Sprint might have a way around this (0.00 / 0)

I read today in PC Magazine that Sprint is set to rollout a new broadband wireless internet technology that they call "Xohm", that, because it's proprietary, they could use to control web usage--if it becomes popular and faces no serious competition, of course, and barring collusion if there is competition. I.e. as opposed to the "current" internet, which ultimately depends upon a wired backbone that is run by various companies, this would be run entirely by Sprint end to end. Or so is my understanding of this technology. Something to watch out for.

Everyone would love to be able to access the net from anywhere at broadband speeds without having to worry about WiFi hotspots or needing a special laptop card, of course. In fact, one of the nice things about this technology is that it could be added to any digital electronic device. E.g. you could connect your MP3 player to the net and download songs from iTunes anywhere (without being restricted to one brand of devices and provider), or stream live video from a handheld camera without needing to connect it to a laptop (just imagine the weblogging potential for that, especially at live events like rallies and speeches). But if this ends up doing an end run around net neutrality, uh uh.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton

---

by: kovie @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 03:17:15 AM UTC

Holy shit, AT&T really did that! (0.00 / 0)

AT&T's terms of service:

5.1 Suspension/Termination. Your Service may be suspended or terminated if your payment is past due and such condition continues un-remedied for thirty (30) days. In addition, AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes (a) violates the Acceptable Use Policy; (b) constitutes a violation of any law, regulation or tariff (including, without limitation, copyright and intellectual property laws) or a violation of these TOS, or any applicable policies or guidelines, or (c) tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries.

That's absolutely evil.  Anyone still unclear about why we need Net neutrality legislation?  I sure hope not.

And yeah, that's big about the Teamsters recognizing this.  Good for them!

---

by: low-tech cyclist @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 13:13:02 PM UTC

Get the word out (0.00 / 0)

I think this helps tremendously to help the "average joe" understand what is at play here.  Although my husband is consumed with net neutrality and reads everything he can get his hands on (and helpfully educated me about the issue), my parents have no clue about the issue at all.  They are on the internet a lot, but are not going to be told about net neutrality by AOL or shopping discounts sites.  I am fairly certain they would be horrified by the AT&T terms.  They would also understand equating labor rights with an open internet.  So how do we get the issue out to the general society? 

---

by: sisterfish @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 15:14:30 PM UTC

equating labor rights (0.00 / 0)

With just about every movement is correct.  From farms to factories to government workers and waitresses, a workplace issue is a labor issue.  Oh, and don't get me started on all the other "issues" out there.  Yeah, many union members are socially conservative, but so are "many" Democrats.

I'm leaning toward the concept that progressives and labor need to do some real hand holding.  At the next yearlykos (net roots nation), I do hope the organizers (I'll volunteer if anyone needs help on this) can figure out how to have a labor advocate on nearly every panel.  In the end, most progressive issues are issues shared by those of us who are also in the labor movement.

---

by: bendygirl @ Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 18:17:35 PM UTC