WASHINGTON: ‘ TED CRUZ CALLS NET NEUTRALITY OBAMACARE FOR THE INTERNET ‘

#AceNewsServices – WASHINGTON – Nov.20 – In the aftermath of his party’s defeat in the midterm elections, President Obama surprised many when he reaffirmed his overwhelming support for net neutrality, proposing that the Internet should be treated as a public utility Press TV reported. 

' "Obamacare for the internet" and stating "the Internet should not operate at the speed of government."

‘ “Obamacare for the internet” and stating “the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.”

On the other side of the political spectrum, Senator Ted Cruz sparked a fire-storm of ridicule amongst net neutrality advocates when he tweeted a response to the president, calling net neutrality “Obamacare for the internet” and stating “the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.” House Majority Leader John Boehner and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell affirmed the Cruz position.

#ANS2014 

#net-neutrality

WASHINGTON: ‘ OBAMA ASKS FCC TO SET STRONGEST RULES FOR NET NEUTRALITY ‘

#AceBreakingNews – WASHINGTON – Nov.10 – Latest press release statement from the White House confirms that President Barack Obama asked the Federal Communications Commission on Monday to set the ‘strongest possible rules’ to protect net neutrality as agency writes new Internet traffic regulations Reuters reported.  

In a statement, President Obama outlined a proposal that he hopes the FCC will implement to keep the internet open and free.

“I believe the FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online,” President Obama wrote.

Source: 

#ANS2014 

#net-neutrality

WASHINGTON: ‘ This Day Asteroids and Net Neutrality

#AceWorldNews – UNITED STATES (Washington) – September 10 – Today the committee will hold a hearing examining ways to explore the solar system, focusing on a bill from Reps. Bill Posey (R-Fla.) and Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.) that would create property rights for exploring asteroids.

Also that day, activist groups and Web companies including Mozilla, Etsy, Demand Progress and Engine Advocacy are launching a protest to raise support for strong net neutrality rules. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is in its second round of comments for a proposal that seeks to ban Comcast, Cox and other Internet companies from treating users differently depending on which websites they visit.

The coalition is launching an “Internet Slowdown” to encourage companies to use a “loading” symbol that will not actually slow down their traffic but will represent their fears about a slower Web.

The FCC has received more than 1.2 million comments on its plan, a spokesperson said, the most of any regulatory process.

#ANS2014

#acenewsservices, #activist, #comcast, #cox, #demand-progree, #engine-advocacy, #etsy, #fcc, #mozilla, #net-neutrality, #united-states, #washington, #web

` Net Neutrality Takes Another Step Towards Two-Tier Internet with Motorway Arrangement of Fast Lanes First ‘

#AceNewsServices – UNITED STATES – FCC – May 08 – In response to the Federal Communications Commission’s internet plan which opponents claim will weaken the concept of net neutrality, more than 100 technology companies have signed onto a letter slamming the proposal.

Dated May 7, 2014, the letter addressed to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler called the recent proposal – which would reportedly allow internet service providers to transmit data to websites at faster speeds if they pay extra – “a grave threat to the internet.”

The letter was signed by scores of technology companies, including giants such as Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, eBay, Netflix, and Yahoo.

“According to recent news reports, the Commission intends to propose rules that would enable phone and cable Internet service providers to discriminate both technically and financially against Internet companies and impose new tolls on them,” the letter reads. “If these reports are correct, this represents a grave threat to the Internet.

“Instead of permitting individualized bargaining and discrimination, the Commission’s rules should protect users and Internet companies on both fixed and mobile platforms against blocking, discrimination and paid prioritization, and should make the market for Internet services more transparent.”

Although the FCC is scheduled to vote on the controversial plan on May 15, the letter also urges the commission to push that date back amidst public outcry.

Many skeptics and consumer advocate groups believe the proposal will create internet “fast lanes,” where larger, wealthier companies will be able to deliver content to consumers far more quickly than their smaller competitors. This, critics contend, would initiate the creation of a two-tier internet.

Ace Related News:
1. RT – May 08 – http://on.rt.com/2bqtcl

#ANS2014

#fcc, #net-neutrality, #united-states

Speech on Building a new international consensus on the future of Cyberspace

English: William Hague at the U.S. Deptartment...

English: William Hague at the U.S. Deptartment of State (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Foreign Secretary William Hague calls for countries to discuss collectively one of the greatest challenges facing our generation.

I thank President Park and the government of Korea for hosting this important conference and for organising it brilliantly well.

We are two years into a process that began in London in 2011 to address one of the greatest challenges facing our generation: building a new international consensus on the future of cyberspace. There is more that unites us as nations than divides us on this issue. We all want to benefit from secure and reliable access to the internet as a driver of growth, development, good governance and innovation in our societies, and to protect our citizens from crime and terrorism on-line.

But there is a divide emerging in the international community that we must confront.

On one side are countries like the UK and many others like Korea who argue that the internet must remain open and borderless, and benefit from collective oversight between governments, international organisations, industry and civil society. In our view this is the only way to ensure that the benefits of the digital age are expanded to all countries; that ingenuity and competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded; and that the creativity that spurs economic growth is nurtured not stifled by excessive regulation.

On the other side are countries calling for an international legal framework for the internet that would enable governments to exercise exclusive control over the Internet’s content and resources.

I am convinced that placing the controls of cyberspace entirely in the hands of governments would be a drastic error that would have profound social and economic consequences. The dead hand of state control would be as stifling for the internet as it has been for many economies in the past. It would erect barriers that impede the free flow of ideas, and would lead to a ghettoized or two-tier cyberspace that hinders free trade and holds back economic growth and development. This world of closed, fragmented Internets would certainly be less free and democratic – but it would also be less creative, less innovative, less progressive and, ultimately, less prosperous than a world with a single and open Internet.

The Internet is the heartbeat of the global economy, linking businesses that are based thousands of miles apart and constantly creating new markets, industries and technologies. Over the last 5 years, it has accounted for one fifth of GDP growth in advanced economies, with vast potential for future growth in countries where many people are now coming online for the first time.

It provides an environment where ideas flourish and barriers to market entry are removed, enabling innovators and entrepreneurs in every corner of the globe to turn those bright ideas into financial gain. It is improving the delivery of public services such as health and education, which heighten the skill and efficiency of workforces the world over.

It is facilitating the development of smart grids, smart buildings and smart cities, which support green and sustainable growth.

And it is creating more attractive investment climates by widening accountability and increasing transparency.

For these reasons, and more, societies that embrace an open and vibrant internet will be the ones that develop and prosper most in the 21st century.

And let us be clear – human rights apply online as much as they do offline. We should have no illusions about the motivation of those who call for a regulated internet stem from a desire to control the expression and curtail the political freedoms of their citizens.

We do all face sophisticated and persistent threats in cyberspace from terrorists or organised criminals. We will not compromise on the United Kingdom’s security or give free rein in cyberspace to those who wish to harm our country. With my full support our security and intelligence agencies will continue to address threats in cyberspace and to help our allies and partners to do the same – and the UK will remain at the centre of the debate on how we tackle those threats more effectively. But countries who seek to hide behind firewalls and erect artificial barriers on the internet will ultimately reduce their security, not enhance it. A fragmented Cyberspace would reduce trust and cooperation, making malicious or subversive activity more likely and harder to detect.

So our challenge is to work together to build confidence and engrain norms of behaviour which govern state behaviour online and support our collective security, while upholding the values of openness and freedom which have been integral to the success of the internet and are our core values as democratic nations.

We need a more transparent and inclusive model of governance; one where no single body controls all of the functions that govern the Internet; which is flexible, adaptable and can keep pace with the lightning speeds at which technology is advancing.

The London process, a process that began two years ago, is designed to achieve that objective and we have made some important progress:

We have brought the debate on the future of cyberspace to the front of the international agenda. We have taken strides towards agreeing principles that can form the basis of widely accepted norms for behaviour in cyberspace, which are captured in the “principles and guidelines” document put forward by Korean hosts. And we are making progress on capacity building to help all states tackle challenges in cyberspace. In the UK, this includes the establishment of the Global Cyber Security Capacity Centre which will open in Oxford next month and help other countries to build their own resilience and security.

Nevertheless, we have still not reached agreement on international ‘rules of the road’ or set of standards of behaviour.

To all those states that are uncertain where their interests lie between these competing visions of the future of cyberspace, I say that there is no stark choice between an open Internet and a secure Internet. But there is a choice between an Internet which continues to create growth and prosperity on all continents, and one which does not. We must agree to take steps to increase the confidence and trust that governments, companies and citizens all have in the Internet while preserving its transformative dynamism and creativity.

At a time of such global economic uncertainty, making the wrong choice would have profound consequences for the future. We must come together and ensure that the Internet is not only secure, but remains an engine for progress all over the world.

Related articles

#acesecuritynews, #aceworldnews, #computer-security, #cyberspace, #economic-growth, #london, #net-neutrality, #political-freedom, #secretary-of-state-for-foreign-and-commonwealth-affairs, #william-hague