Category: Internet Neutrality

It looks as though the new FCC rules on wiretaps are being primarily fought by Universities (Colleges Protest Call to Upgrade Online Systems). At issue is the fact that Internet hardware must be upgraded at great cost to allow for authorities to monitor the traffic of those who are under subpoena. While it looks like the Universities are not overly concerned with civil liberties violations (they contend the cost is unjustified, since the existing system of monitoring works adequately), but perhaps there is some element to be concerned about. The Times reports:

…the federal law would apply a high-tech approach, enabling law enforcement to monitor communications at campuses from remote locations at the turn of a switch. It would require universities to re-engineer their networks so that every Net access point would send all communications not directly onto the Internet, but first to a network operations center where the data packets could be stitched together into a single package for delivery to law enforcement, university officials said.

This has the potential to undermine one of, what I believe to be, the greatest characteristics of the Internet: end to end architecture. By placing a machine between the user and the Internet, the free and open nature of the net could be put at risk. Even with the barrier of a judge/subpoena in the way of the “switch,” there is little telling what is stopping the operations center from becoming a communist-style firewall. Even if this possibility is a gross exaggeration, I would argue that any move away from content-neutral packet routing is out of sync with the spirit of the network.

Here’s a good read about the increasingly important role of Google on the Internet (oh, the irony of where I’m posting this). Among the things potentially in the future of Google are a variety of Internet-based applications which would allow a user to free himself from his desktop, or to essentially use “his computer” at any computer. The article does a good job of pointing out the importance of WiFi and Dark Fiber to their plan. There’s an appealing ambition in this plan of greater net access, but of concern to me are how central it would make Google to the operation of the Internet.

Some people speculate the company will use the dark fiber to build a massive nationwide network that would rival those of some of the largest Internet backbone providers such as MCI and AT&T. As that theory goes, Google would use this network to shuttle traffic across the country between its data centers. Then it would use a wireless network to distribute the content locally to end users.

This could have the potential to hinder one of the Internet’s greatest (and underappreciated) strenghts: it’s decentralized and non-discriminitory network architecture.
To make matters worse, the system is built on a series of patents which may lock control in Google’s hands.
Google is arguably one of the most interesting and innovative tech companies to come out since Apple, but perhaps we need to spend more time keeping a closer watch on Google.

I almost completely missed that the Brand X arguments occurred yesterday. In my usual blog trolling, here’s the best I found (OK, they’re more from news sites than blogs):

• In Broadband Case, Justices Seem Attuned to Internet Services’ Arguments (law.com)
• FCC Ruling Limits Competition, ISP Tells Justices (washingtonpost.com – a first rate analysis)

I’m in the midst of writing a paper on this very topic for AEJMC. Perhaps more on that later.