Europe votes to protect net neutrality, abolish mobile data roaming charges

In a stark reminder of just how different things are over the pond in Europe, the EU Parliament has voted in favor of abolishing mobile roaming fees and maintaining net neutrality. While US lawmakers have generally favored corporate entities, this is another great example of the European Union’s general tendency to side with the consumer (or, in non-capitalist terms, the citizen).

Under these new laws, the 28 countries in the European Union will have to phase out mobile roaming fees (i.e. price gouging when you use your mobile phone abroad) by the end of 2015.

More important, though, is the vote to maintain net neutrality in Europe. Basically, the EU Parliament said that all traffic on the internet should be treated equally, irrespective of its source. This will prevent carriers and ISPs from offering preferential treatment to large web services, such as Netflix or Google, in exchange for money — and likewise, preventing them from peddling a”Skype package” or “Netflix package” to consumers if they want to continue using these services without degraded service.

This is obviously in direct contradiction to the US, where Verizon and AT&T have been trying very, very hard to control the data that flows across their networks, while at the same time squeezing more money out of consumers and web service providers.

www.extremetech.com...

I am happy that this went through. When couple of months ago, I heard about the changes in US internet neutrality, it made me really worried about the future also here. Luckily the direction EU decided was pro-consumer rather than pro-business.

reply to post by Cabin

No roaming charges, supports net neutrality, bans Monsantos, Atrazine, chlorine washes for livestock, anti-biotics as growth hormones, water fluoridation, wi-fi in schools..…geez you socialists seem to really care more about your people than profits?!?!
You need some lobbyist over there! < Sarcasm off >

On topic, this sounds great but I wonder if they will make up for the costs in other areas, such as increasing fees and monthly cost?If not then this is a welcoming verdict and I hope other countries may be influenced to some degree.

speculativeoptimist
reply to post by Cabin

 

On topic, this sounds great but I wonder if they will make up for the costs in other areas, such as increasing fees and monthly cost?

edit on 4-4-2014 by speculativeoptimist because: (no reason given)

I doubt so to be honest. Generally at least in this area, internet neutrality has always been respected. It had potential of creating additional profit but it was not used.

Certain inflation might happen though. Currently the costs for people are kept quite low though, so even smaller raise on monthly costs would be reasonable.-

Personally current costs:
Cell phone - unlimited phone calls, unlimited internet (4g), unlimited texts - 15 dollars a month
Internet - 200 mbit/s download speed, 50 mbit/s upload speed-30 dollars a month.

reply to post by Cabin

Wow 15 bones a month eh? Do you guys have different plans and manufacturers or do you all use the same company?
Are part of your taxes directly allotted towards cell phones and internet by chance?

reply to post by speculativeoptimist


Government does not provide anything for the companies, so taxes are not used.

In mobile phone area, there are 3 major providers, in internet 2-3 (although they also deal with TV, tv+internet+home phone packages - all is connected via internet- digital)

Generally there has been significant demand for IT solutions, which has led to strong competition between the companies. The prices need to be low, otherwise clients go fast.

I am dissatisfied with internet speeds though. In Lithuania for example, you can receive 1 gbit/s connection for the same price. Here the speeds are a bit lower, although generally the companies have focused more on providing the service to everybody, while there only the ones who live in specific region gain access to hi-speed. For example here, currently 99% of the country is covered with 4g internet, which is a lot considering 50% is covered with forest. You can get lost in the middle of nowhere, in some forests and still surf the net

speculativeoptimist
reply to post by Cabin

 

No roaming charges, supports net neutrality, bans Monsantos, Atrazine, chlorine washes for livestock, anti-biotics as growth hormones, water fluoridation, wi-fi in schools..…geez you socialists seem to really care more about your people than profits?!?!
You need some lobbyist over there! < Sarcasm off >

I think its because we don't have laws that let people carry around guns.

In the US all the government have to do to give the illusion that the people have the power is let them own guns. It seems the one right that the people prize over all others no matter how badly the government treats them in other areas. Its like..."do anything you want but just let us keep our weapons, that way we feel free!".

In the EU they really have to pretend to look after the people a lot more effectively. Im sure if we were allowed to carry guns around our government would treat us like crap as well. But instead they give us minor victories over corporations now and then and it seems to keep us happy.

reply to post by Cabin

Thanks for the info
I am surprised this thread didn't get any traction. This is a major decision.

For example here, currently 99% of the country is covered with 4g internet, which is a lot considering 50% is covered with forest. You can get lost in the middle of nowhere, in some forests and still surf the net - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Well that is good to hear, we still have numerous dead zones, but we have some pretty diverse and mountainous terrain.
Soon we will all be on a global cloud internet I suspect, wi-fi planet maybe.
They call it the outernet. Not too creative but I guess Skynet could send the wrong message.

Wonder who will control that, Comcast or Google?

reply to post by PhoenixOD

Interesting point, but I think it is the number of police and how they are armed that makes a difference in our countries.
My impression is that your guy's gov is fearful of the public, whereas here it is the opposite, because our police enforce the laws of gov, and they are somewhat militarized now, with crowd control weapons.

I think ultimately our citizens having guns will be the last bit of empowerment we have against such a police force, if it ever came to that. And for the NSA guys, I am NOT promoting that here and now. I have mixed feelings about guns and society, but I am learning to value ownership a little more these days, of course with scrutinized application and purchases.
This is a hot topic though and this thread may not be the best place for that discussion. Hope you understand...

speculativeoptimist
reply to post by PhoenixOD

 

Interesting point, but I think it is the number of police and how they are armed that makes a difference in our countries.
My impression is that your guy's gov is fearful of the public, whereas here it is the opposite, because our police enforce the laws of gov, and they are somewhat militarized now, with crowd control weapons.

Yes that is a sure sign of tyranny as your Thomas Jefferson once said :

'When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty.'