This is a very serious matter. I think it is very important that the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) come up with solutions to protect children.

'I am hoping they will get their acts together so we don't have to legislate, but we are keeping an eye on the situation and we will have a new communications bill in the next couple of years.'

The initiative comes following a successful trial by British ISPs to stop innocent people accessing child pornography websites.

Ministers now want companies to use the same technology to stop children accessing adult images. A survey earlier this year said one in three ten-year-olds has viewed pornography.

Tory MP for Devizes Claire Perry, who has campaigned for restrictions said: 'Unless we show leadership, the internet industry is not going to self-regulate. The minister has said he will get ISPs together and say "either you clean out your stables or we are going to do it for you".

'We are not coming at this from an anti-porn perspective. We just want to make sure children aren't stumbling across things we don't want them to see.'

Previously the providers had said implementing the scheme would cost too much and be technically difficult.

However some internet providers now seem happy to implement the scheme voluntarily.

Andrew Heaney, TalkTalk's executive director of strategy and regulation, said: 'Our objective was not to do what the politicians want us but to do what is right for our customers.'

'If other companies aren't going to do it of their own volition, then maybe they should be leant on.'

A Virgin Media spokesman said they had already implemented the technology on their mobile service, as they can leave the home, but said that parents can control what their children see at home and online.

And a BT spokesman said they had a 'clean feed' system to stop access to illegal sites.

The Internet being what it is, I find it unlikely that online pornography can be eradicated any more than music and film pirating. E.g. here is a tale of a company which produces online adult films, and is ecstatic that its movies are being pirated, because it actually allows them to make more money.

Also, I completely fail to see the link between protecting children from sexual abuse and the prevalence of adult pornography. I can't be the only one, can I?

And naturally, there is a lot of hang-wringing about the 'violence' and 'exploitation' inherent to pornography, and how any man who watches it is some kind of crazed sex fiend who shall surely be inspired to act out what he sees on the screen.

Yes, this is surely the first step onto a slippery slope - while men may be ashamed of having to 'opt in' under the proposed law, how long until this is not even an option any more?

No restrictions on erotica (porn for women), I notice - only images.

Strange, because erotica can get very explicit indeed, and if we were really hoping to protect children, I'd think this would be just as high a priority.

Perhaps it's time to stock up on free porn while it's all still out there and available for easy download; for Men Going Their Own Way, it will help you through the tough times ahead.

I intend to purchase several external hard drives for the purpose. LOL!