Hello everybody, regarding the "fast lane provision” and the ITRE voting of yesterday (18 March). The real problem is not really with the “specialized service” provision, because the current definition: 15) “specialized service” means an electronic communications service optimized for specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, provided over logically distinct capacity and relying on strict admission control from end to end. It is not marketed or usable as a substitute for internet access service; [its application layer is not functionally identical to services and applications available over the public internet access service;] If this is the text approved by ITRE, it is is sufficiently precise, although it would have been better if the Trautman amendment (the one in brackets) had been approved too (but it was not). The real problem for me derives from the ability of ISPs to discriminate online service by charging different kind of connectivity prices. This could create a 2-tier Internet scenario. I mentioned this risk in my blog: http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/lights-and-darkness-of-... Marjete Schaake is right in being worried, because this reform (if approved in this form) would make the Dutch NN legislation to be contrast with EU law. In fact, the Dutch rules prohibit price connectivity differentiation when aimed at discriminating online services. Kind regards, Innocenzo (Board member Euroispa) ----------------------------------------- Innocenzo Genna Genna Cabinet Sprl 1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Skype: innonews Twitter: @InnoGenna Email: inno@innogenna.it my blog:http://radiobruxelleslibera.wordpress.com/ my music: www.innocenzogenna.com Il giorno 19/mar/2014, alle ore 17:51, cooperation-wg-request@ripe.net ha scritto:
Send cooperation-wg mailing list submissions to cooperation-wg@ripe.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/cooperation-wg or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to cooperation-wg-request@ripe.net
You can reach the person managing the list at cooperation-wg-owner@ripe.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of cooperation-wg digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions? (Meredith Whittaker) 2. Re: EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions? (Meredith Whittaker) 3. Re: EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions? (Gordon Lennox) 4. Re: EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions? (Gordon Lennox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 11:23:40 -0400 From: Meredith Whittaker <meredithrachel@google.com> Subject: [cooperation-wg] EP "Connected Continent" and Internet Fast Lane provisions? To: "cooperation-wg@ripe.net" <cooperation-wg@ripe.net> Message-ID: <CAHx-7OwcCEc_JMJobjC37v_hMrWHt2_CJgE0kynSSn+AJtQVHQ@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi all,
Interested in your thoughts on the EP vote to approve the Connected Continent legislation.
The press release<http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20140318IPR39210/html/Net-neutralityIndustry-MEPs-want-stricter-rules-against-blocking-rival-services>states that, "Companies would still able to offer specialized services of higher quality, such as video on demand and business-critical data-intensive cloud applications, provided that this does not interfere with the internet speeds promised to other customers."
This appears to be allowing for "fast lane" service. At least, that's how it's being read in the US trade press.
Thoughts?
Cheers, Meredith
--
Meredith Whittaker Program Manager, Google Research Google NYC