Thread: Save The Internet

ALL builders and designers of small websites should be really concerned about some things going through the US Congress right now.

Some internet providers want to charge a fee to have some websites load faster than others on their networks. What does that mean to you? If you have a small website dedicated to, say, your travel agency (just an example), you'll have to come up with some money to be able to keep up with the major travel sites.

If Congress allows these measures to go into place, thousands of "small" voices will be silenced by the spending power of corporate giants.

You can make your feelings on this known by visiting SavetheInternet.com

They have a petition for you to sign, along with many other tools to help us spread the word and ask others to take action. You DO NOT have to be a US resident to use these resources.


The below is a recent article from MSNBC.com detailing this:

WASHINGTON - Sensing a revolution in the way Internet traffic is managed, rock and roll musicians find themselves in the unusual position of defending the status quo.

Independent, lesser-known musicians and smaller record labels have launched a nationwide campaign Tuesday to support the idea that all Internet traffic should be treated equally, which they said is under fire from Internet providers who want to charge a fee to have some Web sites load faster than others.

The Rock the Net campaign, made up mostly of musicians who are on smaller record labels or none at all, said they are fearful that if the so-called "Net neutrality" principle is abandoned their music may not be heard because they don't have the financial means to pay for preferential treatment.

Some said they don't want to pay. The Web, they said, has allowed many unknown musicians to put their music online, giving fans instant access to new music and giving bands greater marketing capabilities.

They said independent record labels are also on an equal Web footing with major players like ***** Inc.'s iTunes.

"It could be a pretty sad world where money alone buys the ears and anybody that can't afford it, can't get proper placement, is pushed off to the ghettos," said Derek Sivers, owner of CD Baby, an online store that sells compact discs by independent musicians.

The group is the latest to get involved in the Net neutrality issue.

SavetheInternet.com is a coalition of more than 800 groups — ranging from liberal political groups, such as MoveOn.org, to conservative groups, such as the Christian Coalition of America — that support the issue. That campaign was formed more than a year ago and is organized by Free Press, a national public interest group.

On the other side, phone and cable companies, including AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp., want the freedom to charge content providers for priority Web traffic. They contend any legislation affirming Net neutrality would harm investment and innovation in the Internet.

Former musician Jenny Toomey, who is now executive director of the Future of Music Coalition, a nonprofit advocacy group for independent musicians, said this issue is so important that it has even attracted some big name artists, such as R.E.M., Sarah McLachlan and even Kronos Quartet, a classical musical string ensemble.

"Never before have I been doing work for the music community where every single artist that we called said, 'Yes use my name. I'm on board to support this,'" she said during a teleconference Tuesday morning. Her group is one of the campaign's organizers.

Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., who chairs the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, said if Internet providers are allowed to start charging fees for preferential treatment then it will stifle innovation across many industries, not just music.

"This is nothing more than a new bottleneck fee, a corporate broadband tax that will discriminate against less powerful voices and those unable or unwilling to pay such discriminatory fees," he said during the teleconference.

He complained that the Federal Communications Commission isn't doing enough to protect Net neutrality.

However, the FCC said last week it will see if Internet providers are conducting any such discriminatory business practices.

It said it will study how high-speed Internet providers are managing traffic on their networks and if they're charging different prices for different speeds or levels of service. The FCC might adopt regulations to ensure all Web traffic is treated the same.

Besides the Future of Music Coalition, the Rock the Net campaign is sponsored by Noise Pop Industries, which sponsors an annual San Francisco music festival among other things, and Zeitgeist Artist Management, which manages musicians.

According to the campaign's Web site, 124 bands and 24 music labels support the initiative.

this is interesting Race, to say the least. I will forward this to my clients as I have only worked with small businesses. How unfair is THIS?

I for one have signed this petition and I urge ALL the VH family to do the same......................good post Race........

Great post indeed .... hmmmm though

This is what I received as a Canadian, when I chose to participate ....
Even though it appears you can be a Canadian to participate.

We're sorry but it appears that you are not eligible to participate in this campaign. This campaign is designated for constituents of the targeted decisionmaker(s) and based upon your address, it appears that you do not live in an area represented by the targeted decisionmaker(s). If you would like to correct your address information, please return to

OK this is unfair!! I cant believe some people!!

This a very serious subject, if the telcos win, our children and all future generations lose.

Thank you for reminding us of the continuing subterfuge surrounding the Net Neutrality Act. The outcome will momentous, and surely affect the future of the World Wide Web.

Now that AOL, Google, and Yahoo! have pretty much cemented their Certified Email programs in place (beginning last year and completing in January) ahead of what they see a "win" by ISP's, the fracturing of classes has already begun with the creation of "tiers" of Users, and "protected customer communities" being hawked to advertisers in a huge scale. Using this practice as precedence, ISP's have gained false legitimacy and are already trying to leverage Congress' ignorance to their favor.

Sad, but having fought against Certified Mail so prominently to no avail, I have nothing but foreboding expectations for a Net Neutrality resolution that will be either fair or without condition......

Originally Posted by LadyEye

Great post indeed .... hmmmm though

This is what I received as a Canadian, when I chose to participate ....
Even though it appears you can be a Canadian to participate.

We're sorry but it appears that you are not eligible to participate in this campaign. This campaign is designated for constituents of the targeted decisionmaker(s) and based upon your address, it appears that you do not live in an area represented by the targeted decisionmaker(s). If you would like to correct your address information, please return to

May I suggest stretching the truth a bit? lol You may not be a US resident, but your site is hosted here, so I'd say that makes you at least a part time resident of Dallas, TX.

Even if you can't sign the petition, there are other tools available, some of which you might find useful, such as the "tell a friend" forms, etc.

And you are so clever!! I can do that! And I shall make postings on other boards and I will tell a friend, righteo!!

Race,

Thanks for the info. I sent the email message off for the petition. I really think this is unfair also. It's like mom & pop stores fighting Walmart.

Originally Posted by ace5548

Race,

Thanks for the info. I sent the email message off for the petition. I really think this is unfair also. It's like mom & pop stores fighting Walmart.

That's a very good way to look at it.

Sometime tomorrow, I'll post the text of an email I got from my congressman here in North Carolina. It's pretty clear that this person is already in the pocket of the hosting companies.

Hi Race,

I would really be interested in seeing the text of that email. It is as usual; the rich keep getting richer and the not so rich--meaning the rest of us--keep getting the same.

I believe that if this does pass the character of the internet will have changed completely and permanently and all the efforts of the folks who put their life and soul into SEO will have done it for naught when the price of space on the internet becomes a retail value for the rich instead of the free enterprise and information place it has always been.

This is the email I received. It's very clear that this person isn't knowledgeable on the subject and is simply quoting the BS he's being fed.

Dear Dan,

Thank you for contacting my office regarding Net Neutrality. As your Congressman, your views on this issue are extremely important to me.

Net neutrality is an issue that has been a concern of network engineers since the birth of the Internet. Net neutrality, in the eyes of network engineers, centers on the role of the transmission network acting as a “dumb” pipe that simply carries information offered by content and service providers to the end user. More recently, people have come to understand net neutrality as simply a consumer’s ability to access content and services. The accessibility of content providers or service providers to the network has widely been ignored as of late.

I believe the issue of net neutrality needs to be addressed from both angles, that of the providers as well as the consumer. The Internet was built on a framework that fostered innovation which required the network operator to provide non-discriminatory transmission upon reasonable request. Some innovations have led to what some consider unreasonable requests.

The demand for bandwidth from both consumers and content providers is doubling every year, and is expected to grow four-fold to six-fold each year through the next decade. Bandwidth allocation issues are nothing new; in 2003, Duke University found that 10% of the users on their residential student network were using 90% of the bandwidth. So, Duke University limited students’ use to five gigabytes-per-day in an effort to provide equal access to all students. People viewing streaming videos or downloading entire movies, for example, were compromising others users’ ability to simply check email or view a news website.

Many telephone and cable companies are currently proposing commercial arrangements with content providers to relay their content more effectively and quickly over the companies’ networks. The companies hold firm that service for content providers choosing not to engage in a commercial arrangement will not be degraded. It is their belief that the extra revenue from these commercial arrangements will help them upgrade their network to meet the demands of innovation. Included in the COPE Act, as currently written, is a $500,000 fine for broadband providers that block lawful content.

It is an honor to serve as your United States Representative, and I look forward to tackling the issues 8th District voters sent me here to address. Please know that I have assembled what I believe is the most responsive and courteous staff in Congress. Your suggestions are always welcomed, and if ever we may be of assistance, please don't hesitate to call.


Sincerely,
Robin Hayes
Member of Congress

Yep, sure looks like it.

We emailed our son and he says that he signed the petition over a year ago. I really wonder how long this has been going on. Is it really something that has just jumped up to see or has it been building for years? I am concerned that the "people who are in charge of looking out for the country and its citizens" are doing nothing but looking out for themselves. (porkbarrel politics has always stunk and continues to do so)

It's been around for a while, but the major providers are putting more of a push on it lately.

Here's a thought.... what would be the intended purpose for this petition? --Honestly, I have to admit that I haven't fully read much of this thread yet, but something definitely caught my attention....

Some internet providers want to charge a fee to have some websites load faster than others on their networks.

I've been noticing some pretty interesting things happening all across the web, local newspapers, magazines, blogs, political sites, technology forums and industry news feeds, and just about everywhere else my eyes and ears are, lol. I asked myself, "Why would they (ISP's) consider an idea like this?" I mean, think about it, I am sure that they know very well that they ought to consider many positive/negative impacts of their decisions affecting "who, what, where, and how." I feel that this is a clue that A)a new market is about to emerge (distributed computing? Semantic Web?..any ideas?)<--duh....SERENDIPITY. So the idea is ....IMO...the ISP's have no choice but to let money decide, which means it's then up to the rest of us(the whole world) to decide what really matters the most. >>>For some reason I haven't had a working [ENTER] key or [Del] or [Alt] or [Ctrl] either for about 45minutes, and it's starting to really concern me. Why would I lose my (Ctrl+Alt+Del, and ENTER) keys????? YEAH...you thinking what I'm thinking?<<< anyways, food for thought. good night.

And B)it's not about the rich staying rich...its about global politics, science, religion, humanity, knowledge, and ....what was it that talks, again??? I had to say it. HA!

Robert,

Actually, it's the rich getting richer. If I, as a business person, cannot afford the ISP's cost to promote my business on the internet, then I will lose and the person who can afford the cost will win.

I kind of think of it as the PPC in a way. The cost of some key words have risen out of site because the small business person cannot affort to pay the cost and continue to make a profit on his or her business. So, who's the winner here? It would have to be the big business with the money to pay for services that would drive smaller businesses off the internet.

If you, or anybody, would take the time to read the FAQ or Races' link to Save the Internet, it would possibly answer some questions.

forgive me, but once again i failed to give acknowledgement to agreement on certain points, but that merely brings me to point out another perfect example of how misinterpreted information can become, or rather lack of interpretation; mainly stemming from my failure to properly express that information as well as my thoughts.

Actually, I expressed my thoughts just as I meant to. There's is more involved than just "business" and perhaps if everyone would see that, then, well, perhaps this wouldn't be an issue at all now....would it?

Yes, there are the "rich-getting-richer" but most are simply "big-getting bigger." Determined to design for "the greater good", they continue to grow and grow and grow. The only opposition are those that refuse to see their goals are one of the same.

"One man's gain, is another man's loss."....so, to those for "the greater good" (gain) would also mean that those not for "the greater good"(loss)

--so I ask myself:

"Why would people "for the greater good" focus so much on what THEY stand to lose?"...They don't. So, does that mean doing so would be something those "not for the greater good" do?

***replace the word "lose" with "gain" and read again.***

You have brought about some good points. I was merely saying that the small business person, whether he or she is doing for the greater good or not, will possibly lose whatever they have gained, in the end, when the larger or bigger start dictating what they want which they have done for years.

The smaller person may be for the "greater good" and still lose without focusing on what they stand to lose or knowing that they lost until it is all over. People who focus on what they stand to lose inherently lose most of the time anyway because they cannot or will not focus on the positive side of what they can gain.

Actually, I have a sense of agreeing with what you say, but fail, sometimes, to put words in the proper perspective.

I would still like to see what the gain would be for the smaller companies if the big companies do what is suggested.

I just want to say thanks, ace. Your response was just about what i had hoped for it to be... When I wrote my previous reply, I was bordering on the defensive personally which made it difficult for me to "say what needed to be said." -I hope that made sense, LOL. And I don't mean defensive from your earlier reply, it was just the state I was in at that point in time. Anyways, good post ace, thanks again.


as a random side note those who haven't done so yet --

WAKE UP, open your mind up at least once....AT LEAST ONCE!
OH, and....just.....let....it....go. PLEASE.
And remember....THE TRUTH WILL set us ALL FREE.

Originally Posted by Robert

as a random side note those who haven't done so yet --

WAKE UP, open your mind up at least once....AT LEAST ONCE!
OH, and....just.....let....it....go. PLEASE.
And remember....THE TRUTH WILL set us ALL FREE.

Just because people have differing views from you doesn't mean they need to "wake up" or "open their minds", and they certainly don't need to "let it go" simply because you've so condescendingly decreed they should.

If you have a problem with the people who support this petition and the movement behind it, you're always free to ignore this thread. If you want to offer counter views, that's fine as well, but don't go around talking to people like they don't know what the hell they're talking about just because they see things differently than you.

So, does this affect Canada? Because lately the U.S government has been wanting to change our laws and we keep dis-agreeing with them, now this?

Originally Posted by Jeremy

So, does this affect Canada? Because lately the U.S government has been wanting to change our laws and we keep dis-agreeing with them, now this?

It affects anyone who has a website, Jeremy. The impact would be felt mainly in the US at first as far as the ISP's go, but do you want your site buried behind bigger companies who can buy greater US broadband access than you can?

Well, since I am in Canada and I am hosting with an American company, what if I decided to go with a Canadian company?

Well said Race,

It looks like the ending of got a little off the beaten track. I believe everyone has a "right" to their own views and no one should try to "push" their personal veiws on anyone.

Now, if saving the internet program is enough for us to think about---what about the interesting fact the the U.S. government has now passed an internet tax bill that will again affect all of us who sell products or information on the internet.

I really do think that the "big money companies" are pushing to get more and they don't really care if anyone but them get what they want. It goes back to the Walmart vs small business. This country has made a "free enterprise" system so unfree that the little guy has to really put up a big fight to get anywhere. The government surely does not care--all they want is more taxes to waste and to hell with anyone who has any kind of idea how to actually take what they (the government) have and make this country the "free" democratic country they try to push on others. The non-partisan political radicals are ruining this country. And this goes for all parties concerned.

Originally Posted by racefan20

Just because people have differing views from you doesn't mean they need to "wake up" or "open their minds", and they certainly don't need to "let it go" simply because you've so condescendingly decreed they should.

If you have a problem with the people who support this petition and the movement behind it, you're always free to ignore this thread. If you want to offer counter views, that's fine as well, but don't go around talking to people like they don't know what the hell they're talking about just because they see things differently than you.

um..race, i don't have a problem with people who support the petition, nor do i feel anyone seeing anything differently than I do.


Since it is clear that this:

as a random side note those who haven't done so yet --

WAKE UP, open your mind up at least once....AT LEAST ONCE!
OH, and....just.....let....it....go. PLEASE.
And remember....THE TRUTH WILL set us ALL FREE.

...is what brought about your response, well, I don't know what to say. I made it ambiguatory by stating "those who" which can refer to a semantic AI program..or people; instead of "those that..."

...my intention was of design...serendipity; semantic web; AI; distributed computational networks; awareness; knowledge; answers; etc...

not conflict.

why are you making me out to be the bad person here?

Robert:

Because thats exactly how it came across to me as well.........

We cant just let it go, and if You cant see what is going to be lost then you need to open YOUR eyes.

You used a lot of fancy looking words, and succeded in saying nothing relevant to the issue.

Race,
Thanks for the information.
I have signed, and forwarded.

Originally Posted by ace5548

Well said Race,

It looks like the ending of got a little off the beaten track. I believe everyone has a "right" to their own views and no one should try to "push" their personal veiws on anyone.

Now, if saving the internet program is enough for us to think about---what about the interesting fact the the U.S. government has now passed an internet tax bill that will again affect all of us who sell products or information on the internet.

I really do think that the "big money companies" are pushing to get more and they don't really care if anyone but them get what they want. It goes back to the Walmart vs small business. This country has made a "free enterprise" system so unfree that the little guy has to really put up a big fight to get anywhere. The government surely does not care--all they want is more taxes to waste and to hell with anyone who has any kind of idea how to actually take what they (the government) have and make this country the "free" democratic country they try to push on others. The non-partisan political radicals are ruining this country. And this goes for all parties concerned.

It was inevitable that the internet tax would eventually become a reality. I didn't want to see it because I frequently purchase things online to avoid paying sales tax, but that's exactly why it was initiated. Truth be told, it's been in place for a long time, it's just now being reworded to include online sales rather than just phone and mail order, which was its original intent.

It will certainly affect everyone who sells products online because now, not only will you have to collect the sales tax, you'll also have to charge tax based on what state the customer lives in and then send payment to each state.

It'll drive costs up for online stores and many will have to lower their prices to account for the added expenditure on the customer's end so they aren't overpriced.

Free enterprise is anything but that these days and unfortunately, there's no turning back.

The really sad part is that all of us have a voice, but most seldom use it. If people would rise up, en masse, and make themselves heard to their representatives in DC, things might be different. But most people just keep quiet and go with the flow.

Originally Posted by larazovich

Race,
Thanks for the information.
I have signed, and forwarded.

Thanks, Liz! It's a very important issue and we need as many voices as possible.

I kind of figured the tax would be with us sooner or later. With the internet sales climbing each year the government and other business had to do something to bring more money to the coffers and the people back into the brick and morter stores.

It almost seems that the only way to collect the tax would be charge a nationwide tax rate and the government give back to each state a percentage of that based on their population. It's going to be confusing.

I agree that a lot of people seldom use their "choice" in deciding the future of America. I think the only reall "non-choice" we have is in the presidential election. There it is up to who has the most money or political influence to get their person in.

Well I signed the petition and sent email to senator and congressman. All I got back was your typical auto responder.

Dear Friend:

Thank you for your e-mail message. Hearing from Coloradans is important to me. I will respond to your concerns in the near future. If you need assistance from my office or if you need help dealing with a federal agency, please use the link below to access our casework form. If you are not a Colorado resident, I encourage you to contact the U.S. Senators from your state directly.

Once again, thank you for contacting me.

http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/case.cfm

urg.... But I'll keep on them, because I want to know what they think!

Thanks Cindy,

I really hope it all does some good for all of us.

Originally Posted by Jeremy

Well, since I am in Canada and I am hosting with an American company, what if I decided to go with a Canadian company?

It doesn't matter where you're hosted, Jeremy. If you want a US audience, you should be concerned about this.

Originally Posted by ace5548

I kind of figured the tax would be with us sooner or later. With the internet sales climbing each year the government and other business had to do something to bring more money to the coffers and the people back into the brick and morter stores.

It almost seems that the only way to collect the tax would be charge a nationwide tax rate and the government give back to each state a percentage of that based on their population. It's going to be confusing.

I agree that a lot of people seldom use their "choice" in deciding the future of America. I think the only reall "non-choice" we have is in the presidential election. There it is up to who has the most money or political influence to get their person in.

I have very specific thoughts on the presidential race, but I'll keep them to myself so this thread doesn't head way off in the wrong direction. lol

Hi Race,

Thanks for the info and i have looked into it but unfortunatley as i am not fro mte US ..i was unable to send. It said I could not participate...:(. But I will be keeping my eye on this and hope fully you will all succeed and if I can doanything later I will try.

Originally Posted by Dream Lady

Well I signed the petition and sent email to senator and congressman. All I got back was your typical auto responder.

Dear Friend:

Thank you for your e-mail message. Hearing from Coloradans is important to me. I will respond to your concerns in the near future. If you need assistance from my office or if you need help dealing with a federal agency, please use the link below to access our casework form. If you are not a Colorado resident, I encourage you to contact the U.S. Senators from your state directly.

Once again, thank you for contacting me.

http://salazar.senate.gov/contact/case.cfm

urg.... But I'll keep on them, because I want to know what they think!

I got that same reply from my representative after sending the form, but then I later received the more detailed email I posted earlier. I hope you get a better response than I did.

Originally posted by Racefan20

I have very specific thoughts on the presidential race, but I'll keep them to myself so this thread doesn't head way off in the wrong direction. lol

I also have some very specific thoughts about that race. I probably should not have mentioned it. As I think on it now, I did detract from "some" of the original postings.

This is scary.

Hey racefan my congressman's headquarters are up in Concord, NC... go beat him up or something till he fixes this whole deal!

Ok i got the same reply email as racefan. Identical to the tee. Kind of sad. It was probably a letter written by one of the ISPs in question and just given to the congressman to set up where it would be automatic response. I doubt if my congressman even understands half the terms in that email.

I'm a Eurolander residing in Asia. So not able to sign.
I'll post the initial messages on some of the expat forums here.
US citizens living in this region will sign it, I hope.
Cheers.

Thx for tellin us i had no idea

I'm off to sign the petition - Rx

as a small business someone is always out there to to you
http://www.mainedigitalphotography.com

Signed, Somehow i believe the internet will prevail on this, this whole entire "being" the internet has grown into, wouldn't fall to such trivial matter's, we're a collective, no matter how offensive one's thoughts to another, this is something of a whole new "world" and as such i agree that as a web builder, web viewer & most of all a person just like us all here, We have a right to claim that which matter's most, to mark a place in this new world, put up our homes & businesses and make the world in reality a somewhat better place with our help and opinion, as such i believe every single website & it's owners have a 100% right to fight against such thing's because in the end of it all, all we are is what we are most, no? people? ^^ and therefore we have the right to free speech, good luck! =D

Living in South Africa filling in the form and sending it wont help. But the Internet is not only confined to the States. One of the major advantages that the Internet gives us is access to goods, services, information and people that because of demographic location we would be denied. As in most things the decisions that the USA makes effects the rest of the world whether we like it or not.
Kes

I SAY NO TOO.

LETS GOOGLE IT TO SHOW OUR SUPPORT.

Schmidt Ups the Ante

On Friday, Google CEO Eric Schmidt sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin, stating that all companies licensed to use a soon-to-be-available chunk of the “700 MHz band” should provide (1) open applications, (2) open devices, (3) open wholesale services, and (4) open network access.

These four conditions are the true definition of open access, which has fostered innovation, competition and better user choice in Western Europe and Asia.

True Open Access

In the wireless world, open access would free millions of cell phone users to connect to an open Internet via any device or carrier. It would also blow open competition across wireless networks currently locked by a few dominant carriers.