Within the European Commission under the field of Information Society we have the group Digital Agenda for Europe , which, in recent months has been consulting on the regulation on Net Neutrality under the policy framework Telecommunications and rights of citizens approved in 2009 , be transposed into the national legislative should be done internally before May 25, 2011 (or instead be directly covered by the Directive).
The result of these consultations has been an official declaration of April 19, 2011, entitled: "The Commission underlines the commitment to ensure an open Internet principles are applied in practice. " Accessible here (In English, the untranslated).
The title is certainly encouraging, but not the text, as the Net neutrality is at the mercy of the economic and traffic control measures in the end nobody can control. Does that is neutrality?
Let us say
Digital Agenda The group recognizes that the economic growth associated with the Internet, which in 15 years has gone from 0 € to several billion euros was mainly due to its openness and low entry costs for the company and the user-consumer. And yet, it also believes that the Net has transformed the way we communicate, the way we do business and how we work, thus opening up opportunities in education, culture, communication, interaction social as well as advances in science and technology more broadly, strengthening freedom of expression and plurality. "It is the" network of networks "that have transformed the way we Communicate and do business, the way we work, opening up great Opportunities in education, culture, communication, social interaction, as well as "enabling advancements in science and technology and encouraging more freedom of expression Broadly and media Plurality."
is, makes the explosion in education, culture, communication, freedom of expression, etc. the possibility of doing business and how to work when the explosion and was there when the Internet had a zero economic value.
It is Widely Accepted That Network Operators Need to Adopt Some traffic management practices to Ensure Their an efficient use of IP networks and That Certain services, Such as for instance real-time video conferencing and IPTV, May require special traffic management to Ensure a predefined high quality of service.
read his statement clearly speak of a neutral bias, does not speak of equal opportunities but non-blocking, but openly admits that operators carry out traffic control measures, the only need for this engagement is transparent and informed. Free competition adheres to switch to another supplier to the end user, but is there any provider that dispenses free to control the traffic?
Effectively Consumers Must Also Be Able to switch to a new provider WHERE A Better quality of service and / or a lower price is Offered, or Where They Are Not satisfied with the service They Are receiving , eg imposer WHERE Their current provider Restrictions on particular services or applications.
thousand times I says: Imagine a toll road, bread trucks pay more than the mango because they generate more traffic (and generate more traffic because they are most needed).
That is, online video, VOIP, P2P legal or illegal, and almost the services they want, have an added cost or worse service. And for the company, if you want to compete, will be an added cost.
This is justified by the need to improve infrastructure and the high cost assuming that the telecommunications operators. They have a public message of concern to the future (see news of Deutsche Telekom ), but the fact is that in crisis, continue to present their accounts as required by law, and go continue to increase profits ( Telefónica Group in 2010 , Vodafone in 2010 , Deutsche Telekom in 2010 ), sometimes multiplied by 5 previous benefits such as Deutsche Telekom by 30% as the Telefónica group.
Are justified Traffic control measures? Is not it possible to improve the infrastructure without further increasing the benefits?
BEREC pero, Did not Distinguish the instances of outright blocking from Those Are Offering WHERE OPERATORS But the service Requiring Additional payments, and Did not Indicate The Economic Significance of These payments. These Are Essential Issues Which Need to Be Further clarifier.
The Group acknowledges that Digital Agenda there is some obscurity in the practice of charging for the use of certain protocols, which differs from the blockade, which it finds itself clearly illegal under the 2009 directive.
There are ways to control traffic is not focused on privileging some services over others, explains the statement itself, but there are those who have been identified as dangerous, as well recognized.
- Packet Differentiation Allows Different classes of traffic to Be Treated Differently, for example for Which services require real-time communication Such as live streaming of audio or video events and VoIP. This Differentiation guarantees a certain minimum quality of service to end-users.
- IP routing allows ISPs to route packets via different communication paths to avoid congestion or provide better services. For example, an Internet Service Provider may route packets towards a server that contains a copy of the requested information which is located either in its network or somewhere close.
- Filtering allows an Internet Service Provider to distinguish between “safe” and “harmful” traffic and block the latter before it reaches its intended destination.
The history of the European Union considers as competitiveness is full of restrictions on business practices (and Spain, has suffered multiple times), and yet, on this occasion, the decision is opposite.
Transparency is a key part of the net neutrality debate.
Will it be enough transparency to ensure a truly neutral? Who will control the transparency? What kind of measures Traffic control will be effective?
His conclusion is that we must keep an open Internet, but (I'd say) that open and transparent is the same.
About:
0 comments:
Post a Comment