Red Bank TV

I’ll be writing back to the Governor to try to convince him that Net Neutrality is not a federal-only issue.  There are many internet content providers and developers in NJ.  Combine that with the fact that NJ residents are some of the highest per capita internet consumers in the country and you can see very clearly that Net Neutrality is an issue of great importance to our state.

Cable competition is one form of competition that New Jersey residents will benefit from; but it is not they only form of competition that needs protection right now.  I’ll encourage him to use his conditional veto power to ask for changes in NJ’s state wide cable franchise bill so that it addresses competition on the internet, to ensure that as well as having choice in cable providers we will have choice in internet services as well.

Posted by Tom at 06:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

 I received this letter from the Governor.  I have some thoughts about it that I’d like to share but my laptop battery is drained.  So please be patient and wait for my commute home this afternoon to hear my full thoughts on it.  – Tom

(Click on the image below for a bigger version.) 

Posted by Tom at 06:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

The NJ house passed the state wide cable TV franchise bill about a month ago.  From my recollection Governor Corzine has 45 days sign the bill into law.  I have been keeping an eye out but I have not seen any updates in the news regarding Governor Corzine’s plans.

I and others have encouraged the Governor to consider the telecommunication’s industry plans for the future of the internet as decides whether or not to sign the bill into law.

If anyone has more information on the Governor’s plans regarding this legislation please drop me an e-mail at tom @ redbanktv.org

Posted by Tom at 04:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

The telco industry can act like heavyweight thugs, using law suits and legislation when it’s to their advantage; what I don’t get is how they also are able to pull the wool over some people’s eyes when it comes to Net Neutrality.  They proffer the impression that they are keen to keep government out of their internet business but they are the first ones to call for legislation or use the courts when it suit’s their needs.

As yet another example of a telco using courts to further their needs I suggest you read Nate Anderson’s article at Ars Tecnica on how Verizon is suing a county in Maryland over their IPTV  (FiOS cable TV) negotiations.  According to the article, Chief Administrative Officer (of Montgomery County Maryland)  Bruce Romer said that the lawsuit "is evidence that Verizon is unwilling to play by the same rules that apply to their cable competitors."

I hope we don’t run into the same problems here in Red Bank.  Here is a link to Nate’s article:

Posted by Tom at 04:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

NJ’s State Legislature and the Governor are fighting over the state budget and thus have brought NJ state government to a halt.

I think this affects our discussion in two ways. 1.  I believe the state Board of Public Utilities is shut down.  This means that they won’t be discussing Verizon’s application to provide cable TV to Red Bank.  2.  With the Governor consumed with the tax battle it is unlikely that he will take us signing the state-wide cable franchise bill.

So at the state level we are probably at a stand still till they resolve the budget impasse.

Posted by Tom at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the reasons I started this blog was because I felt the federal Net Neutrality legislation faces an uphill battle in the face of the Telcos deep pockets and huge lobbying machine.  Taking a local grass roots stand for Net Neutrality is the best way to raise this issue, not by working from the top down in Congress, the telcos natural home turf.  Well, late last night the Markey Net Neutrality amendment was defeated on the House floor by a vote of 152 to 269.

The full COPE Act passed with a vote of 321 to 101.  The COPE Act is a sweeping telecommunications bill and is of import to us here in Red Bank because it further removes the regulations that require Verizon to negotiate with communities such as our for what is in the best interest of our town.  The COPE Act would supersede our own recent state legislation and allow for national cable TV franchises.

What does all of this legislation mean for our efforts?  From my point of view it doesn’t change the aim of this blog which is to get Red Bank officials to question Verizon on three key issues.   Verizon still wants to use our town as a role model and will continue to push forward within the current regulations while state and federal legislation is getting singed into law.

Posted by Tom at 06:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Looks like the Markey-Boucher-Eshoo-Inslee Amendment to HR 5252, the COPE Act, will be coming up for a floor vote soon.  My hope is that as Net Neutrality legislation moves forward Verizon and the other telcos will feel the pressure and move to self-regulate.  So I’ll be watching for the vote and hoping that it stays attached to COPE.

Posted by Tom at 04:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A La Carte Cable means you get to pick and choose which television channels you want to subscribe to.  These plans are proven (by an FCC study) to help make cable more affordable for people with limited budgets and help bring educational programming into more households.   I’ve found some more A La Carte news items and I want to share them with you.

Yesterday Arizona Senator John McCain introduced new legislation into the Senate.  His Act is titled: The "Consumers Having Options in Cable Entertainment (CHOICE) Act of 2006 .  An article about the bill can be found on the website DailyIPTV.  The article describes Senator McCain’s bill as: “intended to give consumers more flexibility and choice in selecting channels from cable providers and is also intended to make the market more attractive to alternative providers and for IPTV by increasing the flexibility of the TV market throughout the US.”

Senator McCain’s press release says: "For almost 10 years, I have supported giving consumers the ability to buy cable channels individually, also known as a la carte, to provide consumers with more control over the viewing options in their home and their monthly cable bill," he added. "Cable companies have resisted this and have continued to give consumers all the 'choice' of a North Korean election ballot."

Federal Communications Commision chairman Kevin Martin is also quoted in the DailyIPTV article.  Mr. Martin supports Senator McCain bill and says: “I support Sen. McCain's efforts to increase cable competition and choice for consumers, as well as to remove regulations that keep potential competitors out of the video business."

The telcos are spending a huge about of money to remove the need to work with municipalities and states to gain approval to operate national cable TV franchises.  Senator McCain’s Act is reassuring; it says to me that even if we can not get Verizon to address what we feel is best for Red Bank then there are people in the Senate who are looking out for the issues that concern small towns like ours.

Posted by Tom at 06:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

There is a lot of action going on in Congress regarding Net Neutrality.  With votes and hearings coming up next week Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, went to Washington to talk to politicians about the issue.

Here is a link to an article on c|net with coverage of Brin’s trip.

Posted by Tom at 04:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Summit NJ is a small town that is similar in many ways to Red Bank. Over a year ago Summit started formally looking into municipal Wi-Fi by forming a committee to research the topic.  In May, after much hard work by their Wi-Fi committee, Summit put out a public Request For Information (RFI) on construction of a muni Wi-Fi.

Here is Summit’s “Vision” taken from their RFI

The City of Summit envisions selecting a commercial vendor to plan, install and operate a wireless broadband networking environment throughout the City where our citizens and businesses, community service and non-profit organizations, -- whether operating in their homes, places of business, in open spaces such as parks, recreation areas, and throughout our downtown business district – have reliable, always available, high speed wireless “ready access” to the Internet at reasonable costs. The City of Summit views this project as an opportunity to provide Internet access for its citizens throughout the city while reducing the City’s communications costs, improving the delivery services to residents and improving access to City Hall. The project will increase consumer choice and affordability while promoting digital inclusion for families who cannot currently afford internet access or any access at all. At the same time the Principle Vendor we seek will recommend profit sharing and revenue generating opportunities for the City of Summit. However, the City expects that the full cost of the project will be borne by the selected Principle Vendor, without any City funding.

Their 12 page RFI goes into more detail and it can be read by clicking on this link

I have contacted Summit and asked them what Verizon’s response to their plan has been.  Summit’s project admisitrator told me that they have asked Verizon to respond to their RFI and she feels that Verizon can see that the train has left the station and it makes no sense to oppose muni Wi-Fi’s; I hope she is right.  I’ll be following Summit’s progress closely with an eye towards what we in Red Bank can learn from them.

Posted by Tom at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

An editorial in today’s (6/6/6) New York Times talks about municipal Wi-Fi networks.  Their editorial calls for New York to get into the Wi-Fi game.  The NYT talks about how local municipalities are leading the muni Wi-Fi movement.

Here is a blurb from the editorial:

Local governments are filling a leadership void at the federal and state levels, and they are going directly to providers to negotiate Wi-Fi deals. San Francisco's mayor has turned to Earthlink and Google. Earthlink, based in Atlanta, is also helping Philadelphia. In some of these deals, lower-speed connections are free, with higher speeds available at a price. The providers also hope to make money off advertising.

The editorial does not touch on telcos, such as Verizon, opposition to muni Wi-Fis but that fact that a major newspaper is calling for another major city to start looking into Wi-Fi should tell us that we should, at the least, be asking Verizon if they would oppose a Red Bank muni Wi-Fi

Posted by Tom at 06:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (65)

This comes via engadget: via RCR Wireless news

EarthLink to build Wi-Fi network for New Orleans

And EarthLink’s strategy paid off, as the New Orleans City Council approved an ordinance for the company to build a 15 square-mile Wi-Fi network to replace the city-owned network.

The telcos just don't get it. -- Tom

Posted by Tom at 06:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by Tom at 11:50 AM | Permalink

In what is viewed as mainly a procedural vote, the House Judicial Committee surprisingly voted in favor of moving a bill legislating Net Neutrality out of committee.  H.R.5417 passed with a 20-13 vote.  News.com covers the story here and Rich Bennett blogs about it here.

Verizon and the other telcos should see that legislation for Net Neutrality is gaining momentum and its defeat in Congress is not a foregone conclusion. (No matter how many lobbyist and former press aids they hire) It may be in their interest to consider inviting Net Neutrality provisions into IPTV cable franchise agreements. 

Posted by Tom at 04:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Some pretty scary comments from Verizon today in a press release.  Verizon executive vice president of public affairs, Tom Tauke says that if Verizon is not allowed to implement Tiered Internet plans then people won't be able get "the widespread availability of such innovations as home health care monitoring and diagnosis, online education, telecommuting, and communications services for the disabled."

He makes a compelling case for the government to take over the internet and not to use it at all for commercial purposes.  Maybe Verizon should hand over their portion of the internet for the sake of the public good.

Is that what you are saying Mr. Tauke?  Do you really care that much about home health care?  I’m impressed; very altruistic of you and Verizon.

Of course Mr. Tauke doesn’t think home health care or “communications services for the disabled” are that important.  He’s got some balls to float that balloon in front of Congress.  Let’s not disguise what Verizon really wants Mr. Tauke.  How about some frank communications about Verizon’s future plans for the internet, and stop playing games?

Posted by Tom at 12:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Wall Street Journal has a very interesting online discussion going on between Craig Newmark (founder of craigslist) and Mike McCurry(founder of handsofthenet).  It seems to be a fair, moderated discussion of Net Neutrality.  It seems to focus all too much, in my opinion, on the question of federal legislation and less on the effect the lack of Net Neutrality will have on the future of the internet, but it is a very interesting read nonetheless.

The e-mail discussion between Newmark and McCurry 

The continuing discussion 

Posted by Tom at 04:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (19)

According to a report in Multichannel News, a FCC commissioner; Michael Copps, said at a press conference that the FCC has what it needs under current regulations the authority it needs to enforce Network Neutrality.

Commissioner Copps said: “I think we have authority to go now to the second phase of network neutrality, to make sure that there’s not discrimination against those that are not affiliated with the network owners,”

Commissioner Copps is referring to Title I of the Communications Act.  The general feeling I get from reading up on this Act is that it could be perceived either way; meaning some people perceive it as protecting Net Neutrality and some don’t.

Commissioner Copps comments are certainly welcome news in the fight to keep the internet a level playing field, but I fear that if he were to try to enforce Net Neutrality via Title I then we would end up in a lengthy battle in the courts with the outcome up in the air.

Nationally there seem to be two prevailing approaches to Net Neutrality:

1.  Push for legislation in Congress to give the federal government control over Net Neutrality

2.  Let the FCC handle Net Neutrality and then when a telco violates Net Neutrality we let the courts sort it out.

I don’t like either of these approaches.

I favor the approach of using the Cable TV franchise application process to express our concerns to the telcos and to let them know as consumers that if they don’t promise to uphold the tenets of Net Neutrality then we will choose not to do business with them.  And when I say “as consumers” I mean as communities, whether at the town level or the state level.

 
Tie Net Neutrality to the IPTV Cable TV process and we can affect Net Neutrality without new legislation or relying on courts legislating from the bench.

Posted by Tom at 06:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (72) | TrackBacks (1)

During a break out session at the Personal Democracy Forum someone mentioned the forums at NJ.com as an active area for NJ discussions.

Well, on the train ride home I whipped up a post for their forums.  It can be accessed (I think) by following this link.  Hopefully people in their Hardball Politics forum will respond to my post.

Here is the text of what I posted:

Stop Verizon’s anti-competitive future internet plans

New Jersey has a unique opportunity to take an advanced step to protect the internet by making sure it remains a level playing field; free and open so that competition can continue to drive innovation the way it has for the last 15 years.  The threat to free market competition comes from Verizon and its plans for the future of the internet.

Verizon executives have been speaking lately about their future plans for the internet and the bottom line is their vision is bad for New Jersey.  It’s bad for New Jersey’s small businesses, independent artists and just plain web surfers.

Verizon wants to change the internet from a level playing field into a tiered network where they pick and choose who has access to their high speed pipes.

The way the internet currently works we all pay for access to the internet, this allows us to surf to any web site that we choose to, in essence we are paying Verizon for admission to the web.  On the other side of the coin there are the businesses and people who run web-sites, like NJ.com, they pay their own internet provider to gain access to the internet. 

There are no additional road blocks between consumers and providers.  Verizon wants to change that.

In Verizon’s anti-competition vision of the future internet they want to build roadblocks between the provider and consumer; or you can think of it this way: Verizon wants to have two lanes over their network, a high speed lane and a slow speed lane.  Verizon would pick and choose who would have access to their high speed lane.  If someone wanted for example to compete with Verizon by offering on-demand movies over the internet then Verizon would choose to put them on their slow speed lane.

Verizon has said time and time again when asking for cable TV franchises that they are for more competition.  Don’t believe them.  They are only for more competition when it is in their interest.

The State Board of Public Utilities will now be tasked with deciding whether or not to approve Verizon’s application for a state wide cable TV franchise.  Verizon is using the same fiber optic connection that they use to deliver internet service that they will be using to deliver cable TV.  In fact they are using a technology called Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) to deliver cable TV.  It is absolutely appropriate for the BPU to question Verizon’s future plans for the internet when it comes time to deciding what is best for the future of New Jersey.  The BPU should make keeping the internet open and a level playing field when it evaluates Verizon’s cable TV franchise application.

Let the BPU know that you are concerned about Verizon’s vision of an anti-competitive internet; tell them Verizon must promise to keep the internet a level playing field or they should turn down the application.

Posted by Tom at 04:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Verizon has gotten its wish; under the banner of increased competition they have pushed legislation through the Assembly that removes the need to work with local communities to come to agreement on cable TV franchises.  Now Verizon will apply for a state wide cable TV franchise.

Now Verizon should be held to clearly state their position on competition.  Verizon executives have made it publicly know that they oppose keeping the internet a level playing field and they plan to change the way internet traffic travels over their network.  They want to have a slow lane and high priced fast lane on the internet, in effect creating toll booths on the information super highway.

Their plans could keep NJ consumers from having the best choices available to them when surfing the web or keep NJ companies from having a fair shot at business on the internet.

Verizon will use the same pipes to deliver cable TV as they use to deliver internet service and they will use internet technology know as Internet Protocol(IPTV) to provide TV to your house.  The State Board of Public Utilities (BPU) should ask Verizon if they really are for competition and want to keep the internet a level playing field or if they are only for competition when it comes to getting a piece of the cable TV pie. 

The BPU should not grant Verizon a cable TV franchise unless Verizon promises our state that they will uphold the tenets of Network Neutrality.

Posted by Tom at 05:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sorry for the lack of posts over the weekend.  Big personal weekend for me, as I proposed to Eileen Saturday morning at sunrise on the beach at 14^th street in Surf City NJ, the beach I used to lifeguard at.  Lucky for me she said Yes.

I’ll be catching up on the normal issues that this blog covers today.  But before I do I hope you caught CBS’s Sunday news this weekend.  CBS had a story that featured a couple of friends of mine Vince and Vance Moss.  You can watch their story by following this link: Army Twins on a Unique Tour of Duty . Keep an eye out for these guys; I’m sure you’ll be seeing more of them.

BTW I’m trying to follow up on a comment that someone posted on my blog giving me a heads up that some of the comments I have been receiving on the blog are not from who the appear to be from.

Posted by Tom at 06:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Houston is joining the list of municipalities setting up a city wide wireless internet network.  This blog chronicles a conference call given by Mayor White of Houston this past Monday.  I don’t think Verizon reaches that far down south, I’m not sure.  I’d love to find out if Verizon is playing a role in Houston’s WiFi effort.

Posted by Tom at 05:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The San Jose Mercury News (aka The Merc) is Silicon Valley’s newspaper.  The Merc has long had the reputation of being a leader when it comes to tech issues and tech reporting.  This past Tuesday The Merc ran an editorial stating that it supports protection of Net Neutrality.

They do not sugar coat the issue in the editorial; this is not a primer on Net Neutrality, they know their audience.   Here is a clip from the article:

Phone companies such as AT&T and Verizon have already made it clear that they want to divide the Internet into slow and fast lanes. Web sites and services that pay them a toll will travel on the fast lane, while others will bump along on the slow lanes.

The Merc editors treat this issue with the sober reasoning it deserves, this is not a snazzy web video or flashy web site, they give the facts, they outline the potential dangers and they state what actions should be taken.

 I encourage anyone with an interest in Net Neutrality to read The Merc’s editorial. You can read it by clicking on this link.

Posted by Tom at 04:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Since it is a topic that doesn't seem to be getting as much press as Net Neutrality lately, I figured I'd post a link to Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam's column published yesterday.

 Here is a snippit from Mr. Beam's column:

''A la carte" is an interesting issue, because it aligns right-wing ''family-friendly" religious nuts with cranky, cheeseparing pseudo-libertarians like myself. The ''family" types want to buy just the channels that show ''Herbie the Love Bug: Fast and Spurious"; I just want to save a buck. Who's helping us fight the power? Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin has made noises about favoring a la carte but seems reluctant to push the pedal to the metal. Populist presidential aspirant Senator John McCain is said to be cooking up some legislation that would impose some a la carte pricing on Big Cable, but it hasn't appeared yet.

Here is a link to his column on boston.com: I don't want my MTV 

Posted by Tom at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (19)

I’m not so sure that Rep. Anthony Wiener got the answer he was looking for when he asked for worst case examples of what could happen if the internet is not kept a level playing field.  The proponents of Net Neutrality need to work on their answer to that question.

When I try to explain why Net Neutrality is important to my small town officials I try to show the local affect.  Here is an example of how the demise of Net Neutrality could affect my small town:

Our town has a brand new performing arts center which houses one of New Jersey’s most active theater companies: The Two River Theater Company.  The TRTC may some day perform some new original play that not only entertains local Red Bank residents but draws attention from across the country.  (Maybe they get local resident Jon Bon Jovi to take a leading role in a play.  His fans would be the type of internet consumer who would watch an online performance in great numbers) To help promote the TRTC and Red Bank the company might want to do some type of internet broadcast or distribution of the performance.  With the Tiered Access internet model that the bosses of Verizon and the telcos are promoting the cost of getting the performance onto the high-speed tier would prevent the TRTC from making the performance available to the web.

That’s just one example of many (see: Kev Smith, local affects) I have for showing how Tiered Access would affect our small community.  I recommend that the Net Neutrality proponents start answering questions like Rep. Wiener in more concrete terms.  I can think of many ways of showing Rep. Weiner that his district would be affected.  Think of all the artists in New York and how they might be held back, think of all the small companies with great ideas that might be the next big thing that could be held back, think of all of the political activism in New York that might get stifled and I’m sure there are many many more examples.

I’m trying to make Net Neutrality a local issue with tangible affects.  I recommend that other proponents do the same.

Posted by Tom at 06:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

On the my normal train ride from Red Bank to Manhattan this morning I received an e-mail from Doc Searls inviting me to attend the Personal Democracy Forum which happened to be taking place in the city.  Thank you to Doc and Micah Sifry for helping me to attend an eye opening conference of bloggers and political activist.  I’m still digesting the conference but at the very least I was impressed by the breadth of people who are addressing these issues at the national level.  Though my focus is on what is of interest to Red Bank; it was reassuring to see just how many people share our concerns beyond our small town.

One of the breakout sessions included Princeton Ph.D. candidate and New Jersey blogger Juan Melli. Juan runs BlueJersey.net and has recently mentioned RedBankTv.org in his writing.

Another session, devoted to Network Neutrality, was moderated Rep. Andrew Wiener and featured speakers both for and against Net Neutrality legislation.  On that panel was Chris Wolf, head of the astroturfing web site set up by the telcos that I mentioned in a post last Friday.

I need to let everything I saw and heard today sink in and determine how what I learned today can be applied here in Red Bank.  For now let me just say thank you again to Doc and Micah; sorry I did not get a chance to meet you Doc and though I met Micah it was only for a second as he was very busy.

Posted by Tom at 06:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Verizon infamously hired an ‘astroturfing’ company to send faxes to the mayor of Red Bank proclaiming to be from local residents.  Mayor McKenna sensing something afoot with these faxes did a little research and called Verizon out.  Verizon wanted it to appear that there was a real grass roots effort in support of them being undertaken by the residents of our small town; but there wasn’t.  It was all made up and it backfired miserably.

Now the telcos are doing it again.  Have these guys got balls or what?  They set up a phony web site, designed it to appear to be run by a grass roots organization and started pushing a web video trying to discredit a real grass roots campaign. (I’m not going to link to their web site)

Posted by Tom at 12:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities is the state authority that organizations wishing to gain a cable TV franchise appear before for review.  I’m wondering if anyone from that organization has looked at the issue of Net Neutrality.  They have a web site with a form for contacting the agency, so I dropped them an e-mail today to see if there was anyone there that I could speak to about the subject.

It’s a long shot but we’ll see if they get back to me.

Here is a link to their contact page.

Posted by Tom at 04:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

There are two audiences I try to keep in mind as I post to this blog in my inelegant Jersey Shore writing style. 

1. The residents, business owners and local officials in Red Bank, New Jersey.  The town that I call home.
2. People beyond Red Bank who have concerns about emerging telecommunications issues and are looking for ways to do something about those issues.

To those of you from beyond Red Bank let me try to summarize my message to you:

If you are concerned about keeping the internet a level playing field, aka Net Neutrality, then talk to your neighbors, fellow community business owners and local political officials about your concerns.  The best way for big picture issues to gain traction is to start at the local, grass roots, level.

You may be in favor of federal legislation and you may sign big internet petitions but I think the best way to get you concerns heard is by starting at the local level.  The telcos need to start hearing from the local communities that they might not be welcome if they don’t change their business practices.

Right now in high profile communities all across the country Verizon and AT&T are applying for local cable TV franchises.  That means there are public hearings taking place, probably in a town near you, at which you can voice your concerns.  If enough people start asking questions at a local level then the telcos will start to hear those questions in business terms; it could signal to them that the market has concerns and it could cost us money if we don’t listen to those concerns.

There is legislation working its way up through state and federal levels of government that may change the landscape and remove the need for these local hearings.  The telcos will then be able to apply for State or National cable TV franchises.  At the hearings that will go along with those franchise applications there will be heavy reliance on precedent established at the local level.  If the question of Net Neutrality does not come up at the local hearings then how can it be brought up at the national level?  The telcos will say: “These issues were never brought up in the communities that approved our cable franchises, why should Washington tell local communities how to do their business?” and they will be right.

So, bring up these issues in your town.  Start a blog, let us know about it, write a letter to your local newspaper, contact your local town officials and attend the telco Dog and Pony show when it comes to town and ask questions.  Act Locally.

Posted by Tom at 07:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Verizon Wireless has started sending letters to ‘heavy’ users of their cell phone’s internet services telling them to not use the internet so much.  Verizon Wireless uses that tagline “It’s the Network” in their advertisements and it gives me pause when I hear stories of how they restrict usage of “The Network” to their services or tell people not to use “The Network” too much.  In our area Verizon Wireless does provide the best high-speed wireless service, just as their land based counterpart Verizon FiOS provides the best high-speed internet access.

So, internet users are faced with a choice; you can use Verizon Wireless which provides the highest speeds but only in the way Verizon Wireless wants you to use it or you can switch to a competitor with slower service but with a more liberal attitude towards usage.

Is it far fetched to make the jump from Verizon’s Wireless model to a future Verizon FiOS model?  I don’t think so.  I think you can deduce from some of the public comments that telco bosses have made that they would like to steer the future of the internet to look more like Verizon Wireless’s model.

I am concerned that an aspiring Red Bank artist, gaining popularity through distributing their art on the internet, will some day get a letter from Verizon or have their service curtailed and not have a viable alternative to Verizon.  Without assurances from Verizon that they will keep the internet a level playing field or that they would not oppose a Red Bank municipal WiFi network then this scenario may not be too far fetched.

With Verizon looking to do business in our town, now is the time to ask Verizon about these issues.

Posted by Tom at 06:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Nate Anderson writes a bit about the Verizon conference call over on Ars Technica

Here's a quote:

...this example nicely illustrates the web of relationships purchased by major industry groups in the hope of influencing public policy for their best interests. The goal is to make it look as though pressure on an issue is coming from many different directions (not just from the company's lobbyists), and the more "independent" a source appears, the better.

Posted by Tom at 01:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Another New Jersey Town heard from Verizon last night, Haddonfield, NJ.

There are also presentations and hearings coming up in several more New Jersey towns.  They are:

If you know someone who lives in one of these towns and you think these issues are important then please encourage them to attend their local hearings or visit this website for more information.

Posted by Tom at 06:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I’m going to try to refer to Net Neutrality as Keeping the Field Level; as in Keeping the Playing Field level.  It’s really about making sure everyone has a fair chance to play, without being bullied by the big telcos.

The article on HuffPo gets into how the Net Neutrality Act name is pretty bad.  How about the: “Keep the Playing Field Level Telecom Act” or "The Level Playing Field Telecom Act".  Something like that would play a lot better.  Plus it conveys a sense of saving the free-market instead of heavy regulation.  If the purpose of the act is to Keep the Playing Field Level for the big and small guys then isn’t that the essence of free-markets?

Posted by Tom at 06:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Arianna Huffington has an interesting article today on why the term: Net Neutrality won’t fly.  I tend to agree with her because I know I am having a hard time getting non geeks excited about this issue. 

Posted by Tom at 01:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Posted by Tom at 07:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)