European Net Neutrality being threatened?, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times


reply posted on 3-5-2009 @ 06:02 PM by stumason
reply to post by Donkey_Dean



It's also used to control who views certain content. For example, you can watch the latest South Park vids in the US online, but if you try to access from outside, you get a screen saying you cannot due to existing contract issues for those who have the broadcast rights for that programme in your territory.


reply posted on 3-5-2009 @ 06:08 PM by Skyfloating
reply to post by Donkey_Dean



I dont mind google restricting crime. But if they start restricting too much, people will simply remember that google is only ONE of many Billions of websites and choose to go elsewhere. Google is not the Internet. Some like to believe so, but they are not.



reply posted on 3-5-2009 @ 10:45 PM by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by stumason



I don't much care what this article says, in the end there really is a push to censor the net, check Australia, Germany and a few other western countries that are starting slowly with the censoring. It'll get worse though.


reply posted on 4-5-2009 @ 04:37 AM by Zelong
reply to post by TheBandit795



This seems to be more an ISP push am I right?,to carve up the net into packages to $ell.(like all the vista packages) Premium will co$t you.


The internet as we know it is at risk because of proposed new EU rules going through end of April. Under the proposed new rules, broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look at, and to tell you whether or not you are allowed to use particular services. It will be dressed up as ‘new consumer options' which people can choose from. People will be offered TV-like packages - with a limited number of options for you to access......
*It means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and to put up content could be severely restricted.




I didn't see any reference to a "Filter" type restriction as the Australian government are still trying to implement.


Source:
Optus says 'yes' to internet filter plan Phillip Hudson April 23, 2009
OPTUS customers in Sydney and Newcastle will be asked to take part in the Federal Government's controversial test of internet filters. In a boost for the Government, the nation's second-largest internet service provider said yesterday it would take part in a six-week trial.



Zelong.


reply posted on 4-5-2009 @ 06:11 PM by sonjah1
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Some really grim paranoia around here

Its much too late to control "the" internet much less restrict access to "it", unless electricity is turned off. Wondering who is more delusional...those who desire to restrict the Internet or those who are afraid its actually going to happen...

There is no such thing as "the" internet in the sense of one monopolized entity that can be restricted or controlled.


OK, and that may be the case, but what do you make of this?:

STRASBOURG, France — The United States has too much control over the Internet and needs to give it up, a European Union bureaucrat declared Monday. EU Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding, a Luxembourgian, called for "full privatization" of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), demanding that it be removed from the supervision of the U.S. Department of Commerce when its operating agreement expires on Sept. 30.

"In the long run, it is not defendable that the government department of only one country has oversight of an Internet function which is used by hundreds of millions of people in countries all over the world," said Reding in a statement.

She purports to be calling for less, not more, government involvement in the Internet, using a free-market argument against the Commerce Department's control of ICANN.


However, read on as this points to more of a NWO agenda:

Like the 2005 plan, Yet Reding may have undermined her own free-market argument by simultaneously proposing a new international body, a "G12 for Internet Governance" that would oversee ICANN and be made up of voting representatives from around the world.

Like the 2005 plan, that would essentially be handing over Internet control not to the free market, but to the same creaky collection of international bureaucrats who control the EU and the U.N. — which might mean a lot more government involvement in day-to-day Internet operations.
.


(both sources from Reuters)

What do ya think?


reply posted on 5-5-2009 @ 12:36 AM by Donkey_Dean
Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to
post by Donkey_Dean



I dont mind google restricting crime. But if they start restricting too much, people will simply remember that google is only ONE of many Billions of websites and choose to go elsewhere. Google is not the Internet. Some like to believe so, but they are not.


What does this have to do with Google? If you believe you have unrestricted internet you are mistaken. There are restricted site for US users at this time.

I have seen this list I swear to god! I am digging and will post when I find it.

I think the same powers that allow for the un warranted wiretaps allow for the blocking of websites and seizure of assets etc.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by Donkey_Dean]
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



A MUST Read, "Written By A Female Cop"
  Posted 1 days ago with 33 member flags
Know your enemy ... the Daily Mail & Viscount Rothermere
  Posted 11 days ago with 17 member flags
NBC and the Banned \'Fear Factor\' Episode
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
What are Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs) REALLY like?
  Posted 11 days ago with 5 member flags