Will the APA and Drug Pushers Rule the Internet

[Guest guest]

Think what the drug companies will do to natural cure sites.

Please read the " FAIR USE NOTICE " regarding my intentions.

john

Dear MoveOn member,

Do you buy books online, use Google, or download to an Ipod? These

activities, plus MoveOn's online organizing ability, will be hurt if

Congress passes a radical law that gives giant corporations more

control over the Internet.

Internet providers like AT & T and Verizon are lobbying Congress hard

to gut Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Net

Neutrality prevents AT & T from choosing which websites open most

easily for you based on which site pays AT & T more. Amazon doesn't

have to outbid & Noble for the right to work more properly on

your computer.

If Net Neutrality is gutted, MoveOn either pays protection money to

dominant Internet providers or risks that online activism tools don't

work for members. Amazon and Google either pay protection money or

risk that their websites process slowly on your computer. That why

these high-tech pioneers are joining the fight to protect Network

Neutrality1—and you can do your part today.

The free and open Internet is under seige—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=4

Then, please forward this to 3 friends. Protecting the free and open

Internet is fundamental—it affects everything. When you sign this

petition, you'll be kept informed of the next steps we can take to

keep the heat on Congress. Votes begin in a House committee next week.

MoveOn has already seen what happens when the Internet's gatekeepers

get too much control. Just last week, AOL blocked any email

mentioning a coalition that MoveOn is a part of, which opposes AOL's

proposed " email tax. " 2 And last year, Canada's version of AT & T—Telus—

blocked their Internet customers from visiting a website sympathetic

to workers with whom Telus was negotiating.3

Politicians don't think we are paying attention to this issue. Many

of them take campaign checks from big telecom companies and are on

the verge of selling out to people like AT & T's CEO, who openly

says, " The internet can't be free. " 4

Together, we can let Congress know we are paying attention. We can

make sure they listen to our voices and the voices of people like

Vint Cerf, a father of the Internet and Google's " Chief Internet

Evangelist, " who recently wrote this to Congress in support of

preserving Network Neutrality:

My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great damage to the

Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits

network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of

services and to potentially interfere with others would place

broadband operators in control of online activity...Telephone

companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators

should not dictate what people can do online.4

The essence of the Internet is at risk—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=5

Please forward to 3 others who care about this issue. Thanks for all

you do.

–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic

Action team

Thursday, April 20th, 2006

P.S. If Congress abandons Network Neutrality, who will be affected?

Advocacy groups like MoveOn—Political organizing could be slowed by a

handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to

pay " protection money " for their websites and online features to work

correctly.

Nonprofits—A charity's website could open at snail-speed, and online

contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can't pay dominant

Internet providers for access to " the fast lane " of Internet service.

Google users—Another search engine could pay dominant Internet

providers like AT & T to guarantee the competing search engine opens

faster than Google on your computer.

Innovators with the " next big idea " —Startups and entrepreneurs will

be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay

Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The little guy

will be left in the " slow lane " with inferior Internet service,

unable to compete.

Ipod listeners—A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes,

steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned.

Online purchasers—Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee

their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—

distorting your choice as a consumer.

Small businesses and tele-commuters—When Internet companies like AT & T

favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more affordable

providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls,

and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees—Your choices as a consumer could be controlled

by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services

for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning

vacations, etc.

Bloggers—Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—

silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of

a few corporate-owned media outlets.

To sign the petition to Congress supporting " network neutrality, "

click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=6

P.P.S. This excerpt from the New Yorker really sums up this issue

well.

In the first decades of the twentieth century, as a national

telephone network spread across the United States, A.T. & T. adopted

a policy of " tiered access " for businesses. Companies that paid an

extra fee got better service: their customers' calls went through

immediately, were rarely disconnected, and sounded crystal-clear.

Those who didn't pony up had a harder time making calls out, and

people calling them sometimes got an " all circuits busy " response.

Over time, customers gravitated toward the higher-tier companies and

away from the ones that were more difficult to reach. In effect, A.T.

& T.'s policy turned it into a corporate kingmaker.

If you've never heard about this bit of business history, there's a

good reason: it never happened. Instead, A.T. & T. had to abide by

a " common carriage " rule: it provided the same quality of service to

all, and could not favor one customer over another. But,

while " tiered access " never influenced the spread of the telephone

network, it is becoming a major issue in the evolution of the

Internet.

Until recently, companies that provided Internet access followed a de-

facto commoncarriage rule, usually called " network neutrality, " which

meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network neutrality was

considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that

, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one of

the basic rules of " Internet freedom. " In the past few months,

though, companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to

scuttle it. In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers

could receive what BellSouth recently called " special treatment, " and

those that don't could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth

customers may find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than

YouTube.com, and that the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run

more smoothly. Tiered access will turn the providers into Internet

gatekeepers.4

Sources:

1. " Telecommunication Policy Proposed by Congress Must Recognize

Internet Neutrality, " Letter to Senate leaders, March 23, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1653

2. " AOL Blocks Critics' E-Mails, " Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1649

3. " B.C. Civil Liberties Association Denounces Blocking of Website by

Telus, " British Columbia Civil Liberties Association Statement, July

27, 2005

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1650

4. " At SBC, It's All About 'Scale and Scope, " BusinessWeek, November

7, 2002

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1648

5. " Net Losses, " New Yorker, March 20, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1646

6. " Don't undercut Internet access, " San Francisco Chronicle

editorial, April 17, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1645

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------

FAIR USE NOTICE

This email contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am

making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding

of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted

material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In

accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this

email is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a

prior interest in receiving the included information

for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes

of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission

from the copyright owner.

_______________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Think what the drug companies will do to natural cure sites.

Please read the " FAIR USE NOTICE " regarding my intentions.

john

Dear MoveOn member,

Do you buy books online, use Google, or download to an Ipod? These

activities, plus MoveOn's online organizing ability, will be hurt if

Congress passes a radical law that gives giant corporations more

control over the Internet.

Internet providers like AT & T and Verizon are lobbying Congress hard

to gut Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Net

Neutrality prevents AT & T from choosing which websites open most

easily for you based on which site pays AT & T more. Amazon doesn't

have to outbid & Noble for the right to work more properly on

your computer.

If Net Neutrality is gutted, MoveOn either pays protection money to

dominant Internet providers or risks that online activism tools don't

work for members. Amazon and Google either pay protection money or

risk that their websites process slowly on your computer. That why

these high-tech pioneers are joining the fight to protect Network

Neutrality1—and you can do your part today.

The free and open Internet is under seige—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=4

Then, please forward this to 3 friends. Protecting the free and open

Internet is fundamental—it affects everything. When you sign this

petition, you'll be kept informed of the next steps we can take to

keep the heat on Congress. Votes begin in a House committee next week.

MoveOn has already seen what happens when the Internet's gatekeepers

get too much control. Just last week, AOL blocked any email

mentioning a coalition that MoveOn is a part of, which opposes AOL's

proposed " email tax. " 2 And last year, Canada's version of AT & T—Telus—

blocked their Internet customers from visiting a website sympathetic

to workers with whom Telus was negotiating.3

Politicians don't think we are paying attention to this issue. Many

of them take campaign checks from big telecom companies and are on

the verge of selling out to people like AT & T's CEO, who openly

says, " The internet can't be free. " 4

Together, we can let Congress know we are paying attention. We can

make sure they listen to our voices and the voices of people like

Vint Cerf, a father of the Internet and Google's " Chief Internet

Evangelist, " who recently wrote this to Congress in support of

preserving Network Neutrality:

My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great damage to the

Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits

network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of

services and to potentially interfere with others would place

broadband operators in control of online activity...Telephone

companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators

should not dictate what people can do online.4

The essence of the Internet is at risk—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=5

Please forward to 3 others who care about this issue. Thanks for all

you do.

–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic

Action team

Thursday, April 20th, 2006

P.S. If Congress abandons Network Neutrality, who will be affected?

Advocacy groups like MoveOn—Political organizing could be slowed by a

handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to

pay " protection money " for their websites and online features to work

correctly.

Nonprofits—A charity's website could open at snail-speed, and online

contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can't pay dominant

Internet providers for access to " the fast lane " of Internet service.

Google users—Another search engine could pay dominant Internet

providers like AT & T to guarantee the competing search engine opens

faster than Google on your computer.

Innovators with the " next big idea " —Startups and entrepreneurs will

be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay

Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The little guy

will be left in the " slow lane " with inferior Internet service,

unable to compete.

Ipod listeners—A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes,

steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned.

Online purchasers—Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee

their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—

distorting your choice as a consumer.

Small businesses and tele-commuters—When Internet companies like AT & T

favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more affordable

providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls,

and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees—Your choices as a consumer could be controlled

by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services

for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning

vacations, etc.

Bloggers—Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—

silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of

a few corporate-owned media outlets.

To sign the petition to Congress supporting " network neutrality, "

click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=6

P.P.S. This excerpt from the New Yorker really sums up this issue

well.

In the first decades of the twentieth century, as a national

telephone network spread across the United States, A.T. & T. adopted

a policy of " tiered access " for businesses. Companies that paid an

extra fee got better service: their customers' calls went through

immediately, were rarely disconnected, and sounded crystal-clear.

Those who didn't pony up had a harder time making calls out, and

people calling them sometimes got an " all circuits busy " response.

Over time, customers gravitated toward the higher-tier companies and

away from the ones that were more difficult to reach. In effect, A.T.

& T.'s policy turned it into a corporate kingmaker.

If you've never heard about this bit of business history, there's a

good reason: it never happened. Instead, A.T. & T. had to abide by

a " common carriage " rule: it provided the same quality of service to

all, and could not favor one customer over another. But,

while " tiered access " never influenced the spread of the telephone

network, it is becoming a major issue in the evolution of the

Internet.

Until recently, companies that provided Internet access followed a de-

facto commoncarriage rule, usually called " network neutrality, " which

meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network neutrality was

considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that

, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one of

the basic rules of " Internet freedom. " In the past few months,

though, companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to

scuttle it. In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers

could receive what BellSouth recently called " special treatment, " and

those that don't could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth

customers may find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than

YouTube.com, and that the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run

more smoothly. Tiered access will turn the providers into Internet

gatekeepers.4

Sources:

1. " Telecommunication Policy Proposed by Congress Must Recognize

Internet Neutrality, " Letter to Senate leaders, March 23, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1653

2. " AOL Blocks Critics' E-Mails, " Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1649

3. " B.C. Civil Liberties Association Denounces Blocking of Website by

Telus, " British Columbia Civil Liberties Association Statement, July

27, 2005

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1650

4. " At SBC, It's All About 'Scale and Scope, " BusinessWeek, November

7, 2002

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1648

5. " Net Losses, " New Yorker, March 20, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1646

6. " Don't undercut Internet access, " San Francisco Chronicle

editorial, April 17, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1645

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------

FAIR USE NOTICE

This email contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am

making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding

of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted

material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In

accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this

email is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a

prior interest in receiving the included information

for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes

of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission

from the copyright owner.

_______________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Think what the drug companies will do to natural cure sites.

Please read the " FAIR USE NOTICE " regarding my intentions.

john

Dear MoveOn member,

Do you buy books online, use Google, or download to an Ipod? These

activities, plus MoveOn's online organizing ability, will be hurt if

Congress passes a radical law that gives giant corporations more

control over the Internet.

Internet providers like AT & T and Verizon are lobbying Congress hard

to gut Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Net

Neutrality prevents AT & T from choosing which websites open most

easily for you based on which site pays AT & T more. Amazon doesn't

have to outbid & Noble for the right to work more properly on

your computer.

If Net Neutrality is gutted, MoveOn either pays protection money to

dominant Internet providers or risks that online activism tools don't

work for members. Amazon and Google either pay protection money or

risk that their websites process slowly on your computer. That why

these high-tech pioneers are joining the fight to protect Network

Neutrality1—and you can do your part today.

The free and open Internet is under seige—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=4

Then, please forward this to 3 friends. Protecting the free and open

Internet is fundamental—it affects everything. When you sign this

petition, you'll be kept informed of the next steps we can take to

keep the heat on Congress. Votes begin in a House committee next week.

MoveOn has already seen what happens when the Internet's gatekeepers

get too much control. Just last week, AOL blocked any email

mentioning a coalition that MoveOn is a part of, which opposes AOL's

proposed " email tax. " 2 And last year, Canada's version of AT & T—Telus—

blocked their Internet customers from visiting a website sympathetic

to workers with whom Telus was negotiating.3

Politicians don't think we are paying attention to this issue. Many

of them take campaign checks from big telecom companies and are on

the verge of selling out to people like AT & T's CEO, who openly

says, " The internet can't be free. " 4

Together, we can let Congress know we are paying attention. We can

make sure they listen to our voices and the voices of people like

Vint Cerf, a father of the Internet and Google's " Chief Internet

Evangelist, " who recently wrote this to Congress in support of

preserving Network Neutrality:

My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great damage to the

Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits

network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of

services and to potentially interfere with others would place

broadband operators in control of online activity...Telephone

companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators

should not dictate what people can do online.4

The essence of the Internet is at risk—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=5

Please forward to 3 others who care about this issue. Thanks for all

you do.

–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic

Action team

Thursday, April 20th, 2006

P.S. If Congress abandons Network Neutrality, who will be affected?

Advocacy groups like MoveOn—Political organizing could be slowed by a

handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to

pay " protection money " for their websites and online features to work

correctly.

Nonprofits—A charity's website could open at snail-speed, and online

contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can't pay dominant

Internet providers for access to " the fast lane " of Internet service.

Google users—Another search engine could pay dominant Internet

providers like AT & T to guarantee the competing search engine opens

faster than Google on your computer.

Innovators with the " next big idea " —Startups and entrepreneurs will

be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay

Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The little guy

will be left in the " slow lane " with inferior Internet service,

unable to compete.

Ipod listeners—A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes,

steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned.

Online purchasers—Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee

their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—

distorting your choice as a consumer.

Small businesses and tele-commuters—When Internet companies like AT & T

favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more affordable

providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls,

and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees—Your choices as a consumer could be controlled

by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services

for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning

vacations, etc.

Bloggers—Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—

silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of

a few corporate-owned media outlets.

To sign the petition to Congress supporting " network neutrality, "

click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=6

P.P.S. This excerpt from the New Yorker really sums up this issue

well.

In the first decades of the twentieth century, as a national

telephone network spread across the United States, A.T. & T. adopted

a policy of " tiered access " for businesses. Companies that paid an

extra fee got better service: their customers' calls went through

immediately, were rarely disconnected, and sounded crystal-clear.

Those who didn't pony up had a harder time making calls out, and

people calling them sometimes got an " all circuits busy " response.

Over time, customers gravitated toward the higher-tier companies and

away from the ones that were more difficult to reach. In effect, A.T.

& T.'s policy turned it into a corporate kingmaker.

If you've never heard about this bit of business history, there's a

good reason: it never happened. Instead, A.T. & T. had to abide by

a " common carriage " rule: it provided the same quality of service to

all, and could not favor one customer over another. But,

while " tiered access " never influenced the spread of the telephone

network, it is becoming a major issue in the evolution of the

Internet.

Until recently, companies that provided Internet access followed a de-

facto commoncarriage rule, usually called " network neutrality, " which

meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network neutrality was

considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that

, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one of

the basic rules of " Internet freedom. " In the past few months,

though, companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to

scuttle it. In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers

could receive what BellSouth recently called " special treatment, " and

those that don't could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth

customers may find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than

YouTube.com, and that the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run

more smoothly. Tiered access will turn the providers into Internet

gatekeepers.4

Sources:

1. " Telecommunication Policy Proposed by Congress Must Recognize

Internet Neutrality, " Letter to Senate leaders, March 23, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1653

2. " AOL Blocks Critics' E-Mails, " Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1649

3. " B.C. Civil Liberties Association Denounces Blocking of Website by

Telus, " British Columbia Civil Liberties Association Statement, July

27, 2005

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1650

4. " At SBC, It's All About 'Scale and Scope, " BusinessWeek, November

7, 2002

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1648

5. " Net Losses, " New Yorker, March 20, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1646

6. " Don't undercut Internet access, " San Francisco Chronicle

editorial, April 17, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1645

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------

FAIR USE NOTICE

This email contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am

making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding

of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted

material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In

accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this

email is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a

prior interest in receiving the included information

for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes

of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission

from the copyright owner.

_______________________________________________

[Guest guest]

Think what the drug companies will do to natural cure sites.

Please read the " FAIR USE NOTICE " regarding my intentions.

john

Dear MoveOn member,

Do you buy books online, use Google, or download to an Ipod? These

activities, plus MoveOn's online organizing ability, will be hurt if

Congress passes a radical law that gives giant corporations more

control over the Internet.

Internet providers like AT & T and Verizon are lobbying Congress hard

to gut Network Neutrality, the Internet's First Amendment. Net

Neutrality prevents AT & T from choosing which websites open most

easily for you based on which site pays AT & T more. Amazon doesn't

have to outbid & Noble for the right to work more properly on

your computer.

If Net Neutrality is gutted, MoveOn either pays protection money to

dominant Internet providers or risks that online activism tools don't

work for members. Amazon and Google either pay protection money or

risk that their websites process slowly on your computer. That why

these high-tech pioneers are joining the fight to protect Network

Neutrality1—and you can do your part today.

The free and open Internet is under seige—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=4

Then, please forward this to 3 friends. Protecting the free and open

Internet is fundamental—it affects everything. When you sign this

petition, you'll be kept informed of the next steps we can take to

keep the heat on Congress. Votes begin in a House committee next week.

MoveOn has already seen what happens when the Internet's gatekeepers

get too much control. Just last week, AOL blocked any email

mentioning a coalition that MoveOn is a part of, which opposes AOL's

proposed " email tax. " 2 And last year, Canada's version of AT & T—Telus—

blocked their Internet customers from visiting a website sympathetic

to workers with whom Telus was negotiating.3

Politicians don't think we are paying attention to this issue. Many

of them take campaign checks from big telecom companies and are on

the verge of selling out to people like AT & T's CEO, who openly

says, " The internet can't be free. " 4

Together, we can let Congress know we are paying attention. We can

make sure they listen to our voices and the voices of people like

Vint Cerf, a father of the Internet and Google's " Chief Internet

Evangelist, " who recently wrote this to Congress in support of

preserving Network Neutrality:

My fear is that, as written, this bill would do great damage to the

Internet as we know it. Enshrining a rule that broadly permits

network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of

services and to potentially interfere with others would place

broadband operators in control of online activity...Telephone

companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators

should not dictate what people can do online.4

The essence of the Internet is at risk—can you sign this petition

letting your member of Congress know you support preserving Network

Neutrality? Click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=5

Please forward to 3 others who care about this issue. Thanks for all

you do.

–Eli Pariser, Adam Green, Noah T. Winer, and the MoveOn.org Civic

Action team

Thursday, April 20th, 2006

P.S. If Congress abandons Network Neutrality, who will be affected?

Advocacy groups like MoveOn—Political organizing could be slowed by a

handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups to

pay " protection money " for their websites and online features to work

correctly.

Nonprofits—A charity's website could open at snail-speed, and online

contributions could grind to a halt, if nonprofits can't pay dominant

Internet providers for access to " the fast lane " of Internet service.

Google users—Another search engine could pay dominant Internet

providers like AT & T to guarantee the competing search engine opens

faster than Google on your computer.

Innovators with the " next big idea " —Startups and entrepreneurs will

be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay

Internet providers for dominant placing on the Web. The little guy

will be left in the " slow lane " with inferior Internet service,

unable to compete.

Ipod listeners—A company like Comcast could slow access to iTunes,

steering you to a higher-priced music service that it owned.

Online purchasers—Companies could pay Internet providers to guarantee

their online sales process faster than competitors with lower prices—

distorting your choice as a consumer.

Small businesses and tele-commuters—When Internet companies like AT & T

favor their own services, you won't be able to choose more affordable

providers for online video, teleconferencing, Internet phone calls,

and software that connects your home computer to your office.

Parents and retirees—Your choices as a consumer could be controlled

by your Internet provider, steering you to their preferred services

for online banking, health care information, sending photos, planning

vacations, etc.

Bloggers—Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips—

silencing citizen journalists and putting more power in the hands of

a few corporate-owned media outlets.

To sign the petition to Congress supporting " network neutrality, "

click here:

http://www.civic.moveon.org/save_the_internet/?id=7356-440044-

hIhgZOwJ4v8LirRVL7FCfg & t=6

P.P.S. This excerpt from the New Yorker really sums up this issue

well.

In the first decades of the twentieth century, as a national

telephone network spread across the United States, A.T. & T. adopted

a policy of " tiered access " for businesses. Companies that paid an

extra fee got better service: their customers' calls went through

immediately, were rarely disconnected, and sounded crystal-clear.

Those who didn't pony up had a harder time making calls out, and

people calling them sometimes got an " all circuits busy " response.

Over time, customers gravitated toward the higher-tier companies and

away from the ones that were more difficult to reach. In effect, A.T.

& T.'s policy turned it into a corporate kingmaker.

If you've never heard about this bit of business history, there's a

good reason: it never happened. Instead, A.T. & T. had to abide by

a " common carriage " rule: it provided the same quality of service to

all, and could not favor one customer over another. But,

while " tiered access " never influenced the spread of the telephone

network, it is becoming a major issue in the evolution of the

Internet.

Until recently, companies that provided Internet access followed a de-

facto commoncarriage rule, usually called " network neutrality, " which

meant that all Web sites got equal treatment. Network neutrality was

considered so fundamental to the success of the Net that

, when he was chairman of the F.C.C., described it as one of

the basic rules of " Internet freedom. " In the past few months,

though, companies like A.T. & T. and BellSouth have been trying to

scuttle it. In the future, Web sites that pay extra to providers

could receive what BellSouth recently called " special treatment, " and

those that don't could end up in the slow lane. One day, BellSouth

customers may find that, say, NBC.com loads a lot faster than

YouTube.com, and that the sites BellSouth favors just seem to run

more smoothly. Tiered access will turn the providers into Internet

gatekeepers.4

Sources:

1. " Telecommunication Policy Proposed by Congress Must Recognize

Internet Neutrality, " Letter to Senate leaders, March 23, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1653

2. " AOL Blocks Critics' E-Mails, " Los Angeles Times, April 14, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1649

3. " B.C. Civil Liberties Association Denounces Blocking of Website by

Telus, " British Columbia Civil Liberties Association Statement, July

27, 2005

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1650

4. " At SBC, It's All About 'Scale and Scope, " BusinessWeek, November

7, 2002

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1648

5. " Net Losses, " New Yorker, March 20, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1646

6. " Don't undercut Internet access, " San Francisco Chronicle

editorial, April 17, 2006

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1645

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------

FAIR USE NOTICE

This email contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am

making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding

of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,

scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted

material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In

accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this

email is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a

prior interest in receiving the included information

for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes

of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission

from the copyright owner.

_______________________________________________