Verdict at Stanford: We Want Net Neutrality
April 18th, 2008 by jstearnsRefusing to show their faces wasn’t enough to protect Comcast at Thursday’s FCC hearing at Stanford University, where attendees called for the corporation’s head and implored the FCC to protect network neutrality.
People have been incensed by Comcast’s practice of blocking and discriminating online, so it was no surprise that more than 600 people showed up at Dinkelspiel Auditorium to discuss the future of the Internet. All five FCC commissioners were on hand to listen to expert witnesses and members of the public.
| Lawrence Lessig delivers a landmark presentation to the FCC on the future of the open Internet in America. “Preserve what has worked in driving this economy — and what has worked is a neutral network.” |
Here are their opening statements:
Not one person on the expert panels, made up of scholars, network engineers, lawyers, and consumer advocates, defended Comcast’s misdeeds. While some speakers believed that Internet providers should be allowed to “manage” Web traffic, the vast majority opposed any blocking of consumer choice or legal content because it could crush innovation, competition and free speech.
A few highlights:
- Ben Scott Statement: “This hearing is a pivotal moment in the short history of Internet policymaking.”
- Robert Topolski Statement: Part One, Part Two.
- Harold Feld Statement: “There is a time to speak, and a time to keep silent. With respect, the time has come for the FCC to speak.”
- Barbara Van Schewick Statement: “Disclosure alone is not enough.”
- Jason Devitt, CEO Skydeck Statement: “If this were a Dickens novel, then I would be the Ghost of Internet Future.”
Hundreds of people also turned out to make their voices heard. It was a diverse crowd that came to talk about the importance of an open Internet. People from all walks of life, political affiliations and industries called on the FCC to protect free speech, civil rights, journalism, small business, educational opportunity and more.
In the two hours of public testimony, every single comment supported Net Neutrality and an open Internet. And every comment made it clear that the time for the FCC to act is now.
George Cammarota, an electrical engineer from San Jose, spoke to the panel about the need to safeguard democracy. “If any entity for its own private interest is allowed to limit or otherwise interfere with the free flow of information based solely on the source, destination or content of that information,” he said, “then our freedom of speech is violated and our democracy is placed in extreme jeopardy.”
L. Peter Deutsch, a self-employed composer, retaliated against Comcast’s ploy to write its own “bill of rights.”
“Comcast actions to date have shown that they can’t be trusted to ‘self regulate,’ ” Deutsch said. “Allowing the big carriers rather than consumers and public interest advocates, to take the lead in codifying a ‘bill of rights’ for Internet users would be like letting King George’s cabinet take the lead in writing the U.S. Constitution.”
Video of the public testimony, and the rest of the hearing, is available here: http://www.vontv.net/events/080417. For a taste of some of the video recorded testimony, see ColorOfChange.org’s video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ymCR3DDizw.
You can also listen to the audio archive at the FCC Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/realaudio.
April 18th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
[…] SavetheInternet.com has a short summary with links to some of the written testimony. […]
April 19th, 2008 at 1:14 am
[…] 18, 2008 by poet1960 The FCC held another hearing at Stanford University today. The previous one at Harvard last February, was almost ludicrous taking in to account the antics […]
April 19th, 2008 at 8:59 am
NET NEUTRALITY, THE LAST FRONTIER OF FREE SPEECH - ONE VOICE, ONE VOTE - FAIR AND BALANCED, IT PROVIDES, YOU DECIDE
When Verizon extends fiber to the curb and then cuts the copper cable behind it on the way out while Homeland Security gives lectures about the need for multiple paths of redundancy built into essential networks, it’s time for net neutrality.
When large digital content companies align themselves with the digital pipes that distribute their content and coordinate public campaigns designed to concentrate content in a closed system, it’s time for net neutrality.
When broadband service is available overseas for twice the speed at half the price while the public is lectured about how interference with private markets reduces economic efficiency, it’s time for net neutrality.
When one cannot walk on a public street or in a shopping mall wearing a protest slogan on a tee shirt without being surveilled, tagged and run through a bank of data mines, it’s time for net neutrality.
When public relations firms spend millions to generate messages disguised to appear as emerging independently from grassroot levels as well as professional sources, it’s time for net neutrality.
When a broken health-care industry issues warnings that going online for medical information can be dangerous and one should see a physician before taking aspirin, it’s time for net neutrality.
When a lobbying industry with over 30,000 members spends $17M a day while Congress is in session to influence the democratic process through special access, it’s time for net neutrality.
When a broadband provider treats a public hearing like an annoying irritation from the public that just doesn’t understand how markets work and buys up the seats like a strip mall crowding out the public square, it’s time for net neutrality.
When broadband providers issue threats not to invest or build out networks under the competitive conditions imposed on content by network neutralty - in effect holding customers hostage to their market power over physical networks - it’s time for net neutrality.
When the enforcement of property rights over content and security over the protection of the network is exploited and abused ad nauseum as absurd excuses to undermine the competition among content producers and consumers enabled by net neutrality, it’s time for net neutrality.
When “hands off the internet” means “hands on free speech”, it’s time for net neutrality.
It’s the last frontier for spontaneous, self-organizing free speech to thrive from the bottom up on a level playing field, free of manipulation and crowding out from the top down. One voice, one vote for anyone who wants to participate.
As Lawrence Lessig stated eloquently in the Standford hearing, support competition, support net neutrality - not its promise, its clear enforcement.
It’s not just an alternative to competition and free speech any more. For many, it is the only alternative. Let a thousand flowers bloom, and a thousand more …
April 20th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
I was the only person on any of the panels who was an Internet service provider or had actual experience running one. For the full text of my prepared remarks, see http://www.brettglass.com/FCC/remarks.html
April 21st, 2008 at 12:42 pm
[…] Save The Internet: We want net neutrality! […]
April 21st, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I absolutely support Net neutrality.
April 21st, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Thank you Brett Glass. I appreciated reading about the other side, especially http://www.brettglass.com/principles.pdf
April 21st, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Google has been pushing for a more open and easily accessible internet and various companies have been working on cloud computing and grandscale wifi. I would like to push easier access to the internet backbone, leading to less control by large companies and hence a chance for those want certain freedoms to get it, by way of economic supply and demand instead of barking at the FCC.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
net neutrality is the only thing that we have that most countries dont and we need this to help this country stay different from others