<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AT&#038;T Filtering Plan Violates BellSouth Merger</title>
	<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/</link>
	<description>Tracking the battle over Network Neutrality</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 13:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: onaturalia</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-122727</link>
		<dc:creator>onaturalia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:25:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-122727</guid>
		<description>AT&#38;T practices two forms of censorship of content today. Email blocking and Newsgroup blocking. If someone complains to AT&#38;T about SPAM coming from a particular email domain, that domain is blocked for all AT&#38;T users. This includes all non-SPAM related email. There have been thousands of cases of email communications between users cut off in this manner and the recipient has no idea their email is blocked. In Newsgroups, the Attorney General of NY is on a child porn witch hunt and convinced AT&#38;T to block all newsgroup domains that have ever included attachments of illegal images. Another example of indiscriminate censorship because most communications in those domains do not have illegal content. So AT&#38;T is censoring content, legal or otherwise. And they are working with government agencies in this process. AT&#38;T is a communications company in the public sector and they are actively censoring content today. It will not surprise me if they block this website in the near future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AT&amp;T practices two forms of censorship of content today. Email blocking and Newsgroup blocking. If someone complains to AT&amp;T about SPAM coming from a particular email domain, that domain is blocked for all AT&amp;T users. This includes all non-SPAM related email. There have been thousands of cases of email communications between users cut off in this manner and the recipient has no idea their email is blocked. In Newsgroups, the Attorney General of NY is on a child porn witch hunt and convinced AT&amp;T to block all newsgroup domains that have ever included attachments of illegal images. Another example of indiscriminate censorship because most communications in those domains do not have illegal content. So AT&amp;T is censoring content, legal or otherwise. And they are working with government agencies in this process. AT&amp;T is a communications company in the public sector and they are actively censoring content today. It will not surprise me if they block this website in the near future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jdkhost</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-89912</link>
		<dc:creator>jdkhost</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 08:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-89912</guid>
		<description>Recommended for everyone to a game site: http://www.cxkf.net.cn/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recommended for everyone to a game site: <a href="http://www.cxkf.net.cn/" rel="nofollow">http://www.cxkf.net.cn/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Net Neutrality Links 02-11-2008</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-87374</link>
		<dc:creator>Net Neutrality Links 02-11-2008</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-87374</guid>
		<description>[...] AT&#38;T Filtering Plan Violates BellSouth Merger By schang But less discussed — and equally important — are the ways AT&#38;T’s proposed filtering violates the Net Neutrality conditions the company reluctantly agreed to back in December 2006 to seal its mega-merger with BellSouth. &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] AT&amp;T Filtering Plan Violates BellSouth Merger By schang But less discussed — and equally important — are the ways AT&amp;T’s proposed filtering violates the Net Neutrality conditions the company reluctantly agreed to back in December 2006 to seal its mega-merger with BellSouth. &#8230; [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quick News Links for Week Ending 2/10/2008 &#171; Command Line</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-87187</link>
		<dc:creator>Quick News Links for Week Ending 2/10/2008 &#171; Command Line</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 19:11:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2008/02/05/att-filtering-plan-violates-bellsouth-merger/#comment-87187</guid>
		<description>[...] Is AT&#38;T violating terms of BellSouth merger? I think the access to lawful content and failures to correctly handle fair use are enough without stretching the other network neutrality provisions as the opinion piece tries to do. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Is AT&amp;T violating terms of BellSouth merger? I think the access to lawful content and failures to correctly handle fair use are enough without stretching the other network neutrality provisions as the opinion piece tries to do. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
